COMMENT - Did David Really Beat Goliath?

Does the Hurt Locker's Oscar Sweep signify a new direction in the Academy's pickings?

By Ben Holmes

The Hurt Locker wins Best Picture

The Oscars are often criticised for being less a celebration of the creativity of filmmakers and more an opportunity for the Academy to congratulate itself, with awards usually going to those that sway the most Academy influence. This year however, the close of the 82nd Academy Awards saw Kathryn Bigelow’s stunning Iraq war drama The Hurt Locker storm the show despite returning a mere $21 million, making it the lowest grossing Best Picture winner ever; beating James Cameron’s Avatar, the highest grossing film of all time. The problem is not that The Hurt Locker won, but why it won. Was it really the David and Goliath tale it has been made out to be? Does the film’s success mark a shift by the Academy towards recognising more relevant films or is it just as out of touch with popular opinion as ever?

One fact that cannot be overlooked here is the issue of genre. It is rare that the Academy gives recognition to sci-fi, horror or comedy films. In 1977, Star Wars was beaten to the Best Picture accolade by Woody Allen’s Annie Hall. It is just not the Academy’s way to give the Best Picture award to films they don’t consider “serious”. The question is, was Cameron’s effects-driven sci-fi epic ever really in the running? A closer look at The Hurt Locker reveals that it shares a number of characteristics with the typical “Oscar film”: a socially-relevant context, an in-depth character study and an opportunity to satisfy the Academy’s need to appear “artistic”. In light of this it is not all that surprising that it was picked over Avatar.

The second contributing factor to consider is the matter of hype. The Academy is notorious for simply picking the films with the most buzz surrounding them. As more critics got excited about it, and the pile of smaller awards mounted up, The Hurt Locker was carried on a wave of hype towards a landslide victory. Every year the awards are dominated by one or two overhyped movies. While this year it was at least deserved, it was, as usual, blown way out of proportion.

So what does this mean in the grand scheme of things? Well, for Avatar, nothing. The lack of Academy recognition to accompany its enormous box office gross will be only a minor grievance. The real victims, however, year in year out are films like Neill Blomkamp’s incredible District 9 and the Coen Brother’s A Serious Man, nominated as a formality with no real hope of any result. These quirkier, more creative films continue, despite being widely praised by film fans, to be lost in the buzz surrounding critically acclaimed dramas like Precious and The Blindside.

There has always been little relation between Oscar success and the opinions of “real people”, only 8 of They Shoot Pictures, Don’t They?’s Top 100 Films of All Time received the Best Picture statuette. It seems that the films we remember are often the ones that the Academy forgot. As tastes continue to diverge, with new media making independent cinema ever more accessible, the Oscars remain detached from the opinions of movie fans, who now turn to films bearing the “Spirit Awards” badge over the Oscar stamp. The Hurt Locker’s success is a step in the right direction, but only time will tell if it represents the Academy taking a new perspective on film, or simply a continuation of old habits.

www.theyshootpictures.com

www.spiritawards.com