..Gary Dretzka
..Noah Forrest
..Leonard Klady
..R.J. Matson
..David Poland
..Douglas Pratt
..Ray Pride
..Michael Wilmington

A Few Thoughts on
The Oscars

I’m not an Oscar writer.  I leave that task to others.  However, I am a fan of film and around this time of year, the Oscars are the biggest topic in the world of film and to stay out of that conversation is to stay out of most conversations about movies.  So, being simply a fan of film, I wanted to offer my perspective on various aspects of the Oscars. 

The Oscars mean more and less than you think. 
          
Since I was a little kid, I always enjoyed watching the Academy Awards, thinking that it was the greatest honor that someone could achieve in the industry that I admired so much.  The first time I can remember being upset was in 1994, when Forrest Gump beat out Pulp Fiction. While I enjoyed the former film, I knew that the latter was groundbreaking – even in my ignorant adolescence.  I felt that the awards should honor the film that felt like a mad-rush of images and ideas rather than the nice story of a dim-witted man who accomplishes all his goals.  It was the moment I realized how important verisimilitude was.
           
As the years passed, I became more obsessed with cinema and saw the Academy Awards as more and more of a popularity contest; for every win for Jim Broadbent or Marcia Gay Harden, there were wins for Julia Roberts or Robin Williams.  It’s not that the latter two are undeserving; it’s that I find it hard to believe that those were truly the best performances in those categories for the whole year in film.  That’s why it’s been hard for me to take the awards seriously anymore, despite tuning in year after year; I wind up seeing the films I respect the most being relegated to a single screenplay nomination or shut out entirely. 
           
There are plenty of websites these days that focus solely on the build-up to that single night - the business of Oscar becoming an industry in its own right – that predicting the Oscars has become easier and easier.  We’re at the point now where we probably know eighty percent of the major nominees and then there are hardly any surprises during the actual show.
           
So why bother?

I know that personally, I don’t necessarily take my cues from the Academy when it comes to appreciating films, but it is the only calculable way – besides box office - of measuring films against one another.  Film is a subjective medium and people can argue all day about which movie is better and ultimately it would have to get to the point of, “more people would agree with me.”  The Academy Awards is a way of backing up such claims, to have an amount of nominations or statues that could either aid your arguments or ruin them.  Of course, that doesn’t make the film with the most wins the better film, it’s still subjective, but it’s another point to consider.
           
It’s not always good to be a frontrunner.

This year we don’t actually have a frontrunner to win the award, which makes this a pretty exciting year because usually by late November, early December most of the films have been seen and measured for their awards potential.  At this point right now, we probably have a good idea of the Best Picture nominees: Atonement is pretty much a lock, there will probably be a nomination for either No Country for Old Men or There Will Be Blood but not for both, figure another nomination for Michael Clayton, probably one for Charlie Wilson’s War, and then one for either Juno, Kite Runner or Sweeney Todd.  So while things are narrowed down, it’s still up in the air and there’s always a chance a movie like The Diving Bell and Butterfly or Into the Wild could gain momentum when screeners go out or when people start talking.
           
Two years ago, most everyone though Brokeback Mountain had Best Picture sewn up, although there were some whispers that Crash might swoop in.  Sure enough, Crash got the award while Ang Lee won Best Director for Brokeback Mountain and the film also won a screenplay award. But how on Earth is it possible that the best directed and best written film could not be the best film?  Some folks chalked it up to it being homophobia, but I find it hard to believe that the voters would give a Best Director award to the man who directed the "gay” flick but not the Best Picture award to that movie.  This all brings me to the big point about the Oscars these days:

Oscar voters pick the movies that make them feel good and don’t challenge them.

Something I never wanted to believe about the Oscars is that the voters don’t pick the best film, but the one that made them feel the best.  Now, in theory, there is nothing wrong with wanting to honor a film that made you feel good about yourself.  However, the best films for me are the ones that challenge my beliefs rather than reinforce them.  I would rather watch a challenging film like The Thin Red Line than a nice movie like Shakespeare in Love.  Of course, that’s just me, and I understand how someone could think the latter is a better movie to sit through.  However, I think it’s pretty clear which film took more skill to make and it is why Terrence Malick is a name familiar to all cineastes while John Madden is more likely to be confused with a sports announcer. 
           
