Image credit: Robert Deutsch/USA TODAY NETWORK
The night of the 89th Academy Awards began with the expected explosion of color and sound, but the moment Justin Timberlake's "Can't Stop the Feeling" broke down to a bizarrely slow techno remix complete with the half-spoken, half-rapped verse that sounded so much more awkward live, the mood of the night was predetermined. From then on, I should've seen it coming. Because the rest of the night continued in the very same, uneven kilter of comedy and emotion that failed to build an impact throughout the ceremony, and leaving us utterly confused - arguably more so than Warren Beatty when he read "Emma Stone" as the winner for Best Picture.
That's right, for those who haven't yet heard, the Oscars just pulled a Steve Harvey. Somehow allegedly receiving the already-delivered envelope for Best Actress, Hollywood legend Warren Beatty found himself announcing La La Land as the winner of Best Picture, at a complete loss when all he read was "Emma Stone" on the card. In reality, Moonlight was the winner, proved when La La Land producer Jordan Horowitz held up the winning card to the camera. And thank the Academy for that!
But before I dive into how the night went, here's a list of all the Oscar winners, just to catch you all up to speed:
 |
| Image credit: InSync Plus |
Best Actor: Casey Affleck - Manchester By the Sea
Best Actress: Emma Stone - La La Land
Best Director: Damien Chazelle - La La Land
Best Original Screenplay: Manchester by the Sea - Kenneth Lonergan
Best Writing Adapted Screenplay: Moonlight - Berry Jenkins
Best Supporting Actor: Mahershala Ali - Moonlight
Best Supporting Actress: Viola Davis - Fences
Best Original Music Score: La La Land - Justin Hurwitz
Best Original Song: "City of Stars" - La La Land; Justin Hurwitz, Ben Pasek, and Justin Paul
Best Foreign Language Film: The Salesman - Asghar Farhadi
Best Live Action Short Film: Sing - Kristóf Deák
Best Documentary Feature: O.J.: Made in America - Ezra Edelma and Caroline Waterlow
Best Documentary Short Subject: The White Helmets - Orlando von Einsiedel, Joanna Natasegara
Best Animated Feature Film: Zootopia - Byron Howard, Rich Moore, and Clark Spencer
Best Animated Short Film: Piper - Alan Barillaro and Marc Songheimer
Best Cinematography: Linus Sandgren - La La Land
Best Film Editing: John Gilbert - Hacksaw Ridge
Best Visual Effects: The Jungle Book - Robert Legato, Adam Valdez, Andrew R. Jones, Dan Lemmon
Best Production Design: La La Land - David Wasco, Sandy Reynolds-Wasco
Best Sound Editing: Sylvian Bellemare - Arrival
Best Sound Mixing: Hacksaw Ridge - Kevin O'Connell, Andy Wright, Robert Mackenzi, Peter Grace
Best Makeup and Hairstyling: Suicide Squad - Alessandro Bertolazzi, Giorgio Gregorini, Christopher Nelson
Best Costuming: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them - Colleen Atwood
Looking at this lineup, it seems to me that the reorganization of the Academy structure last year contributed to more than just unexpected nominations. If anything, the results of this year's competition are just as unfocused and unpredictable as the presentation of the ceremony itself.
Or maybe it's a statement on post-modernity and meme culture, as that win for Suicide Squad might suggest. Either way, let's talk about that.
As Jimmy Kimmel so eloquently put it while introducing Charlize Theron, "Yes, we have a theme, I promise. It's 'Inspiration'." But - and stop me if I'm wrong - but. That seems odd. Considering that the speech given just thirty seconds earlier by the President of the Academy, Mrs. Cheryl Boone Isaacs, highlighted specifically on the diversity of the nominations and the widening inclusiveness of the Hollywood industry.
Again, stop me if I'm wrong, but between these two themes there is a lot to unpack. While watching the ceremony, Isaacs' speech is not out of place at all for the mood of the night. Within the first five minutes of the ceremony, Kimmel, while throwing barbs at the nominees and one 'untalented' Matt Damon, managed to bring the political atmosphere of the country into the spotlight as well. Leaping off of the inherent racism associated with The Great Wall (while still making fun of Damon, because why wouldn't we?), Kimmel immediately discusses the "225 countries that now hate us" and emphasizes his own message of coming together as a nation despite the atmosphere throughout the country.
