I know the ratings aren't in yet but if this thread is any indication, nominating two of the highest-grossing films ever - that is
all time, mind you, not just last year - will not succeed in bringing back the chunk of yesteryear's audience who the pundits and loudmouths insisted tuned out because the Academy kept ignoring star-studded movies we actually cared about. And if you lived through the rare cultural phenomenon that was
Titanic you don't need to be told that neither of the new
Maverick/
Avatar came close to approximating the 1997 classic's extraordinary grip on the public imagination then and now. (In case you're wondering,
its recent 25th-anniversary rerelease grossed an extra $61M worldwide.)
This should hopefully put an end to ABC's (read: Disney's) futile experiments like last year's embarrassing "Fan Favorite" contest or downright offensive "streamlining" like last year's (again!) separate pre-telecast presentation of eight awards which presumably don't matter.
The world is too demographically and technologically diverse these days for any awards show to match TV ratings of yore, which may give Disney executives fits but also present welcome opportunities for the Academy to stop pandering to "the crowd" and focus instead on the nitty-gritty of what has allowed this institution to withstand nearly a century of cultural upheaval and commercial constraints. Garnering less than 20 million domestic viewers is just fine as long as you get more people talking and, of course, viewing some of the nominees. After all that's what these awards are for, no?
Guess a few words about the ceremony itself are in order. This has gotta be the speech of the nite:
It's obvious
M. M. Keeravani rehearsed that over and over, but huge props to him regardless cuz I would've been completely petrified just to recite my lines... let alone to sing them in front of a
worldwide audience of millions! (The much-touted 1B total didn't add up even at the best of times.)
Also I can't be the only one who saw a hint of disappointment on Butler's face as he still graciously applauded Fraser's upset win:
You're still just 31 years old, kid. A handsome lad like you will have more chances as long as you stay out of trouble.
I'll just close this round with a repeat of my earlier thumbs-up for Kimmel. Why the hell would you wanna waste time looking for a new host when you've got the perfect one right here
who also happens to be one of your own employees?!
Now a couple replies:
I haven't seen all the oscar nominated films, but EEAAO was certainly an interesting film.
The slowly changing demographic of the academy members bodes well for a wider variety of films to be nominated in the future.
But what kind of "variety" are we talking about? EEAaO is "interesting" alright, but only within the usual genre parameters it is happy to traffic in. Say OTOH what you will about
Tár which, as you probably saw in our group chat, I didn't much care for - to quote Nathan Lee again: "
Tár is
Memoria for people who think
The New Yorker is super important" - but I can't deny that it made me at least think about its grand themes of identity, fame and its trappings, cancel culture, etc. So would I take the decidedly arthouse
Tár over EEAaO even though I "enjoyed" the latter on my 1st viewing of each? Without hesitation.
This actually reminds moi of
Slate's recent "
New Black Film Canon" which not only shortchanges African filmmakers but also the pre-1980s which apparently were so racist only 14 of the 75 supposedly canonical films were produced then. My response:
They really need to come up with a better-qualified "special panel" if these supposed experts think bad histories like Malcolm X, 12 Years a Slave and Selma or souped-up Hollywood blockbusters like Get Out, Black Panther and The Woman King belong in the same "canon" as the likes of like Black Girl, Touki Bouki and Killer of Sheep - all of which happen to hail from before the 1980s, apparently something of a black hole for Black art according to the panel. And why am I not remotely surprised that Souleymane Cissé (let alone his masterwork Yeelen) and Charles Burnett's remarkable short When It Rains aren't even mentioned?
Good call, though, on Spike's 25th Hour, probably his best and most underrated feature after Do the Right Thing. And I've always had a soft sport for Carl Franklin's Devil in a Blue Dress, whose seductive 1940s-noir atmosphere is matched by its scrupulous attention to period details and racial dynamics.
I say that's not the kind of variety or diversity we should be striving for. This notion that only certain demographics are capable of understanding certain issues betrays a fundamental mistrust and degrading of the human imagination which drives all great art. That should be especially evident in film where many of the most sympathetic and perceptive portrayals of women or the so-called female gaze have come from men as diverse as Dreyer,
Mizoghuchi, Naruse,
Cukor, Sirk, Ophuls and
Miyazaki.
EEAO and AQWF win, essentially, everything.
Curtis winning BSA is a joke. If you watched the film she was almost there as a joke, Hsu was crucial to the plot and actually acted much better than Curtis side by side. I get it’s lifetime achievement but I have no clue how, or why, she won that.
Editing and Best Supporting Actor were fully deserved wins, Ke Huy Quan was the big winner of the night along with Yeoh, really happy for them.
Best Picture AND Director AND original screenplay to the Daniels, though? Stop it. This film was not that good.
So you've finally come to realize I was right, once again. Took you long enough!
This is the same problem the Emmys have now. The combination of large expansion of the voting pool + peak content leads to these lazy sweeps. Blanchett and basically everyone in Supporting Actress were robbed.
Not sure what you mean by "peak content." I've never bought into
the "peak TV" hype and though my viewing frequency has yet to return to its pre-pandemic level I'm sure there were better films in 2022 than most of this year's Best Picture nominees.
Don't think Bassett deserved SA more than Curtis, but agreed on the main point.
www.indiewire.com
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/Awardist-Predictions-Tout-Joey-1-31-2000-d9b8ea6d462a4e50a10016038d2bcaaf.jpg)
ew.com
But probably deservedly so. Congratulations, Brandon. 
