Thanks for nothing, Academy
The Oscars have lost all relevance with this year’s batch of disappointing nominees
Alex Migdal
News Editor
Feb 15, 2012
A year ago, I was tasked with writing a commentary on the Oscar race, an assignment I took with an embarrassing degree of seriousness. Having viewed all the films nominated for Best Picture, I offered what I hoped at the time was an insightful and accurate take on the awards, while also taking contention with their general predictability.
And so history repeats itself: I’ve once again been entrusted to offer you my predictions on the Oscar race. But the tides have changed. Something is amiss in the Oscar world — maybe it has to do with the homophobic remarks made by former Oscar producer Brett Ratner, which left an ugly stain on this year’s ceremony. In any case, I can no longer deny the obvious: the Oscars are a few clowns short of the circus.
Let’s start by addressing the elephant in the room: Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. The 9/11 weepfest that earned a stunning 48 per cent rating on Rotten Tomatoes, somehow managed to weasel its way into the Best Picture category. Its dubious inclusion is even more disturbing considering the academy’s change in voting guidelines this year that allows the category to vary from five to 10 nominees.
All right, I get it. The Tree of Life was a snoozer, but visually dazzling. War Horse bears the almighty Spielberg brand. And The Help, despite its Disneyfication of racial tensions in the Deep South, was fueled by some noteworthy performances. But Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close? Why do cinematic duds starring Sandra Bullock always seem to hypnotize the Academy?
Adding insult to injury, the film has been nominated despite the omission of some actually outstanding films this year, including Bridesmaids and the second installment of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. But the Academy’s steadfast refusal to recognize comedies or fantasies is a whole other problem unto itself.
You see, the Oscars often have little to do with cinematic quality. As the last act of the awards season, the Oscars tend to adopt the herd mentality, following the whims of guilds and critic circles around the country (excluding its troll counterpart, the Golden Globes). And there are statistics to prove it. Over the past decade, 90 per cent of the Directors Guild Award recipients have also nabbed the Oscar for Best Picture. Thus, it’s a near-statistical certainty that The Artist will strike major Oscar gold this year.
Exciting, isn’t it? Who doesn’t love an awards show that offers the viewer a chance to blurt out the winner’s name before the envelope is torn open? Hey, while we’re at it, let’s declare all the other winners (major spoiler alert coming up!): Viola Davis for Best Actress, Octavia Spencer for Best Supporting Actress, Christopher Plummer for Best Supporting Actor and a toss-up between George Clooney and Jean Dujardin for Best Actor.
Yawn, I’m over it. And if the declining ratings are any indication, viewers share my sentiment. The Oscars have turned into a tedious, insipid affair, honouring films that are aggressively marketed in the art-house circuit while usually shunning obvious commercial and critical successes. Plus, the show attracts a bevy of awful hosts (remember last year’s attempt to attract a hip younger crowd with James Franco and Anne Hathaway?) in long-winded ceremonies that are made torturous with inane categories like Best Live Action Short Film.
But the Oscars’ greatest sin this year is the general unremarkable nature of the nominees. How are we supposed to care who wins Best Original Song when the two nominees come from Rio and The Muppets? Why does George Clooney deserve a Best Actor nod over Ryan Gosling’s performance in Drive, which wasn’t even nominated? As for Viola Davis versus Meryl Streep — who cares? They both did great as always.
Like all the other categories, figuring out who deserves the Oscar for dullest awards show is no surprise.
Comments
For all this talk of the Oscars losing relevance, you don’t bring up any real problems with the show. Live Action Short Film is an inane category? How can it be? Most of the Academy Awards’ viewers won’t have seen them but they’re still readily available to watch, even in an Edmonton theater so accessbility isn’t a problem. They’re just not as discussed or hyped as the feature length films.
The Oscars shouldn’t be about appeasing the mainstream public anyway. The Oscars aren’t meant to cater to box office successes, but instead to films of the highest quality (and for some reason Extremely Loud). They’re about honoring all forms of film and every aspect of film making. That’s why even though most people find the Oscars’ middle section of technical awards dull, those will always be a part of the show. Just like with the film shorts, they may mean nothing to the majority of viewers but they mean a whole lot more to the people being honored for their craft.
The Oscars haven’t become predictable either. There has never been a time where consistently, year after year, there were any more than 2-3 realistic front runners to win any major category. This year is no different as Best Actor, Actress, Director and Film all have at least two realistic candidates that could win. As for the “herd mentality” idea, for better or worse even nominating Extreme Loud and Incredibly Close while snubbing Drive in a number of categories sets the Oscars apart from the pack.
The awards do overlook comedies too often, but a screenplay and supporting actress nomination for Bridesmaids is impressive and exactly the amount of recognition that the film deserved. And fantasies get noticed too when they’re good enough. After all, it hasn’t even been 10 years since Return of the King won 11 Oscars. They also don’t shun commercial successes if the film is strong enough. Inception was nominated for Best Picture just last year after all.
But by your last comment about it not mattering who wins between Meryl Streep and Viola Davis, that’s not a bad point. Maybe it is ridiculous to compare amazing performances and somehow claim one is better than the other. But that would be a problem with the very idea of the Academy Awards which would make complaining about how they’ve become irrelevant entirely pointless.
Posted by Stop_Complaining on Feb 23, 2012
Submit a comment
All comments must be approved by a moderator before they will be visible, and may take up to 48 hours to appear. Comments may be no longer than 5000 characters.
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Winning at cheating: a not so comprehensive guide
03/30/2012
Life is hard. There’s no secret or manual — we’re all just sort of playing it by ear. There’s no right or wrong way to go through life, just an easy way and a hard way. The hard way involves work, dedication, motivation, aggravation, archaeological excavation, rhyming skills, etc. So we can all agree the hard way is way too hard. It’s clear you need to take the easy way out. After all, with great effort comes great responsibility.
The Gateway Opinion Podcast Sells Out!
For the final show of the year, Ryan, Darcy and Adrian sit down for an hour and talk about stuff they like.