It was impossible to separate politics from the presentation at the Academy Awards on Sunday night. In all honesty, Kimmel should have stuck with it as his theme. The introduction of "Inspiration" seems to throw it all off, and honestly does not play in his favor. Immediately I think back to the 2012 Academy Awards, hosted by Billy Crystal - charming, witty, and focusing on the magic of cinema, but so much more organized than this year's show.
If this year's Academy Awards were a direct response to last year's controversy surrounding lack of representation in the nominations - which it definitely was - then it shouldn't have attempted to mask that. Especially in this time of social unrest throughout our nation, the hidden references to the POTUS and certain legislation came across as almost false. It was the greatest relief, to me, when Kimmel just kind of said "screw it" and live-tweeted out to Trump for his lack of response.
I say this largely because none of the attendees or presenters pulled any of their punches. From Giorgio Gregorini's impassioned acceptance speech referencing immigration, to Asghar Farhadi's outright refusal to attend the ceremony due to the controversial "Muslim ban" that is currently alienating our nation; not to mention Gael Garcìa Bernal's direct statement condemning the construction of a wall on the Mexican border. The only person who seemed to reign himself in was Kimmel himself.
Do I blame him? Not at all; just one look at the man and he appears as if he hasn't slept for days. Maybe this contributed to the disorganization throughout the show. Maybe there was a desire to emulate the fun and random encounters of Ellen DeGeneres' ceremony two years prior. One thing is for certain: the fragmentation of everything that happened at the Academy Awards on Sunday night could arguably just be a statement on postmodern art. It really could. Or it could have just been a mess.
A large part of this is the intersection that we are now starting to realize between the media and the industry. In decades' past, the Academy Awards played like a high-profile cocktail party. Formal, respectful, and completely saturated with press attention, but ultimately still familiar. This is the reason why Beatty found it more amusing than scandalous that he misread the card; meanwhile, social media and the presses went wild. Award shows such as the Academy Awards and the Grammy Awards are no longer a mere presentation of awards over dinner or - in this case - parachuting pastries. No, with the presence that the media has built in today's world, these ceremonies have become a platform for social statement and action.
Whether this is a good thing or not, the Academy doesn't seem ready to accept that fact. Because let's face it: the Academy Awards are meant to be entertaining. Politics? Well, sometimes, but also a double-edged sword that invites controversy and anger. Why would the industry even dare to introduce such topics into the conversation? And yet, with how our nation is today, even opening the discussion about diversity is a political maneuver. Despite this, the ceremony refused to acknowledge it, which only contributed to the mess that was Sunday night.
Because there isn't so much that it contributes to discussion, here's a quick list of all the mishaps that occurred on Sunday night: Justin Timberlake's weird techno-rap; Suicide Squad somehow won Best Makeup and Hairstyling (this is literal nonsense, let me tell you); a flag hit Auli'i Cravalho in the head as she performed her song from Moana; a tour bus of random people was driven to the Academy Awards under the guise of a red-carpet dress exhibition; consequently, Denzel Washington officiated a wedding?; Gary from Chicago is probably now a national hero; John Legend sang both of the nominated songs from La La Land despite the fact that Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling were both right there?? And he fell flat on the opening notes??; one of the In Memoriam people is actually still alive, surprise, and; Donald Trump never tweeted back. Was that everything? Did I forget something?
OH RIGHT: THEY ANNOUNCED THE WRONG WINNER FOR BEST PICTURE. Honestly, I don't even know if this moment was staged or not. If it wasn't, then who was supposed to organize it?! If it was, then what the hell?! I don't want to address this too closely, because I've already seen several reviews of the show break this down unfavorably for both sides. Long story short: Do I think that Moonlight deserved the Oscar? Yes. Would I have been upset if La La Land had really won it? No, because - surprise, hype happens for a reason - La La Land was a good movie. Was I completely ECSTATIC when Moonlight won? Yes, I believe there were actual tears involved.
