The 2011 Oscars perfectly managed to embody the lackluster year with a lackluster night and lackluster winners. The return of Billy Crystal hosting the evening seemed outdated and out of place. A guy who hasn't had decent work in the last ten years (if not more) is just not relevant nor in tune with the sensibilities of a 2012 audience (fittingly like almost all of the nominees this year, zing). Not to mention the Sammy Davis Jr. bit (Wait…did he just…?). I mean, I get it. He used to do Sammy back in the day (when blackface was PC?). But why, of all the people from history did he have to do the one that would risk a twitter outrage (and it kinda did but not really)? Think people. You are already on thin ice because apparently Hollywood is bleeding to death before our very eyes, and this is what you do?Now, the nominations weren't that good to begin with. A lot of them were pretty expected, with The Artist and Hugo and other broad, shallow, glossy, generalized, marginalized, over-thought, under-executed films pulling a lot more clout than they should have. The Artist dominated with Best Pic, Best Director, and Best Actor amongst others through the night. Jean Dujardin has been in a few roles in his life, most notably the OSS 117 agent (also from the Hazanavicius circle), but the dude has a pencil mustache and tilts his eyebrows and suddenly he is best actor? Poppycock. I know guys like Clooney and Pitt were dialed in to their usual shtick, but at least they showed range within their characters. The Artist's arc was flat and stereotypical, the lead character even more so. The entire Artist experience felt like a low-budget movie that is simply showing audiences everything they've missed in the history of film, because they are too lazy to go out and actually watch them, or they aren't available on Netflix streaming. My opinion (especially fueled by the current state of cinema) is that film should be revolutionary, pushing audiences forward, showing how life is, not how it used to be. CHALLENGE ME! The night was full of reverence for the past, when we should be looking to the future. Evolve or die, Hollywood (I daresay more on that in a later post).
The biggest faux pas of the night was the Academy's attempt to show insight as to why film and cinema is such an important cultural necessity. I certainly agree that film is great and hope that it does amount to everything Edward Norton and Robert Downey Jr. "say" that it is/should be, but it feels like the Academy wasn't listening to their own words. Omitting films like Drive from a Best Picture nom, or Michael Fassbender from a Best Actor nom for Shame shows a blatant flaw within the Academy. Through the actor/director interviews reciting why film is so awesome, we were informed to look at film as something that moves us, that transports us into another world, that helps us escape, that challenges us, that makes us feel something. Looking at this year's nominees, none of them really "took me to that other world" like cinema should. Films like Drive, Attack the Block, Shame, Martha Marcy May Marlene, Take Shelter…those took me places. Those showed me something I hadn't seen before. Those were "films" in the most basic sense because they took chances and pushed me as a viewer into new territory.
Ever since the 5-10 Best Picture nominations idea came back into play it's hard not to notice some blaring differences between each year. Remember when District 9 was up for Best Picture in 2009? A science fiction film that is basically a video game brought to the silver screen. Yet this year you cannot nominate Drive for Best Picture? There weren't even the full ten nominee slots filled! Even if you don't mean it, at least nod your head to the independent, lower-budget, bastard children of cinema and show that you acknowledge the different facets of your domain. To disregard Drive (oh pardon me, except for in sound editing) and any other film that had even the slightest buzz is to deny a part of yourself that is very much alive. Inject some youth into your nominations and show us that you know what is going on outside of your masturbatory bubble.
There was a hanging desperation in the air, more so than usual. The night was screaming, "Look how great Hollywood is!" and really pushed the glitz and glam, the acclaim, the specialness of it all. Yes, when we see Hollywood, we want to be impressed, but there is a grace and charm that is missing nowadays. It's difficult not to see Elizabeth Taylor's acceptance speech which is subtle and understated (in so many words "timeless"), in contrast to even Meryl Streep (“the greatest actress of our time/ever”) stumbling through her acceptance speech like a flustered lost lamb. I want Hollywood to admit to itself "Hey, we just make movies. Sometimes they are good, sometimes they are bad. This is what we do." They don't need to sell us that Hollywood is the best thing ever, they just need to be there for us while we fill in the blanks. Hand out your awards, take your trophy with humility, say thank you and walk away. Don't force it!
What can the Academy do to make the show better? A lot of things actually.