The “Best” Picture will always be subjective, but there are some ideas and images that one can objectively see as being better than others.  Sure, Shakespeare in Love makes me smile and sometimes that’s all I’m in the mood for, but I don’t think it’ll be remembered ten years from now.  In fact, I bet most people still think Saving Private Ryan won that year.  And what we want from the Academy is to pick a film that we can see ten, twenty years from now and say, “wow, good pick,” and not “wow, this won?”  The Academy Award for Best Picture is like a time capsule for future generations to look at in their history books and they will think that each film listed as the Best Picture is the best we had to offer that year.  Unfortunately, I don’t think this is usually the case; it’s usually just the film that people didn’t feel too threatened by.
           
The internet has changed the race.

It’s gotten to the point now where I have to wonder if some voters are taking their cues from other voters or if perhaps they are reading some of the prognosticators.  I have no proof that this is the case, but I have to wonder how the internet has helped to shape the Oscar race since the internet has become such a large part of predicting it.  We know that not every voter sees every film (although they are supposed to), so is it not possible that a few voters would rather just read the Cliff’s Notes and check out what the prognosticators are saying and check the box that everybody else is? 
           
The more likely scenario, however, is that somebody is trying to make up their minds between two films and goes online to see the arguments for both sides and winds up being persuaded.  This would be completely understandable because, after all, how does one choose which is the better film between Chicago and The Hours?  They are two completely different films that try to achieve completely different goals, so how do you compare them?  I know that if I were deciding between those two films – which I wouldn’t because I’d be voting for The Pianist – then I would want to see what my friends were doing or what the prognosticators were advocating to help me feel better about the choice I’d make.

My favorite film will never be nominated for Best Picture.

The one thing I know every year is the film I loved the most will never, ever be nominated for the most important of Academy Awards.  In recent years, my favorite films have been The Fountain, Kings and Queens (Squid and the Whale for best American film), Before Sunset, Elephant, and 25th Hour and not a single one has been nominated for Best Picture.  This does not bode well for Zodiac or The Darjeeling Limited (my two favorite films from this year) and I apologize to those involved with those productions, as anointing something as my personal favorite tends to be the kiss of death.  I can only hope that eventually the film I believe as most deserving will be awarded as the best.

I will be watching the nominations at 8:30 in the morning, as well as the show itself.

Every year, I wake myself up and make some tea and wait for the random celebrity guest to announce who the major nominees are on the E! Channel.  Knowing ahead of time that my favorite film will never be nominated, I still find the actual announcement to me so exciting because there are still those little surprises that seem to make the entire year of Oscar-watching worthwhile.  I will hold out hope until the last second that Zodiac will earn a surprise nomination.
           
Of course, once the nominees are announced, it’s time to find your favorite in each category and start rooting all over again. 

It starts all over again the second the Academy Awards end.

The Oscars have been a year-round industry and now we pick the probable nominees a year ahead of time just to see if they pan out.  The truth of the matter is that no matter who wins or loses and who does or doesn’t get nominated, the reason we talk about the Oscars and watch the show is because it’s all fun, whether we’re picking the winners a day ahead of time or a year.  It’s the same reason people play fantasy sports; it’s an escape and we love movies, so why not have a little bit of fun by picking your favorites.

I like to think of myself as a serious filmgoer that eschews “meaningless” prizes like awards for movies, but I know that I will watch every single year with my heart racing and pounding through my chest, like it was last year at the mere thought that Martin Scorsese might win Best Director.  This year, I’m sure there will be many more moments like that one and I wouldn’t miss it for anything.
           
My current prediction for Best Picture, 2007: No Country for Old Men

- Noah Forrest
November 26, 2007

Other columns by Noah Forrest
11.19.07 - Thanksgiving
11.12.07 - Redacted
11.05.07 - Oscar, Don't Forget the Subtle Guys
10.30.07 - Ridley Scott - Overrated?
10.21.07 - Clooney Straddling The Line
10.08.07 - Wes Anderson
10.02.07 - Jake Paltrow's The Good Night
09.27.07 - Cleaning House
09.20.07 - Top 10 To Date
09.13.07 - Film Vs Television
08.31.07 - Halloween Review
08.28.07 - Who Is The Next Scorsese?
08.21.07 - Fall Preview
08.14.07 - The Horrific State Of The Horror Film
08.10.07 - Reservations About Catherine Zeta-Jones
08.07.07 - Saving Steven Spielberg
07.30.07 - Skinheads in the Cinema & This Is England
07.28.07 - Siena Miller: Good or Evil?
07.26.07 - The Frenzy on the Wall

Noah Forrest is a 24 year old aspiring writer/filmmaker in New York City.

The opinions expressed in these columns are the writers and do not neccessarily reflect the opinions of Movie City News or any of its editors or other contributors.

.