Lifting the Oscars Boycott
February 5th, 2004 at 7:54 am (Film Theory)
For the last decade I have been boycotting the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences Awards (commonly known as the Oscars). With boycott I don’t just mean that I have not watched the Oscars but that I have actively avoided and encouraged others to ignore the whole Oscar hoopla. My dislike for the Oscars has been based primarily on the selection of titles for award nomination which are based more on who is popular with who in Hollywood and have for at least the last fifteen years had very little to do with actual acting or movie making talent, an effect I refer to in polite company as ‘Hollywood patting itself on the back’ and when I am really riled as ‘Hollywood giving itself a blow job’. I mean really, Gladiator (2000) as best picture best picture for 2000>? Titanic (1997) as best picture for 1997? Give me a god dammed break! Not only where there dozens, nay hundreds of much better movies released each of those years but both of these flicks sucked! Yeah, Gladiator was entertaining but it was a fluff popcorn flick. Titanic was barely worth the time it took to watch it. Keep going back and you will find crap like this specked among the truly worthy movies going back well before the 80s.
This year however, I believe the time may have finally come to stop turning my nose up at the award and give them some credit. Now don’t get me wrong, I still believe that the Academy is more about a bunch of self-gratifying egotistical entertainers than it is about culture, art and great filmmaking but this year’s list of nominees reaches a bit beyond the money makers at the megaplex and calls out some movies with true worth. I am a bit surprised that the third installment of Lord of the Rings came up for one last run at Oscar gold and still did not generate any acting nominations, specially since the epic special effects extravaganza enjoys the popularity that seems requisite to be present in the wondering minds of Academy members. Other more pleasant surprises like Finding Nemo (2003) going up for Best Writing (original screenplay) or Lost in Translation (2003) going up for Best Picture, Writing, Leading actor (Bill Murray) and Directing (Sofia Coppola) do give me hope though. The list of nominations for 2003 are still not what I would have chosen but they at least show some attention to talent above popularity.
john said,
February 7, 2004 at 10:44 am
I have yet to completely lose interest in the Oscars because, believe it or not, every year there seems to be one award handed out that completely shocks me. And by shocked, I mean that an odds on popular favorite doesn’t win, and a truly deserving underdog does. Last year, for example, had 4 welcome surprises (a record in my book)… “Spirited Away” for best animated movie - Adrien Brody as best actor for “The Pianist” - Pedro Almadovar for writing “Talk to Her” - and the best upset, Roman Polanski as best director for “The Pianist”, beating out an overhyped Martin Scorsese and his hyper-zelous Oscar campaign manager Harvey Weinstien.
These moments are why I keep going back and watching year after year - slogging through 3 to 4 hours of tripe for the hope of seeing a Frances McDormand win for “Fargo”, or Bill Condon winning for “Gods and Monsters” - there are some little movies that sneak through to grab something away from the more popular films that garner the most attention.
If you really want to see the industry unmitigatingly fawning at itself, then catch the SAG awards… without a doubt the most pretentious event to be created by Hollywood. Oscar doesn’t even come close.
john said,
February 8, 2004 at 10:50 am
Just wanted to add - I wouldn’t mind seeing another upset this year in the animation award. I loved “Finding Nemo”, but I just saw “The Triplets of Belleville” and was completely blown away. A film that seems to encompass the history of animation - from the early Harman/Ising WB ‘toons of the early 30’s, through to the UPA styles of the 50’s - with a dose of modern computer animation thrown in as well. This is a French film that has no subtitles, but doesn’t need them since it has extrememly little dialogue. The story is told through the acton, much like the “Mr. Hulot” films of Jacques Tati. It’s a film that fulfills the great animator Chuck Jones’ #1 prerequisite of masterful animation - Jones wrote, “If you can turn off the sound to an animated film, and still be moved by the story - whether laughing or crying - because of the images themselves, then you have reached the pinnacle to which all animators strive.” “The Triplets of Belleville” does just that. This is one that will immediately go into my collection.
