Commentary Track: The Power of Snub

Posted by Josh Radde (josh@filmschoolrejects.com) on January 23, 2009

The Power of Snub

Over the past day or so, since the Academy Award nominations were announced, I’ve read nothing but contempt for the Academy and its voters. “The Dark Knight was robbed,” “Best Animated Feature is not good enough for Wall-E,” “Nothing for Gran Torino? Really?” I gotta say, it’s beginning to sound a little ridiculous. Just because a movie has been in limited release doesn’t mean it should be chastised. “Art house” movies only exist because there aren’t enough investors to make said movie a large release. Know why? Paul Blart: Mall Cop made $40 million last weekend. Taking a risk and telling a good story takes a backseat to an easily marketable idea. If the Academy is out of touch with moviegoers, I thank God, because they would’ve awarded Spider-Man 3, Pirates of the Caribbean 3, Shrek the Third, and Harry Potter 5 all the Oscars last year over truly fantastic films like There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men. And you know what, There Will Be Blood was playing in a theater near you before the telecast, I guarantee it was, so don’t throw that “limited release” argument around. It doesn’t stick.

Yes, The Dark Knight is the best superhero film ever released and without a doubt one of the best ten films of the year. Yes, you could make a solid argument for Best Picture, Screenplay, and Director. But no, it’s not better than Frost/Nixon. I’m sorry, it’s just not. The Academy Awards speak for the members of the Academy, not for the People. The Dark Knight won the People’s Choice Award for favorite movie–one of its five wins. Yet somehow I don’t think that appeases the fanboys and girls. The Dark Knight made the most money any film has ever made its opening weekend. It’s the second highest grossing film of all-time. Its notable performance, that of Heath Ledger, is going to walk away with a Golden Guy, paying tribute to one man’s extraordinary transformation which also ended up being his swan song. The producers and crew of The Dark Knight will sleep soundly, and if nothing else, it’ll put a fire under Chris Nolan’s ass to make a potential third movie even better.

Besides, what does it matter to any of you whether or not the films YOU like get nominated? It doesn’t depreciate the film and shouldn’t de-value your enjoyment of it. Look back to the year 2000. Gladiator won Best Picture, while Traffic, Erin Brockovich, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, and Chocolat were nominated alongside it. Do you know which movie is most memorable and has stuck with me since? Almost Famous. Dances with Wolves won Best Picture for 1990, yet Goodfellas is regarded by many as one of the greatest films of all time.

Does this mean that the Academy got it wrong? No. It just means the voters went a different way than the public. The Academy Awards are not a democracy of the people; it’s an organization of professionals patting each other on the back and peers recognizing peers for their achievements. Helen Hunt received an Oscar for being annoying in an above-average romantic comedy. Nicole Kidman got one for putting on a fake nose. Likewise, Charlize Theron was mesmerizing in Monster and Daniel Day Lewis gave a bravura, towering performance worth every accolade in There Will Be Blood. Sometimes their awards are pretty dubious; sometimes they f*cking nail it. But what it really boils down to is:

The Oscars are essentially meaningless. They’re the equivalent of the Heisman Trophy. Oklahoma’s quarterback Sam Bradford won the Heisman this year, yet Florida’s Tim Tebow led his team to victory in the National Championship game over the Sooners. The Heisman voters are a select group of people within college sports who voice their opinions. But, if you asked any regular college football viewer they would say Tebow was already the best leader and that Texas’ Colt McCoy was unfairly shafted. Furthermore, whoever wins the Oscar for Best Picture this year will not be “crowned” anything. They won’t have bragging rights like whoever wins between the Steelers and the Cardinals next Sunday will. The Golden Globes, BAFTA’s, National Board of Review, and every critic’s association in the country get to name the movie they feel is best; there’s only one Super Bowl winner.

If it’s an outrage that The Dark Knight was “snubbed” don’t watch the Oscars. If the ratings become so low, next year they’ll start doing it like the Grammy’s where everyone whose album goes platinum will be nominated so that people will tune in to watch them perform. We can nominate Johnny Depp for whatever overrated performance he gives and we can create a special slot where whichever movie makes the most money and gets good reviews can sit. Otherwise, go see The Reader and Milk and Frost/Nixon (because they WILL be out near you before the Oscar telecast) and tell me these snobs in the Academy don’t at least know a thing or two about film. They see films one way; you see them another. I can’t for the life of me see anything wrong with that.

