So yesterday was the big announcement for a film-press that is heavily dominated by this one ceremony; one set of results; one little statue per category. To lay my cards down on the table, I’d have to say that my views on The Oscars oscillates between mere indifference, to vicious frustration that this safe, conservative simplification of the year’s cinematic accomplishments hijacks a vast proportion of the film-discourse for that year, completely ignoring the wealth of more interesting cinema out there. And yet here I am, the hypocrite, writing about them below, because it doesn’t matter what I think, the films listed below will be talked about a great deal between now and the ceremony on Sunday February 26th. I leave a few fleeting remarks and invite the Culture Vulture readership to let us know how you feel about the nominations, as well as the Oscars in general.
In no way do I hate all Oscar nominated films, in fact, there are very few I actually dislike, it is the need to put such significance on films that for the most part represent a bland, middling mediocrity (there are many exceptions, but these are largely token nominations); neither truly popular, nor particularly challenging. Give me the extremes any day; thought provoking avant-garde or car chases and explosions. For an anecdotal example, I recently curated my own cinematic double bill, which hit either end of the spectrum (an activity I like to do frequently). I watched the surrealist Czech animator/filmmaker Jan Svankmajer’s new film Surviving Life (Theory and Practice) at the local ‘art-house’ cinema; a part live action, part animated ‘psychoanalytic comedy’, pushing the boundaries of film form. Immediately after, I walked up the road to the local multiplex to see the latest Tom Cruise vehicle, Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, which embodies the kind of sheer exhilaration and choreography that ultra-high concept, mammoth budget production can achieve. Both magnificent features for completely different reasons, but both films that will rarely be muttered in the same sentence as these Academy Awards.
After that rant, I should really concede that out of the films below that I have seen, only one of them I hated (Woody Allen’s nauseating pallet of smug hypocrisy Midnight in Paris). Hugo I wish I loved as much as everyone else did, but I found its central child performances were cold and lifeless, leaving a thinly veiled lecture on silent cinema. It feels strange then, considering my own reservations about the film, that I’m happy it has received so much positive attention (11 nominations in all). I can put aside my own personal reaction/opinion and recognise that although I thought it a completely misdirected endeavour to package it as a kids’ film, my belief that there would be no possible way it could appeal to kids seems to have been a presumptuous and ignorant attack on a film that has indeed found a vast young audience of appreciators. A young audience that is then receiving Scorsese’s message loud and clear through a pleasant and enjoyable experience, rather than a dull lecture that, if anything only reifies their indifference towards something that existed a hundred years before they were even born.
I’m glad that the pundits seem to have The Artist down as favourite (or at least most desired) to win the big Best Picture prize. It is such an innocent joy of a film; refreshing considering the heavy subjects that many ‘Oscar bait’ films dangle to prove their seriousness. It comes close to challenging my statement regarding the middling mediocrity of most Oscar nominated features, with its rather unique offering of being a silent film, but enough of the narrative and its nostalgic method stop it from particularly pushing any boundaries.
The decision to neither stick with the ten Best Picture nominees this year, nor revert back to the limited five, is a decision in which I see merit. On the one hand, the expansion allowed films that are of a much higher quality than most winners (for instance last year’s superb Winter’s Bone versus the nostalgically conservative aristocratic Rocky, The King’s Speech) to be nominated and benefit greatly from the exposure. Yet on the other hand, perhaps having at least four in there that really had no chance at all of winning diluted the prestige of this token nomination.
Please feel free to throw your two cents into the comments section. Who/what do you think should win each category? Who/what are you shocked about being left out? What do you think of the awards’ status and weight in the film world?
Below are only a selection of the most talked about categories, including Best Animated Feature (Come on Rango!).
Best picture
War Horse
The Artist
Moneyball
The Descendants
The Tree of Life
Midnight in Paris
The Help
Hugo
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
Best actress in a leading role
Glenn Close – Albert Nobbs
Viola Davis – The Help
Rooney Mara – The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Meryl Streep – The Iron Lady
Michelle Williams – My Week with Marilyn
Best actor in a leading role
Demián Bichir – A Better Life
George Clooney – The Descendants
Jean Dujardin – The Artist
Gary Oldman – Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
Brad Pitt – Moneyball
Best actress in a supporting role
Bérénice Bejo – The Artist
Jessica Chastain – The Help
Melissa McCarthy – Bridesmaids
Janet McTeer – Albert Nobbs
Octavia Spencer – The Help
Best actor in a supporting role
Kenneth Branagh – My Week with Marilyn
Jonah Hill – Moneyball
Nick Nolte – Warrior
Christopher Plummer – Beginners
Max von Sydow – Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
Best director
Michel Hazavanicius – The Artist
Alexander Payne – The Descendants
Martin Scorsese – Hugo
Woody Allen – Midnight in Paris
Terrence Malick – The Tree of Life
Best animated film
A Cat in Paris
Chico And Rita
Kung Fu Panda 2
Rango
Puss in Boots
Why no Tilda Swinton and/or We Need to Talk About Kevin?
