So, this year I neglected to cover the Oscars in my typical fashion for several reasons. Most of which being that I am unusually overwhelmed (as you can tell with my door being closed, often:) And because most of the films and performances that I have been following for 2011 were not recognized with nominations. Being a spoiled sport does not fit within my personality, but I will admit that I felt curious as to why some of the best work out there was being ignored by the Academy.
The critical community keeps tabs on accolades by tracking awards given at film festivals; most importantly Cannes, Venice, and Sundance. Awards given at these festivals did not reflect in the nominations nor the winners on Sunday night's event. Even industry sub committee (VES for Visual Effects; SAG for Actors) awards did not accurately reflect the films that won. This got me thinking, "Who makes these decisions? Why were these people given the authority to decide the absolute best in filmmaking?"
The LA Times answered this for me. They have a great series of articles and videos exploring Academy voting statistics. Please click on the links below to learn more about the Academy and the voting process -
In my opinion, I think the process to be an academy voter is antiquated at best. The pillars of our industry are not even voting members, as revealed in this report. So why do we give the Academy Awards such notoriety when their membership does not accurately reflect excellence in the industry or the critical community? I'm asking this as a person who regards the Oscars ceremony as the "Super Bowl of Film Nerds." My video attendance for the yearly spectacle has been consistent since 1990. I love the race, speculation, anticipation, and yes, the outfits. But, this year, I felt that the nominations did not reflect perfection in filmmaking, overall.
I'll end this post with a video from JoBlo that highlights the films that should have been nominated this year. Let me know what you think. Cheers, Eve.