Related Reading:

Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!

MrDeath

You make a good point. The thing I'm angry about, however, is not the nominations. All of the movies nominated that I've seen were great. The problem is, quite frankly, this year it's so damn...predictable. It feels so much the same. And not because there are a lack of movies, but it seems some of the movies that could have been nominated (cough The Wrestler cough) were replaced by some that are not very remarkable (I don't care what you say, Milk is like every political biopic I've ever seen).

I'll agree with you on one thing though, you will find an opportunity to see these movies. I live in East Bumblefuck in upstate New York and I've seen 3 of the 5 Best Picture nominees. Not only will it be easily available to see eventually, but why not make a trip of it? Go to your little art house theater a couple of hours away. Get some dinner. Have a date. Enjoy the movie. Don't bitch about not seeing the movie.

Jim Rohner

I think my main problem with The Dark Knight being left off of the nominations for Best Picture or Best Director is not that I think it was THE best film of the year, but because they were replaced with The Reader, Stephen Daldry, and Ron Howard. Audiences may not have heard of The Reader, but you know who did? Critics groups all over the country. You know what they thought of it? Neither do I. While I understand that the Academy Awards are decided by yes, the Academy, doesn't it say something when not a single critics group - the groups that production and distribution companies work so hard to woo - across the country awarded The Reader with anything? I understand that A) critics do not determine the Academy Awards and B) the Academy Awards are not a democracy, but there still seems to be something pretentious about a select few ignoring the opinions of an overwhelming critical majority.

To an extent, Daldry, and definitely Ron Howard, are Academy darlings and they fawn all over anything these two guys do. I don't mean at all to detract at all from either director - they both do very good work - but Best Director for Frost/Nixon? Was it a great movie? Yes. But before that, it was a great stage play and how much work did Howard have to do to adapt it, especially when he has both Sheen and Langella, who have played those respective parts on the stage as well? That movie was great in spite of Howard, not because of him. I don't see why Nolan doesn't slip in as a nominee in his place seeing as he held the entire massive undertaking of The Dark Knight together. The dude oversaw every single shot of the film and the decision to shoot specific scenes in IMAX was a great decision to enhance the film. Also, if one is to believe the whispers that Nolan was instrumental in hushing up Warner Bros.' plans to exploit Ledger's nomination, and you have one classy individual on top of it.

tmccar20

The Dark Knight was awesome, If the oscars want to lose money by not nominated it, who cares they have enough money. It won't stop me from watching the film a thousand times. The film may be snubbed here, but health ledger will get it supporting actor, they owe the picture that much, I'm sure. And Chris Nolan will get an oscar for a lesser work, like did with Scorese with Departed. All the movies that they nominate for the oscars isn't the answer to some SAT question so what they can go suck an egg for all I care.

Cpt J

BEST POST EVER!!! It's everything I want to say and more... way to be man... way to be...

harold

IMO it still is going to be a pretty boring Oscar race. I agree with a lot of your points, but that doesn't mean the Academy didn't screw things up. I think TCCOBB, for example, received way too many nominations for a film that was, really, pretty subpar in comparison to something like The Wrestler. Or what about some of the other categories. What about The Visitor snub for screenplay or Sally Hawkins for Happy-Go-Lucky. I mean, I'm not saying at all that I have the authority or am any authority whatsoever on what film should receive official recognition from the AMPAS or not, but based on films that deserve awards and shouldn't, I still think they're pretty snobbish. If there's anything I feel like I should slam, in fact, it is Benjamin Button. Not that it was a BAD film, but it really isn't as great as people proclaim it to be. If you've seen Forrest Gump or Big Fish, you already get the idea, and both films are shorter and easier to sit through without falling asleep. I also do think that some of the technical categories SHOULD have a pretty strong bearing on what deserves a best picture or best director nod. After all, every category has its role in the success of the film. I certainly do think that if TDK was recognized for film editing, sounds, special effects, supporting actor, so on so forth, it is worth a gander at putting it in comparison to the rest of the best picture nominations as well as the directorial efforts.

