As its always the case whenever the nominations for the Academy Awards pop up many fans, analysts and industry commentators begin to wonder who they are going to nominate in their respective categories.
This year people wondered if Pixar's Wall-E would get a best film nod because of all the great reviews it has received as well as the maturity of the storyline. I believe they said the same thing about "The Dark Knight". So when the Academy finally announces its nominees none of the mentioned films were nominated for best film (though Wall-E did receive many nominations).
This always happens. Back in 2004, people were wondering if the Academy would consider "The Incredibles", "The Passion of the Christ" and even "Farenheit 9/11" as possible candidates for best picture. Last year, they were talks about "Ratatouille" getting the nod. And history goes on and on and on...
Let's forget about the quality of the films I mentioned and focus on the validity of the "Best Picture" category.
A few years ago, my best friend was talking to another friend about "Batman Begins" and how it should have been nominated for best picture, or at least in any of the big categories (best acting, best script). The other friend turned around and saying "While Batman Begins is a great film, the best picture should be award to dramas, serious films and such". He didn't word it exactly like this, but he summed up the problem with the Academy Awards.
Why are films made? Movies are made to entertain and delight the senses and emotions.
We go see a musical to have our musical tastes enlightened. We see a comedy to laugh and have fun. We go to see an action film to be thrilled. We see a documentary to broaden our minds. Drama films are made to create sympathy towards the characters in the audience. We see scary movies to jump and be shocked. Heck, people see Michael Moore movies to be pissed and angry (whether at the information or at the man himself).
To me "Best Picture" means that X film did this better than any other film in the year. That this film was very well made, the general audience and critics love it and best represents why people go to the movies.
So, if the Academy Awards believes in this and shows it through long montages showcasing everything from B-movies to previous winners why isn't there any variety in the nominees? Why can't Wall-E be best picture? If Christian Bale did a fantastic job as Bruce Wayne/Batman (despite his epic temper tantrums
) shouldn't he get the nod? If they make a really good, feel good comedy that may have some fart jokes here and there shouldn't it get some nominations, especially if it was well written, directed and shot?Now, it seems that the "Best Picture" category, as well as the rest of the categories, are created mainly for pretentious, serious films that try hard to win the award than to entertain the audience.
Let's be honest here for a second. Many of these films are made to win awards, not to entertain or gain wide acceptance. Some films hide this fact better than others, but you will see right away that the film was made to gain Oscar gold.
Do you guys remember the episode of "The Simpsons" with Mel Gibson and Homer trying to remake "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington". The heads of the studio told them that they had already bought 5 awards with the film. In a similar joke, "American Dad" had a scene in which Roger the alien makes a mock tear jerker film called "Oscar Gold" and feature the cliches seen in many Oscar worthy films.
These jokes have a hint of truth to them. It seems that the modern Academy Awards are so hung up on awarding only the truly serious films that they are awarding films that don't deserve it, which goes against what the awards are all about; award the films that best delighted audiences and critics worldwide.
Many of these so called "Oscar worthy films" lack heart, honesty and sincerity. They are barely enjoyable and in the worst case scenario you wonder why they are even made. So it bugs me to see these films get chosen to represent the best in cinema when other, far worthy films are snubbed.
So long story short, what I am trying to say is that if the Academy wants to regain some of its credibility they should be more daring in their nominations. Nominate off the wall films, and make this the rule, not the exception.
I know the Academy is capable of this. They nominated "Beauty and the Beast", "The Full Monty", "Silence of the Lambs", "The Lord of the rings trilogy" and many unconventional films, but now this is a rare case.
For the record, I am not saying that EVERY film should be rewarded. Lord knows I will have a heart attack if something like "Disaster Movie" gets nominated in anything. What I mean is that if a film best describes what "Best Picture" is all about it should get nominated, no matter if its an action film, a horror film, an animated film or a musical.
Now that I've said this get ready to agree with me or roast me. I know many of you hold movies to very high regards so I can't to see what you think.
NOTE: The films I mentioned are examples of films I remember being talked about during their nomination years. If you think they aren't worthy of the honor that's your opinion. I am talking about the logic of the best picture category, not if YOU think they deserve it.