Nick said,
February 9, 2004 at 3:46 am
The Oscars are a mixed bag. And the actual choices are always worse on average than the nominees as a whole. The one that really did it for me was when Braveheart got best picture. Gladiator, in my mind, was just a later version of the same.
I don’t think the choices are any better this year than any other, though. I think they’re pretty typical choices for the academy. Seabiscuit? Master and Commander? Lost in Translation? All decent, but nothing special. I haven’t seen Mystic River, but it looks rather typical hyper-drama.
The academy always has a tendency to pick a) the odds on favorite, or b) a historical drama. Comedies rarely get the credit they deserve and certainly comic actors rarely get the credit they deserve.
I think this was a disappointing year in movies overall. I was excited but the only movie that really lived up to my expectations was LOTR: ROTK. Actually, it exceeded my expectations with how disappointed I was with TTT. But what other movie will we have in our DVD collections 10 years from now? I can’t think of any.
heathcliffe said,
February 12, 2004 at 4:27 pm
I have a very unreasonably hatred of the Oscars. I’ve never watched them. The only interest I have in them is thanks to the oh-so-rare nomination that I can actually get behind (not, of course, that they ever wind up picking it for the *award*). There is a running joke among my circle of friends that if a film is totally rebuffed by the Oscars, it’s probably worth watching.
If and when the Lord of the Rings people get the credit they deserve (unlikely…in the extreme), I may start paying attention out of gratitude. Until then, I will take morbid pleasure in my total indifference toward/ignorance of the Oscars.
Come to think of it, I regard the Oscars the same way as I do the Superbowl: I don’t who played or who won, but I know it’s not worth watching and I sure as blazes don’t care.
Celandine said,
March 1, 2004 at 2:32 pm
Well, I guess what happened this year (the third movie of a gigantic, big budget triology SWEEPING the Oscars) proves you wrong. If you have a dislike of the Oscars, well and good, a lot of us do. Hollywood is in itself dislikeable- it’s human ego on parade. It’s hard to embrace that, unless you have a lot of emotional problems.
However, the Oscars DO exist for a reason. Parading your dislike of Titanic (which was an incredible accomplishment, and will be recognised as such, 50 years down the road, long after Leonardo Dicapro’s name has faded and everyone has forgotten anything about the movie except for Jim Cameron’s incredible passion for the wreck, his incredible risks he took finantially, emotionally, and physically to make that damn movie.) It WAS an incredible movie, and it deserved to win, and whenever I read whiny complaints like yours “OMG, Titanic won? I STILL can’t get over it, 5 years later!” I roll my eyes. You got caught up in the backlash. Look at the movie for what it was. Look at Gladiator for what it actually was.
And then take a look at Return of the King for what it actually was. A Fantasy movie, third in a trilogy, that did the impossible. It grabbed the Academy’s attention, managed to sweep the Oscars, setting records, even THOUGH it was what it was- FANTASY. Peter Jackson said it so aptly in his acceptance speech- “fantasy is an f-word that hopefully won’t be bleeped.” He thanked them for looking beyond the wizards and the trolls and seeing the real movie. And yes, that’s what the Oscars are about- you may not agree with them always (I don’t, trust me, I could have chucked my shoe at the TV when I saw Sean Penn win this year….) but frankly, on the whole, I think the Academy makes good decisions.
And I think you are whining.
Calamormine said,
January 25, 2005 at 6:13 pm
Yes, and after reading your post, Celandine, I am tempted to say a different “f-word” to you. The Academy doesn’t make good decisions. Do you think that there was any chance that Return of the King was not going to win? Do you realize what kind of an uproar would arrise from it not winning? Simply the fact that Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind didn’t get nominated for best picture or best actor (Jim Carrey) should say something. The Oscars are a big “who knows who, and who can afford the biggest after-party” bullshit fest.