However, I need to give credit to the cast of La La Land, because I've seen too many people say that La La Land deserved to lose "like that". Did La La Land deserve to lose? That's up to you all; personally, I think it deserved its nomination, and it deserves the awards it received. But did it deserve to lose like that? No. Never in a million years, no. Even as a person of color, I don't care about the debate of white washing, nor the arguments of representation; in this context, the award is delivered based on skill and impact. Moonlight won, and the Academy should have allowed it to win without subjecting anyone to a form of public humiliation or by creating a false sense of loss or success. I've seen people make fun of the La La Land producers and crew for being salty about losing, but really, who wouldn't be?! They accepted it more graciously than I would have for sure. Because a moment like that isn't about being a "sore loser". A moment like that is achieving the highest honor possible - for almost all of those filmmakers, for the first time in their careers - and then realizing it was a sham. A mistake. Not to mention that the significance of the achievement of Moonlight has only been lost in the controversy. A moment like that isn't a loss. And the fact that it happened in the first place, whether intentional or not, is unacceptable.
I want to end this review on a high note, however, and discuss my favorite part of the evening that I've been avoiding thus far. Maharshala Ali won Best Supporting Actor, and Viola Davis was the pinnacle of the night with her speech accepting Best Supporting Actress. I cannot think of any two people more deserving of the awards that they received, and Davis' speech emphasized the reason that I and so many people continue to love film. Because, despite its many flaws as an industry, and despite the many, many hardships it takes to make the best movies, the stories that we tell through cinema make a difference. The stories of the people before us make a difference. The best films do inspire, and they represent us, and they tell not only our stories but the stories that will go down in history and will document the struggles that we've faced. These stories matter, and they can spur action and change.
Meanwhile, while I look at the current media coverage that continues to debate about the scandal the Oscars have created with their mistakes, and I attempt to break down the reluctance of the Academy to acknowledge its position in the world of Hollywood, I wonder if it can ever say the same.
Looking at this lineup, it seems to me that the reorganization of the Academy structure last year contributed to more than just unexpected nominations. If anything, the results of this year's competition are just as unfocused and unpredictable as the presentation of the ceremony itself.
Or maybe it's a statement on post-modernity and meme culture, as that win for Suicide Squad might suggest. Either way, let's talk about that.
As Jimmy Kimmel so eloquently put it while introducing Charlize Theron, "Yes, we have a theme, I promise. It's 'Inspiration'." But - and stop me if I'm wrong - but. That seems odd. Considering that the speech given just thirty seconds earlier by the President of the Academy, Mrs. Cheryl Boone Isaacs, highlighted specifically on the diversity of the nominations and the widening inclusiveness of the Hollywood industry.
Again, stop me if I'm wrong, but between these two themes there is a lot to unpack. While watching the ceremony, Isaacs' speech is not out of place at all for the mood of the night. Within the first five minutes of the ceremony, Kimmel, while throwing barbs at the nominees and one 'untalented' Matt Damon, managed to bring the political atmosphere of the country into the spotlight as well. Leaping off of the inherent racism associated with The Great Wall (while still making fun of Damon, because why wouldn't we?), Kimmel immediately discusses the "225 countries that now hate us" and emphasizes his own message of coming together as a nation despite the atmosphere throughout the country.
It was impossible to separate politics from the presentation at the Academy Awards on Sunday night. In all honesty, Kimmel should have stuck with it as his theme. The introduction of "Inspiration" seems to throw it all off, and honestly does not play in his favor. Immediately I think back to the 2012 Academy Awards, hosted by Billy Crystal - charming, witty, and focusing on the magic of cinema, but so much more organized than this year's show.
If this year's Academy Awards were a direct response to last year's controversy surrounding lack of representation in the nominations - which it definitely was - then it shouldn't have attempted to mask that. Especially in this time of social unrest throughout our nation, the hidden references to the POTUS and certain legislation came across as almost false. It was the greatest relief, to me, when Kimmel just kind of said "screw it" and live-tweeted out to Trump for his lack of response.
I say this largely because none of the attendees or presenters pulled any of their punches. From Giorgio Gregorini's impassioned acceptance speech referencing immigration, to Asghar Farhadi's outright refusal to attend the ceremony due to the controversial "Muslim ban" that is currently alienating our nation; not to mention Gael Garcìa Bernal's direct statement condemning the construction of a wall on the Mexican border. The only person who seemed to reign himself in was Kimmel himself.