I hope Streep doesn’t win for that Thatcher film. Trust the US to make a film like that, a hagiography which celebrates her life and achievements, pretty dangerous in these times. It doesn’t explore all the hardships, poverty and turmoil she caused. And why is Jim Broadbent in it? Didn’t he grow up in an anarcho-socialist collective? Or is it because him and Thatcher are from Lincolnshire. To be fair I can’t really comment on many of the films as I haven’t seen them.
Its just an advert for the multiplexes isn’t it, you summed it up spot on. The animation oscars are a particular dissapointment. I want Rango to win so it does not become the Pixar/dreamworks award!
I’m not going to defend The Iron Lady, but I feel I need to point out that it was made by the U.S., but was British-made and funded. In fact, it was the last film commissioned by the U.K. Film Council before it was shut down last year.
The lack of a nomination for Albert Brooks for his great performance in Drive is the thing that sticks out the most to me, especially considering that he has been receiving plenty of attention from critics groups in the lead up to the awards. I didn’t expect the film to pick up any other nominations because it really isn’t the sort of film the Academy go for, but Brooks seemed like a certainty to me.
Great post Mike,
Your point about The Oscars dominating film discourse is an interesting one, and one I don’t wholly agree on you with. Whilst it’s true it focuses attention away from other deserving films the discourse it provokes really thrills me. I don’t particularly move in ‘film circles’ (for lack of a better expression) with many of my friends/colleagues only going to the cinema occasionally which can sometimes frustrate me. Obviously I have my outlets to talk about films such as twitter and my blog but it’s nice for films (albeit 9 dubiously chosen ones)to take centre age in mainstream discourse, not just ‘film discourse’ as you put it.
Having said all that, Midnight in Fucking Paris? I thought MIFP was pleasant at best, trite in reality and pretentious at worst.
Drive, Shame, Tyrannosaur and We Need To Talk About Kevin were 4 of my favourite films of last year to see them all ignored is really gutting. Of course I’m thrilled for The Artist, a film I really loved both times I saw it but one good choice does not a satisfying Oscars make.
The Iron Lady annoys me the more I think about, the dual themes of “FEEL SORRY FOR THIS POOR LADY” fighting against “YOU CAN’T TRUST THE RELIABILITY OF THIS NARRATOR” really clashed. Furthermore, ignoring the entire Aids crisis/her legislation against the LGBT community is really frustrating. It was the biggest Health issue of her entire premiership and much more important then some of the trivialities it focused on, “BUT THAT’S THE POINT!” sympathisers cry: refer back to the aforementioned clashing themes.
And breathe.
Although it is nice to see something like Hugo do so well, I am almost inclined to view it through cynical eyes. A ‘legitimate’ 3D film by a ‘legendary’ film maker getting so many awards feels like an agenda.
The more you look at The Artist the more it seems like it should be an Oscar film. As you eloquently put it, it maybe different but not to different.
As for things being left off, it is inevitable that performances/films etc will be missed out. But looking at the nominations it just seems like the most traditional set of Oscar nominations of recent years even with the larger Best Film category. There doesn’t seem to be any surprises in store which is a shame.
It does more harm than good, many people would watch the show and assume that because that film won an Oscar that it is the best thing out there and never then go on to watch movies such as drive, and other creative movies. It is a game, certain directors know that the movie plot. or genre they want to pick solely on the purpose of oscar nomination, its about time the oscars rewarded bravery and creativity such as films like inception
Thanks everyone for the comments.
Louise – The omission of Tilda Swinton is quite perplexing. She is nominated for a BAFTA, which is a telling deviations, along with an interesting one, as they have BÉRÉNICE BEJO for ‘leading role’ whereas the Oscars have her in a ‘supporting role’.
BAFTA – leading Actress
BÉRÉNICE BEJO The Artist – Film
MERYL STREEP – The Iron Lady
MICHELLE WILLIAMS – My Week with Marilyn
TILDA SWINTON – We Need to Talk About Kevin
VIOLA DAVIS – The Help
Andy – I’m afraid I have refused to give my precious time to a film that seeks to humanise and (as Jamie pointed out) simplify a very complex era of contemporary history. To release such a film now, when her legacy has ta….. I am cutting off this rant now before it gets out of hand, but I thank you for your comment.
Jamie – I see there is a difference between film discourse and film in mainstream discourse. I feel it’s a double edged sword: on the one hand it’s great that films get such attention in the mainstream, but then on the other hand that reifies the point about the distillation of what are the important films of that period, especially in the public eye.
