Whats the point in judging art by the hype that surrounds it? By hype I mean what you call the narrative that surrounds the film. It seems that there is little consideration for the actual craft that has been put into the film other than for the more technical prizes such as sound and SFX.
Do you agree with me if I say that the Oscars doesn't care for 'art for art's sake'?
I don’t think that’s fully true. The Academy DOES care about the art itself, and here’s a key example: EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE doesn’t stand a chance unless the movie itself touches the hearts of those who watched it.
But why, then, would EEAAO beat out something like TÁR or WOMEN TALKING? Because if a given Academy voter is torn between two choices, they will go with the film which has the more exciting narrative, which in this case is EEAAO. It’s a kind of affirmative action mindset: if two films are arguably just as good, but entirely different in theme and subject matter, how do you choose between them? The answer is to choose based on narrative rather than the superior art.
Is this a good thing? I’m inclined to think so. There will never be a “correct” best picture winner, so why not go with the choice that promotes the best cultural narrative? With the EEAAO win, the Academy is promoting a narrative of indie film weirdos beating out blockbusters and high-minded art films. I see that as a positive. (Though I would have been equally happy with a win for TÁR or MAVERICK.)
Whats the point in judging art by the hype that surrounds it? By hype I mean what you call the narrative that surrounds the film. It seems that there is little consideration for the actual craft that has been put into the film other than for the more technical prizes such as sound and SFX.
Do you agree with me if I say that the Oscars doesn't care for 'art for art's sake'?
I don’t think that’s fully true. The Academy DOES care about the art itself, and here’s a key example: EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE doesn’t stand a chance unless the movie itself touches the hearts of those who watched it.
But why, then, would EEAAO beat out something like TÁR or WOMEN TALKING? Because if a given Academy voter is torn between two choices, they will go with the film which has the more exciting narrative, which in this case is EEAAO. It’s a kind of affirmative action mindset: if two films are arguably just as good, but entirely different in theme and subject matter, how do you choose between them? The answer is to choose based on narrative rather than the superior art.
Is this a good thing? I’m inclined to think so. There will never be a “correct” best picture winner, so why not go with the choice that promotes the best cultural narrative? With the EEAAO win, the Academy is promoting a narrative of indie film weirdos beating out blockbusters and high-minded art films. I see that as a positive. (Though I would have been equally happy with a win for TÁR or MAVERICK.)
Thanks for watching so I didn’t have to 🙏🏼
That’s what I’m here for 👍🏻