Do I blame him? Not at all; just one look at the man and he appears as if he hasn't slept for days. Maybe this contributed to the disorganization throughout the show. Maybe there was a desire to emulate the fun and random encounters of Ellen DeGeneres' ceremony two years prior. One thing is for certain: the fragmentation of everything that happened at the Academy Awards on Sunday night could arguably just be a statement on postmodern art. It really could. Or it could have just been a mess.
A large part of this is the intersection that we are now starting to realize between the media and the industry. In decades' past, the Academy Awards played like a high-profile cocktail party. Formal, respectful, and completely saturated with press attention, but ultimately still familiar. This is the reason why Beatty found it more amusing than scandalous that he misread the card; meanwhile, social media and the presses went wild. Award shows such as the Academy Awards and the Grammy Awards are no longer a mere presentation of awards over dinner or - in this case - parachuting pastries. No, with the presence that the media has built in today's world, these ceremonies have become a platform for social statement and action.
Whether this is a good thing or not, the Academy doesn't seem ready to accept that fact. Because let's face it: the Academy Awards are meant to be entertaining. Politics? Well, sometimes, but also a double-edged sword that invites controversy and anger. Why would the industry even dare to introduce such topics into the conversation? And yet, with how our nation is today, even opening the discussion about diversity is a political maneuver. Despite this, the ceremony refused to acknowledge it, which only contributed to the mess that was Sunday night.
Because there isn't so much that it contributes to discussion, here's a quick list of all the mishaps that occurred on Sunday night: Justin Timberlake's weird techno-rap; Suicide Squad somehow won Best Makeup and Hairstyling (this is literal nonsense, let me tell you); a flag hit Auli'i Cravalho in the head as she performed her song from Moana; a tour bus of random people was driven to the Academy Awards under the guise of a red-carpet dress exhibition; consequently, Denzel Washington officiated a wedding?; Gary from Chicago is probably now a national hero; John Legend sang both of the nominated songs from La La Land despite the fact that Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling were both right there?? And he fell flat on the opening notes??; one of the In Memoriam people is actually still alive, surprise, and; Donald Trump never tweeted back. Was that everything? Did I forget something?
 |
| Image Credit: Lucy Nicholson/Reuters |
However, I need to give credit to the cast of La La Land, because I've seen too many people say that La La Land deserved to lose "like that". Did La La Land deserve to lose? That's up to you all; personally, I think it deserved its nomination, and it deserves the awards it received. But did it deserve to lose like that? No. Never in a million years, no. Even as a person of color, I don't care about the debate of white washing, nor the arguments of representation; in this context, the award is delivered based on skill and impact. Moonlight won, and the Academy should have allowed it to win without subjecting anyone to a form of public humiliation or by creating a false sense of loss or success. I've seen people make fun of the La La Land producers and crew for being salty about losing, but really, who wouldn't be?! They accepted it more graciously than I would have for sure. Because a moment like that isn't about being a "sore loser". A moment like that is achieving the highest honor possible - for almost all of those filmmakers, for the first time in their careers - and then realizing it was a sham. A mistake. Not to mention that the significance of the achievement of Moonlight has only been lost in the controversy. A moment like that isn't a loss. And the fact that it happened in the first place, whether intentional or not, is unacceptable.
I want to end this review on a high note, however, and discuss my favorite part of the evening that I've been avoiding thus far. Maharshala Ali won Best Supporting Actor, and Viola Davis was the pinnacle of the night with her speech accepting Best Supporting Actress. I cannot think of any two people more deserving of the awards that they received, and Davis' speech emphasized the reason that I and so many people continue to love film. Because, despite its many flaws as an industry, and despite the many, many hardships it takes to make the best movies, the stories that we tell through cinema make a difference. The stories of the people before us make a difference. The best films do inspire, and they represent us, and they tell not only our stories but the stories that will go down in history and will document the struggles that we've faced. These stories matter, and they can spur action and change.
Meanwhile, while I look at the current media coverage that continues to debate about the scandal the Oscars have created with their mistakes, and I attempt to break down the reluctance of the Academy to acknowledge its position in the world of Hollywood, I wonder if it can ever say the same.
Worthwhile review of a rather unworthy event!
ReplyDelete