Steve – It must be frustrating for you, watching as much animation as you do, to see that list. I don’t know if they particularly think about what they’re putting in. “Well we’ll put Rango in because it’s a completely different beast; we better put an ‘arty’ on in to give us credibility. Let’s make it that Chico and Rita, even though it’s years old – No let’s have two this year (speaking of which I haven’t sen this A Cat in Paris, have you? What’s the crack?. Looks interesting actually) . Urmmm, yeah let’s just go to the kids’ section of Blockbusters and pick another couple at random”. I’m disappointed that Tangled isn’t in there. I’ve watched it with my five year old so many times since Christmas; it’s not only a wonderful film, but I’d have thought it would be the Acadamy’s cup’a tea too.
Ed – I hadn’t realised that Brooks had garnered such acclaim. I’m really happy about that as he is a real force in that film. With respect to where he’d fit in to the supporting actor category, I couldn’t confidently comment, as it is somehow my least seen category.
Khawar – It’s interesting you bring up Inception, because this year’s nominations have completely neglected the mainstream summer blockbuster, although I’m not sure there was anything quite like Inception this year that crossed over so well and pleased the masses and the critics. Any suggestions anyone?
I think the Oscars were originally invented as a sort of PR advert to show the respectable side of Hollywood after quite a few early period scandals.
So its pretty much a special interest awards show – its there solely to preserve an image of Hollywood as a glamorous and classy place. Thus it usually rewards the better end of the most mediocre, (supposedly) inoffensive films – it’s not there to really reward the Best or most challenging films..
..which is why I find it quite a remarkable thing when films as spectacular as Tree Of Life get a look in and The Artist is favourite.
It really isn’t remarkable that a film looking at Hollywood’s past which still has an air of glamour/nostalgia and a film with one of the biggest Hollywood actors (two if you include Penn) in it are both nominated.
Like Mike I find the Oscars both frustrating but strangely compelling. But they have no relation to whether a film is any good or not.
For every clean sweep of the major prizes by a masterpiece like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest there is a Best Picture award to Rocky.
Does anyone really believe that Ordinary People – think a mediocre episode of Thirtysomething – was better than Raging Bull. Or Robert Redford was a better director for that shite than Scorsese for the greatest boxing film evr made?
In fact, the Oscars often become long service awards like Scorsese for an awful remake of the Departed, or John Wayne for True Grit.
Sure, the Academy gets it right with something remarkable like The Godfather or a leftfield Best Picture like the amazingly underrated Coming Home.
But, in truth, it rewards big budget pap rather than genuine artistic endeavour and this year is no exception.
I’ve yet to see The Artist as I really don’t fancy it – there is a reason silent movies died out – and I’m with the women of the Chesterfield Women’s Miners Support Group in boycotting the revisionist Iron lady.
I also happen to really, really hate Meryl Streep who I think is without doubt the most vacuous leading lady of all time. She’s no Kate Hepburn and has the range of my laptop. Despite 16 nominations still turns my stomach and I note she get didn’t get a nod for Mamma Mia which was a surprise.
I totally agree with the Tilda Swindon fans who think it bizarre she hadn’t got a nod. Is she really worse than her non performance in Michael Clayton, which won a best Supporting Actress statuette?
But I am furious that Lynne Ramsay – our best young director and you should see Movern Callar if you haven’t already – has been ignored as she did a brilliant job on Kevin creating a real air of claustrophobic love/hatred. Mind you, the older Kevin was rubbish so that might have counted against her.
As for Rooney Mara…are you having a laugh? This proves my point as she is awful in Dragon Tattoo compared to the amazing Noomi Rapace who was Lisbeth, but had the cheek not to speak in English.
I think The Artist will sweep the board as the rather elderly voters of the Academy like to look cool and trendy from time to time. Sadly, Streep will pick up her long service award, and Gaz Oldman is a good outside bet for his wonderfully controlled performance.
I’d love to see Melissa McCarthy win as she dominated the tiresome Bridesmaids, and is in the same mould as Marisa Tomei’s wonderful winning effort in the very funny My Cousin Vinny.
Christopher Plummer will win as he has a double whammy of playing a minority character and long service. I suspect Alexander Payne will win due to his solid body of work.
I couldn’t give a toss about the cartoons as they are boring kids films. I see enough of them with my seven year old to know they are all pretty lame with the emotional depth of the average Streep performance.
The Oscars mean very little artistically – remember Citizen Kane didn’t win – but are a bit of fluff that at least raises the profile of some obscure films from time to time.
Having just read that previous post I do have to say something contentious:
Yes I do think Ordinary People is a much, much better film than Raging Bull and out of all the nominated films in 1980 it was easily the best. In fact it is one of the few examples I can think of the Oscars picking, what in my opinion, was the best film of the year in the last 35 years
Just thinking about the intro and Timothy Hutton’s pained face at the end gives me shivers. It deals with many of the same themes as Raging Bull – failed masculinity, depression, rage – but in a much more measured fasion. Ordinary People is one of the greats of American cinema and it just seems to be written off by many people for the sole reason it beat Raging Bull.
That said – Coming Home (although it didn’t win Best Film) won a load of Academy Awards and rightfully so. Hal Ashby is so under rated its not funny.