Like what everyone else said, these nominations seem pretty formulaic, with the odd exception here and there. That doesn't necessarily mean that the AMPAS have lost their touch with the people, but it certainly does indicate for me, that by purely selecting films that did have limited releases (believe me I did check and I wasn't willing to make a 1+ hour trip to see The Reader or Frost/Nixon) and a relatively small viewership over overwhelmingly well-reviewed (by more than just critics, might I add) and popular films, they are making some sort of elitist statement about the general audience. And yes, it is really dull when you can pretty much predict what's going to happen and who's going to win.

Nevernude

I agree with everything Jim Rohner said. The Academy is flawed, but it would have been decent of them to at least Christopher Nolan. Perhaps his work is overshawed by Ledger's legacy or the blockbuster status of the movie, however, he did a great directing job, made great decisions, and the guy's previous work is astonishing. So far, not a single misstep in his filmography. Say what you will about Insomnia, but i personally think it was brilliant.
I dont begrudge the Academy anything, they are free to make their decisions and nominations etc etc...but their decision-making sticks of the decisions of a certain former president of the USA...

Sun

You make a fairly good point with this, and I agree with almost everything. However, There Will Be Blood was not released by me, and neither, unfortunately, will Milk, Frost/Nixon, or The Reader be released by me. Not everybody in America lives by an enormous theater that carries all the new releases.

Nicholas

I understand your point of view on the article and certainly we are perhaps griping over something silly. The true heart of the matter is, we backed a movie that is deserving of praise. Who is going to remember The Reader 10 years down the line? A movie should not be punished because it is not popular, it should be admired because it took chances on what a comic book movie can be without selling out to either the art crowd or the mainstream public. We don't want the Academy to award Spiderman 5 if it is not worthy of Best Picture. If you feel that TDK is not a great movie that is your opinion, but bear in mind you are in the minority. At least a dozen critics put it on their best lists so we are not off the mark. I remember an Academy that favored true creative talent over pure Oscar bait. The Godfather was not an art house movie, nor was Forrest Gump or several others, hell, Silence of the Lambs is not their typical kind of pick either. As a matter of fact, can anyone list the times the Oscars were given out to other genres besides drama? You can argue that we are of two different tastes but you cannot argue with facts. The Academy used to take risks and nominate films that deserved praise, now it has become who campaigns enough (Harvey Weinstein) rather than who deserves it (The Dark Knight).

Omek

I see where you're coming from too, Josh. But, I'm going to have to go with Nicholas and Jim on this one. TDK was popular, but that doesn't make it non-Oscar worthy. Does it make the Academy look elitist? Hell yes it does. The very least they could have done is give it a nomination. And doesn't it make the award category a little more exciting when you don't know who's going to win? I thought that was the fun of award shows. Well, go figure.

TCCOBB or Frost/Nixon were definitely not as good.

I'm just saying, we should just boycott this year and not watch it. Will low ratings really matter to them? Probably not, but at least they'd get the message.

_Christopher_M

Frost/Nixon is better than the Dark Knight, really? I've watched both and I have to disagree...F.N. was slow paced and over dramatized (to an annoying extreme)...I personally thought it was the worst performance from Sam Rockwell...which is odd since I'm his biggest fan...Frank L.'s performance is pretty much everything we've seen before with the many many actors playing Nixon......I understand how this could have won a lot of Tony's..But it would be like if Mama Mia! got nominated over a very creative and genre inspiring masterpiece...this was a movie based on a play that was based on interview tapes that already existed...there really isn't as much creativity involved as there is creating a whole city, characters and situations that never existed...sorry but these movies based on actual events or people is kind of a cop-out....sorry but Dark Knight at the very least should have been nominated for either Best Picture or Adapted Screenplay....A lot of these movies nominated were average at best including Rachel Getting Married and Revolutionary Road...where Happy-Go-Lucky and Gomorrah get snubbed it's very sad to see....

Commentary Track: The Power of Snub

Related Topics:

Related Reading: