Oscar Snubs 2017/18 Edition
The Academy Awards, also known as the Oscars, are the biggest and most prestigious award in the film industry. Every year, the best films, performers and auteurs in Hollywood are nominated and rewarded for their hardwork and efforts. However, like all award shows, the Oscars have faced criticism for many of their choices of nominees and winners over the years. The recent years in particular have been especially tough for the Academy, with the #OscarsSoWhite movement two years back and the sexual misconduct scandal that has rocked the industry this year. When it was time for the announcement of the nominees, I was all prepared for some ridiculous snubs in the top categories.
However, to my pleasant surprise, the Academy this year has actually done a pretty great job in nominating many deserving people and showering love towards some unexpected films and performers. This doesn't mean there weren't some egregious snubs though, and I am here to talk about some of them. Keep in mind, I am not gonna talk about every snub in every category, but rather talk about some of those that I haven't seen mentioned or talked about as much. So acting snubs like James Franco, Michael Stuhlbarg/Armie Hammer, Holly Hunter or general snubs for films like The Post, The Big Sick and The Florida Project sadly won't be discussed here. (Although I will say I was quite sad that Franco, Stuhlbarg and Hunter didn't make the final cut)
There has been some uproar regarding the complete shut-out of Wonder Woman by the Academy. Strangely though, most of the complaints were that the film wasn't in contention for the top prizes (Picture, Director, Actress for Gal Gadot). I personally don't feel like it really deserved a Best Picture or Best Director nod (although Patty Jenkins did do an admirable job helming the film), even though I liked the film, but one area that it definitely should have got in for was Costume Design. The scenes in London gave us some good, old-fashioned period-piece costumes, while those set in Themyscira brought us some pretty great costumes for the Amazonians. However, the crowning achievement was definitely Diana's Wonder Woman costume. It was really perfectly designed, harkening back to its comic roots while still feeling modern and updated enough to fit into the world of the DCEU. It is actually my favourite superhero costume of the year.
I think this one may piss off quite a few people, but I wasn't a big fan of Disney's live-action Beauty and the Beast. The film felt so average and never really breathed new life into the material outside of Gaston and LeFou (credit to Luke Evans and Josh Gad for giving their all), and Emma Watson made for a really lacklustre Belle. Another underwhelming aspect of the film was the Costume Design. Yes, the costumes of Belle, Beast and Gaston were nice to look at, but there was also some pretty over-the-top costumes for the side characters that really took me out of the film. Most of the costumes also felt like very standard work. I thought Jacqueline Durran did a better job in her other nomination, Darkest Hour.
This one kinda ticked me off, especially since Dunkirk got in for most of the other technical categories. Honestly I shouldn't have been surprised by this snub, since Dunkirk's visual effects are not the flashy, effects-heavy kind. The brilliance behind Dunkirk's visuals though is that the audience isn't meant to notice them. Every single Spitfire scene, for instance, is excellent usage of subtle visual effects, with the perfect blending of CGI and practical effects to create some of the best aerial sequences of not just the year, but among all war films. Even though the visual effects in Dunkirk are low-key and subtle, it still really is great effects work that added to the overall achievement of the film and it definitely deserved a nomination.
James Gunn's sequel was a perfectly fun film, with some fun flashy visual effects work that is fitting to a Marvel film. However, the problem was I always felt like I was looking at some obvious CGI creations (even the CGI in the first film didn't feel as obvious as it did here). And in terms of usage of obvious CGI creations, I truly believed that Thor: Ragnarok and Okja both did much better jobs than GotG 2. It seems like this may have been the token "obvious and flashy CGI” nomination that happens every year (like with the Transformers films), but with Star Wars and Kong: Skull Island both already nominated and fulfilling this spot, it makes Dunkirk's snub even more infuriating.
This might be the most inexcusable snub so far. Back in 2014, the Academy subbed The Lego Movie, although there was some strong competition like Big Hero 6, How To Train Your Dragon 2 and The Tale of Princess Kaguya. This year though, the snub was just ridiculous. The Lego Batman Movie may not have been as good as The Lego Movie, but it was still a uproariously entertaining and genuinely heartfelt movie that both poked fun at and paid tribute to the Batman lore. The writing was clever, the voice-acting top-notch, and the animation is beautiful. This should have been a sure-fire nominee for Animated Feature. I really don't understand the hatred the Academy seems to have towards the Lego film series.
The snub is even more egregious when you look some of the other films nominated. I haven't seen The Breadwinner, but by all accounts it is excellent. Loving Vincent and Coco are both great and would make deserving winners. However, both The Boss Baby and Ferdinand pale in comparison to the rest. I'm not saying that those two are terrible films, in fact they are entertaining enough and watchable and definitely well-animated. However, I truly cannot fathom how someone can say that those two films were better than The Lego Batman Movie. Lego Batman was miles ahead in terms of its writing alone, and it really should have gotten in over either of these two films.
I, Tonya is an absolutely brilliant film. The Academy rightfully recognised Margot Robbie and Allison Janney for their amazing performances (although Sebastian Stan should have at least been in some award conversations too). How it failed to garner a Best Picture nod though confuses me (more on that later though), but by far and away the biggest snub was for its brilliant screenplay. The script is scathing and funny while still managing to wring compelling drama out of the ludicrous true-story it is based upon. All the while, it never seeks to simplify any of its characters and does a great job of humanising all of them (yes even Allison Janney's terrible mother). It honestly reminded me of the brilliant screenplay of Goodfellas (which was Oscar-nominated) and the fact that both BAFTA and the Writer's Guild recognise I, Tonya's screenplay further proves how big of a snub this was.
This choice is actually a lot easier than it seems. Although I loved The Shape of Water, its screenplay is definitely weaker in comparison to the rest of the field. Get Out, Three Billboards and Lady Bird are, in my opinion, three of the best-written films of the year. The Big Sick, despite being influenced and based upon real-life events, is surprisingly heartfelt and well-written and offers a very refreshing take on the rom-com genre. Furthermore, I would actually attribute the success of The Shape of Water more to its director and cast rather than its screenplay. Without the deft hand and vision of Guillermo Del Toro and the pitch-perfect performances of its cast, the story of The Shape of Water could have easily come apart. I do believe its screenplay nod probably rode in off the overall love and success of the movie, which is a shame as it was at the expense of one of the best screenplays of the year for I, Tonya
Hong Chau was already at a disadvantage as compared to many of her fellow Supporting Actress contenders, in that she wasn't in a great film. However, despite the overall mediocrity of the film surrounding her, and the fact that her character is in all honesty atrociously and offensively written, she somehow managed to rise above it all and become the best part of her film. In the wrong hands, the character could have become a terribly over-acted and offensive racial stereotype. But Hong Chau impressively managed to avoid all the trappings of the role and turned in a hilarious yet earnest performance that was the sole reason for me to keep watching the film . I really have to applaud her efforts and success at pulling off such a tricky character and it's a shame that the poor reception of her film all but snuffed her chance at a nomination.
I will be perfectly honest, I think the Academy (and most of the award bodies) is recognising the person, and not the performance, in this case. Now I know, acting is quite a subjective thing to judge, but for me, Blige's performance was one where it was good and fulfilled its purpose, but that was it. I just didn't see the great performance that many people were raving about and didn't think that this performance was one of the top five supporting actress performance of the year. I really believe that if some other actress had given this same performance, it wouldn't have garnered as much awards attention as it did.
And for all the talk about diversity among all the nominees in this year's Oscars, I would have appreciated it even more if Hong Chau had gotten in over Mary J. Blige, as Asian/Asian-American actors really do not get enough recognition in Hollywood.
Seems like a pre-requisite for a Denis Villeneuve film is that it will have to be somehow snubbed by the Academy in some way. Prisoners was completely shut out aside from Roger Deakins' amazing cinematography. Sicario missed out on Best Actress, Supporting Actor and arguably Screenplay. Arrival, despite earning a Best Picture nod and a Director nod for Villeneuve, also had one of the biggest snubs in recent years when Amy Adams missed out on Best Actress. Blade Runner 2049 continues that trend, being shut out of nearly every single major category of the Oscars outside of technical achievements.
I know the film is definitely not for everyone in the general audience, as its poor box office reception indicated, but this film is my personal favourite of the year. And despite what one may feel about the script or overall story, there is no denying what Villeneuve pulled off in terms of directorial achievements is nothing short of astonishing. I know this may sound sacrilegious to some, but I think Villeneuve may have done an even better directing job on Blade Runner 2049 than Ridley Scott did in the original Blade Runner. Villeneuve realised the vision of the future world so astoundingly well. I really felt every scene was perfectly directed, from the biggest action set-pieces to the simplest conversation between two characters. And let's not forget the outstanding performances Villeneuve managed to draw from his cast (Direction of actors is an important aspect of a director's job). I think the best praise I can heap for both Villeneuve and the film is that despite being the longest film I have seen this year, it was also the film that most engaged and intrigued me.
This one was extremely, extremely tough for me to decide. I loved The Shape of Water and Get Out, and really really liked Dunkirk, Lady Bird and Phantom Thread. And I think all five directors did excellent work on their respective films. Both Nolan and Del Toro might have actually given their career best directorial work in my opinion, and Paul Thomas Anderson did a masterful job behind the camera as usual (really don't expect anything less from him). As for Jordan Peele and Greta Gerwig, they really could not have asked for a better directorial debut. Both prove extremely adept at blending and juggling the various tones of their respective films and both show a sense of mastery behind the camera that really makes me extremely excited for their follow-up films.
Honestly, I really cannot fault the Academy for choosing these five nominees as they are a great set. However, this is my personal opinion and as much as I hate leaving Gerwig out for doing such a great job, she is sadly number six on my personal Best Director list. (Honestly its years like these where I feel like the Academy should also extend their Best Director list like they did with Best Picture). It's just a shame Villeneuve didn't get in, although I should have seen this snub coming as BAFTA was the only major awards body that nominated him.
(On a side note though, I am kinda glad Gerwig still got in. Imagine the backlash the Oscars would have gotten if she hadn't got in. Natalie Portman certainly won't be the only one voicing her opinion at the lack of female Director nominees. And I can only imagine the backlash Phantom Thread, The Shape of Water and Blade Runner 2049 may have received if Villeneuve really got in over Gerwig. Then again, this is why I really hate it when politics gets mixed in with art and film. But I guess this is unavoidable nowadays.)
Well I guess you can tell that I really loved these two films from my writings above. I won't go into too much detail here about why these two films should have gotten in for Best Picture as I will go into the specifics for my next post (which will be about films that under-performed/were shut out at the Oscars). I will just say this, both films are in my personal Top 10 of the year.
The Best Picture nomination for Darkest Hour was really head-scratching to me, considering it is honestly quite average outside of the brilliant lead performance of Gary Oldman and its solid supporting cast. It also missed out on screenplay and director nods (which was no surprise really). The only way I can explain this is that the Academy members really really took to the film. This still doesn't explain why only 9 films made the cut when the limit was increased to 10 a few years back. I, Tonya or Blade Runner 2049 definitely should have taken that 10th spot. And to be honest, either of the films should have knocked out Darkest Hour too from the final 9. I guess the only explanation is that the Academy is a sucker for period films set during the WW2 with a British actor playing the lead character (i.e. The King's Speech, The Imitation Game).
However, to my pleasant surprise, the Academy this year has actually done a pretty great job in nominating many deserving people and showering love towards some unexpected films and performers. This doesn't mean there weren't some egregious snubs though, and I am here to talk about some of them. Keep in mind, I am not gonna talk about every snub in every category, but rather talk about some of those that I haven't seen mentioned or talked about as much. So acting snubs like James Franco, Michael Stuhlbarg/Armie Hammer, Holly Hunter or general snubs for films like The Post, The Big Sick and The Florida Project sadly won't be discussed here. (Although I will say I was quite sad that Franco, Stuhlbarg and Hunter didn't make the final cut)
Costume Design
The Snub: Wonder Woman
There has been some uproar regarding the complete shut-out of Wonder Woman by the Academy. Strangely though, most of the complaints were that the film wasn't in contention for the top prizes (Picture, Director, Actress for Gal Gadot). I personally don't feel like it really deserved a Best Picture or Best Director nod (although Patty Jenkins did do an admirable job helming the film), even though I liked the film, but one area that it definitely should have got in for was Costume Design. The scenes in London gave us some good, old-fashioned period-piece costumes, while those set in Themyscira brought us some pretty great costumes for the Amazonians. However, the crowning achievement was definitely Diana's Wonder Woman costume. It was really perfectly designed, harkening back to its comic roots while still feeling modern and updated enough to fit into the world of the DCEU. It is actually my favourite superhero costume of the year.
What it should replace: Beauty and the Beast
I think this one may piss off quite a few people, but I wasn't a big fan of Disney's live-action Beauty and the Beast. The film felt so average and never really breathed new life into the material outside of Gaston and LeFou (credit to Luke Evans and Josh Gad for giving their all), and Emma Watson made for a really lacklustre Belle. Another underwhelming aspect of the film was the Costume Design. Yes, the costumes of Belle, Beast and Gaston were nice to look at, but there was also some pretty over-the-top costumes for the side characters that really took me out of the film. Most of the costumes also felt like very standard work. I thought Jacqueline Durran did a better job in her other nomination, Darkest Hour.
Visual Effects
The Snub: Dunkirk
This one kinda ticked me off, especially since Dunkirk got in for most of the other technical categories. Honestly I shouldn't have been surprised by this snub, since Dunkirk's visual effects are not the flashy, effects-heavy kind. The brilliance behind Dunkirk's visuals though is that the audience isn't meant to notice them. Every single Spitfire scene, for instance, is excellent usage of subtle visual effects, with the perfect blending of CGI and practical effects to create some of the best aerial sequences of not just the year, but among all war films. Even though the visual effects in Dunkirk are low-key and subtle, it still really is great effects work that added to the overall achievement of the film and it definitely deserved a nomination.
What it should replace: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2
James Gunn's sequel was a perfectly fun film, with some fun flashy visual effects work that is fitting to a Marvel film. However, the problem was I always felt like I was looking at some obvious CGI creations (even the CGI in the first film didn't feel as obvious as it did here). And in terms of usage of obvious CGI creations, I truly believed that Thor: Ragnarok and Okja both did much better jobs than GotG 2. It seems like this may have been the token "obvious and flashy CGI” nomination that happens every year (like with the Transformers films), but with Star Wars and Kong: Skull Island both already nominated and fulfilling this spot, it makes Dunkirk's snub even more infuriating.
Animated Feature
The Snub: The Lego Batman Movie
This might be the most inexcusable snub so far. Back in 2014, the Academy subbed The Lego Movie, although there was some strong competition like Big Hero 6, How To Train Your Dragon 2 and The Tale of Princess Kaguya. This year though, the snub was just ridiculous. The Lego Batman Movie may not have been as good as The Lego Movie, but it was still a uproariously entertaining and genuinely heartfelt movie that both poked fun at and paid tribute to the Batman lore. The writing was clever, the voice-acting top-notch, and the animation is beautiful. This should have been a sure-fire nominee for Animated Feature. I really don't understand the hatred the Academy seems to have towards the Lego film series.
What it should replace: The Boss Baby/Ferdinand
The snub is even more egregious when you look some of the other films nominated. I haven't seen The Breadwinner, but by all accounts it is excellent. Loving Vincent and Coco are both great and would make deserving winners. However, both The Boss Baby and Ferdinand pale in comparison to the rest. I'm not saying that those two are terrible films, in fact they are entertaining enough and watchable and definitely well-animated. However, I truly cannot fathom how someone can say that those two films were better than The Lego Batman Movie. Lego Batman was miles ahead in terms of its writing alone, and it really should have gotten in over either of these two films.
