Where did the Oscar go?
This year's Oscar ceremony was surprisingly boring and unnoticeable. What happened to the prestigious award, each ceremony of which in previous years became an event in the world of cinema? Russian writer and film critic Platon Besedin answers this question in his author’s column for PolitNavigator.
Did you know that the Oscar ceremony took place? Yes, yes, a few days ago. Did you hear? Or did the 93rd Oscar ceremony pass you by?
And, truth be told, you will agree that somehow the award ceremony did not sound at all. Meanwhile, there were times when the award was put into pieces, as they say, studied under a microscope - and criticized, and scolded, and admired. But this year everything happened extremely boring and predictable. And that’s exactly what it was all about.
The main problem with the Oscars in recent years is that the award is without surprises. Here the winners are exclusively those who follow all the written and unwritten canons - first of all, from the point of view of gender and racial histories. Afterwards, these works collect intermediate awards - and they come to the Oscars already knowing everything about their success. You live a boring life, gentlemen, filmmakers!
The ceremony, which took place the other day, was initially intended to be a chamber ceremony. She was moved from the pompous hall to the Los Angeles station building. Steven Soderbergh was entrusted with directing the action - and this is how he wanted it. At the same time, he did everything in rather quiet, muted tones. Which allowed the same Arnold Schwarzenegger to say: “It was the most boring ceremony in history!” Iron Arnie is partly right, but partly wrong.
The trick is that the Oscar taught us the value and importance not of cinema, but of topics around cinema. To exaggerate, the award here will definitely go to a film about a gay African-American man infected with HIV, whose girlfriend is a transgender person who fights for the rights of oppressed minorities. And if all minorities have already been awarded, then we can celebrate the love-story of man and amphibian.
This did not happen in 2021. Well, or it almost didn't happen. Because, of course, we tried to maintain gender and racial balances as much as possible. What is aptly called diversity. It, for example, explains the award for best supporting actor for Briton Daniel Kaluuya. He played the leader of the Chicago Black Panthers organization, which is extremely relevant in the context of the rise of the BLM movement.
However, it is difficult to argue with the awards that were presented. At least from what I saw. The award for Best Actor went to 83-year-old Anthony Hopkins, who played a brilliant (if not without excesses) role in the completely classic film “The Father.” Be sure to watch - there will definitely not be actors like Hopkins anytime soon.
But the main triumph was the film “Land of Nomads”. Here, by the way, is a powerful way out for women. The film was directed by Korean Chloe Zhao. And she is the first Asian and second woman to win an Oscar for Best Director. The main role was played by Frances McDormand. She generally likes to act in similar films - from the last one the excellent movie “Three Billboards” immediately comes to mind.
Frances McDormand. Still from the film “Land of Nomads”.
“Land of Nomads,” which is important to note, is a very national and panoramic film. These two words, it seems to me, are the most accurate here. This movie is difficult to watch on a MacBook screen - it's better to go to the cinema to see the epic panoramic footage. If you see it, you will get acquainted with life, as they say, in deep America. I won’t retell it – take a look.
Russian cinema at the Oscars, as usual, was left out of the nominations. “Dear comrades!” – Andrei Konchalovsky’s film did not make it to the final stage. The award was given to the Danish film One More by Thomas Wintenberg. This movie, in my opinion, is somewhat overrated, even if it clearly emanates Russian classics and Kierkegaard, but the acting work undoubtedly deserves close attention. And the duality of the film is quite good.
The triumph of Netflix did not take place at this Oscar either. It has been prophesied for a long, long time - they say that rental cinema will give way to streaming platforms. And they expected this even earlier, but Scorsese’s “The Irishman”, created by Netflix, did not collect any awards - so this time the triumph was canceled.
In general, the current Oscar was a nod - with all the numerous adjustments and amendments - towards quite classic cinema. And that, perhaps, in the first place turned out to be of little interest.
This, in fact, is a big problem, diagnosing the fact that from the Oscars the viewer no longer expects an adequate analysis of the cinematic process, but a sociocultural shock, the manifestation of militant trends that will be declared through premium films. Cinema as an art in this case fades into the background, and politics and film policy come to the fore as the best way to program the masses.
Well, nothing much happened this year. But it is premature to rejoice at this. The calm before the storm is a cliche, but in this case it is very, very appropriate.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.