1. Ditch the idea of finding the perfect host – There isn’t and never will be a perfect host. Comedians are a good way to go, but let's face it, how funny can they really be? Ricky Gervais did nicely on his first stint at the GG's, but the next year, it felt pretty flat. Don't try and create/recreate buzz, let it happen naturally. Bringing Billy Crystal back from the grave doesn't feel fresh. It brought with it EXPECTATIONS, which can never be met in a controlled and scheduled environment like the Oscars. It was like Billy Crystal, who is one of the Academy's favorite hosts in the past, would save the show. Dream on! The highlight of the night was when Chris Rock broke down just how easy it was to record voices for an animated film. It was real, unforced, and slid in under the radar. Don't plan for the hilarity; give it room to happen without training wheels. It's risky, but that's what makes it interesting and entertaining.
2. New/Revised Categories - I do believe that each facet of filmmaking deserves their moment. I like all the categories, but let's face it, sound mixing and sound editing is getting too nitpicky. How about just BEST SOUND? It's plain, it's simple, it's to the point, and it's all encompassing since most winners of one category win the other. This is 2012 people, cinema is changing. Do we need best song written for a film? When there are only 2 nominees, it's a hard one to defend. Also, BEST MAKEUP is always a joke.
There are other interesting awards that could be given like:
• BEST TITLE DESIGN/SEQUENCE (graphic designers rejoice)
• BEST USE OF MUSIC (this can expand beyond just original score, including all aspects of music in film)
• BREAKTHROUGH PERFORMANCE (stealing from the MTV awards, this could really help younger actors and directors gain more recognition, the Grammy's have Best New Artist, why not at the Oscars?)
• BEST CASTING / ENSEMBLE (c'mon, this should be a no brainer).
• PERFORMER OF THE YEAR (allowing actors who maybe didn't have one single role that stood out as the best, but had a great year of multiple roles that deserve recognition)
3. Don't be afraid to broaden your horizons - The Academy runs the middle of the road. It's nice when they pick up on performances like Demian Bichir's in A Better Life (which I'm fairly certain nobody at the Oscar's actually saw), but it also has a hint of backhandedness to it. We will nominate THIS performance, which no one saw, and negate THESE performances which everyone saw? Where is the line drawn? What is the distinction being made here? It's confusing to have Hollywood legends in the making like Clooney and Pitt and a relative newcomer like Bichir in the same pool together. I'm not denying the strength of Bichir as an actor (if anything, his performance clip was quite impressive, showing he deserved to be there AND win), but when films get buzz all year for their performances (like Fassbender in Shame) and don't get a nomination, it's difficult not to feel slighted.
4. The Best Picture needs to return to it's strict 5 nominees rule - Look, it's fun and interesting to see District 9 and Winter's Bone get props by being nominated, but we all know that they do not stand a chance to win. They are there to show the public that they aren't old, crotchety, white men. I don't think we are as stupid as they think, and it's because they are old, crotchety, white men that they think we will fall for it. 5 noms are all we need. Focus the attention on films that deserve to really be there, not ones that skirted in by the seat of their pants. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was a smack in the face.
5. The Academy needs to face it: they are irrelevant - I have never held much stock in what the Academy considers to be the best of anything (I certainly won’t start now). It's the flagship of film awards, but it's incredibly narrow-minded and stuffy. The sooner the Academy gets over itself and gets new, fresh blood in their system, the sooner it will be relevant again. This day and age, with a steady flow of information and opinions, we have a better chance of knowing if we will like a movie or not by Googling it rather than listening to what the Academy says. It's hard to look at the ratings of certain films on IMDB, Metacritic, or Rotten Tomatoes and feel the Academy knows what they are talking about. It's not the people's choice awards, but if they want people to be interested in what they have to say, the Academy needs to open up to them. Otherwise, keep the awards to a footnote in the Entertainment section of a news website and let me do something better with my 5 hours on a Sunday night.
Looking back on the night, I definitely recognize that 2011 was a rough year in film. There was some good stuff, but nothing that will truly echo throughout time as a cinematic tour de force. Maybe the glory days are behind us, or maybe this is simply the calm before the storm of a return to greater films being made, but I can't really blame the Oscars for sucking when they don't have much to pull from. Watching the Oscars now is more of a chance to witness train wrecks, be it Angelina Jolie's skeleton showing off a leg, or Billy Crystal blatantly make fun of Nick Nolte to his face (pretty harsh actually), the event will continue on (at least for a few more years). I'll keep watching them of course, but when they start recognizing they aren't as cool as they think they are and that maybe they need to expand their horizons, I might actually look forward to watching the Oscars with hope and excitement, instead of pessimism and disappointment.
