It’s hard to pinpoint precisely when the Grammys became irrelevant in our culture.
For me, it came when I realized Milli Vanilli had a Grammy but the Who didn’t, and that it took the Rolling Stones more than 20 years to earn their first statuette (in 1994 for “Voodoo Lounge.”)
Could the Oscars be heading in the same direction?
How many years must we suffer through bloated Oscar telecasts and watch terrific films get slighted or ignored outright? Won’t audiences rebel, en masse, if another year goes by and the best comedies, animated films and actioners get shoved aside for Serious Dramatic Features and Important Biopics?
And while “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” scored both at the box office and with Oscar voters, they neglected to pay tribute to two films which garnered better reviews and boffo box office – “Wall*E” and “The Dark Night.”
Will audiences endure another round of political speeches this time out guaranteed to enrage half the show’s audience?
It’s why the upcoming awards telecast on Feb. 22 is so crucial to Oscar’s future. The show’s producers have stripped away the comedic elements of the production, handing the reigns over to Hugh Jackman instead.
We’re promised – again – that this year’s show will be different. We’ll see. It’s hard not to be skeptical.
Perhaps a few big time movie stars will show up, look gallant or gorgeous, and make us forget about all of the above.
Or, there’s always the worst case scenario – that “The Reader,” a fine film but one which doesn’t deserve an Oscar for anything except Hottest Nazi in a Nondescript Peasant Blouse (Kate Winslet) could walk away with Best Picture honors.
Consider that the nuclear bomb blast which could forever alter the way movie lovers view the Oscars.
Thankfully, the stars are aligning to give Danny Boyle’s “Slumdog Millionaire” the top prize. If that holds true, the Oscars may remain a controversial, but still vital, part of our collective film culture.
But it’s place has never been on less secure footing.
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
While I understand that good movies aren’t always box-office hits, and visa versa, the Oscars really jumped the shark when Michael Moore won for “Bowling for Columbine.”
CT – Death and taxes may be the only permanent facts we all face, and the status of every other thing can change, but I think Oscars day in the sun is long over. Low TV ratings for the broadcast are a pretty good single indicator, but the story behind your comments also seems to indicate that many film fans are sophisticated enough and conservative(!) enough to know quality when they see it.
And, God bless ‘em, they watch, rent and buy that quality despite the overhyped buzz generated for the Academy’s nominee’s. We have the means to acquire and abundant information about the popular arts to avoid being dictated to re: what’s best, etc. If only a few more of us were brave enough publicly to confirm that our tastes and our views are one and the same, there wouldn’t be much confusion about what constitutes quality! But, conservatives are decent enough to not act provacatively.
For now, as always, if you just watch the market for the arts, you’ll probably get a truer picture of what’s popular and good.
Off-topic: Wanted to say thanks for your response to my comment on your review of “Bias.” I’m kinda getting snottier about this “preaching to the choir” thing, because I feel those of us working with the web, weirdly enough, aren’t reaching out enough.
I know that sounds nuts – I mean, we link to everything, right? But it’s just a feeling.
One thing that isn’t just a feeling, though, is my ire at the Oscars for neglecting TDK. That movie was incredibly unrealistic, I’ll admit that, but every word counts, and every shot counts, and the themes and characters add up. The Batman fanboys want to go “best movie ever,” and honestly, despite its flaws, it might be – I don’t think I’ve ever seen a comic-book movie be important, but this one takes on whether you can have a conception of justice in the face of nihilism head-on. My take on it: “Analysis of The Dark Knight.”
Agree on all fronts, Ashok … thought Dark Knight, for its small flaws, was a stunning achievement on so many levels.
And yeay, those decrying media bias are preaching to the choir … but they gotta keep on preaching in the hopes that others will finally start listening. I’m not sure what else people can do …
it’s a great conversation for another day, or perhaps a non-movie blog!