Original Screenplay
The Snub: I, Tonya
I, Tonya is an absolutely brilliant film. The Academy rightfully recognised Margot Robbie and Allison Janney for their amazing performances (although Sebastian Stan should have at least been in some award conversations too). How it failed to garner a Best Picture nod though confuses me (more on that later though), but by far and away the biggest snub was for its brilliant screenplay. The script is scathing and funny while still managing to wring compelling drama out of the ludicrous true-story it is based upon. All the while, it never seeks to simplify any of its characters and does a great job of humanising all of them (yes even Allison Janney's terrible mother). It honestly reminded me of the brilliant screenplay of Goodfellas (which was Oscar-nominated) and the fact that both BAFTA and the Writer's Guild recognise I, Tonya's screenplay further proves how big of a snub this was.
What it should replace: The Shape of Water
This choice is actually a lot easier than it seems. Although I loved The Shape of Water, its screenplay is definitely weaker in comparison to the rest of the field. Get Out, Three Billboards and Lady Bird are, in my opinion, three of the best-written films of the year. The Big Sick, despite being influenced and based upon real-life events, is surprisingly heartfelt and well-written and offers a very refreshing take on the rom-com genre. Furthermore, I would actually attribute the success of The Shape of Water more to its director and cast rather than its screenplay. Without the deft hand and vision of Guillermo Del Toro and the pitch-perfect performances of its cast, the story of The Shape of Water could have easily come apart. I do believe its screenplay nod probably rode in off the overall love and success of the movie, which is a shame as it was at the expense of one of the best screenplays of the year for I, Tonya
Supporting Actress
The Snub: Hong Chau (Downsizing)
Hong Chau was already at a disadvantage as compared to many of her fellow Supporting Actress contenders, in that she wasn't in a great film. However, despite the overall mediocrity of the film surrounding her, and the fact that her character is in all honesty atrociously and offensively written, she somehow managed to rise above it all and become the best part of her film. In the wrong hands, the character could have become a terribly over-acted and offensive racial stereotype. But Hong Chau impressively managed to avoid all the trappings of the role and turned in a hilarious yet earnest performance that was the sole reason for me to keep watching the film . I really have to applaud her efforts and success at pulling off such a tricky character and it's a shame that the poor reception of her film all but snuffed her chance at a nomination.
Who should be replaced: Mary J. Blige (Mudbound)
I will be perfectly honest, I think the Academy (and most of the award bodies) is recognising the person, and not the performance, in this case. Now I know, acting is quite a subjective thing to judge, but for me, Blige's performance was one where it was good and fulfilled its purpose, but that was it. I just didn't see the great performance that many people were raving about and didn't think that this performance was one of the top five supporting actress performance of the year. I really believe that if some other actress had given this same performance, it wouldn't have garnered as much awards attention as it did.
And for all the talk about diversity among all the nominees in this year's Oscars, I would have appreciated it even more if Hong Chau had gotten in over Mary J. Blige, as Asian/Asian-American actors really do not get enough recognition in Hollywood.
Best Director
The Snub: Denis Villeneuve (Blade Runner 2049)
Seems like a pre-requisite for a Denis Villeneuve film is that it will have to be somehow snubbed by the Academy in some way. Prisoners was completely shut out aside from Roger Deakins' amazing cinematography. Sicario missed out on Best Actress, Supporting Actor and arguably Screenplay. Arrival, despite earning a Best Picture nod and a Director nod for Villeneuve, also had one of the biggest snubs in recent years when Amy Adams missed out on Best Actress. Blade Runner 2049 continues that trend, being shut out of nearly every single major category of the Oscars outside of technical achievements.
I know the film is definitely not for everyone in the general audience, as its poor box office reception indicated, but this film is my personal favourite of the year. And despite what one may feel about the script or overall story, there is no denying what Villeneuve pulled off in terms of directorial achievements is nothing short of astonishing. I know this may sound sacrilegious to some, but I think Villeneuve may have done an even better directing job on Blade Runner 2049 than Ridley Scott did in the original Blade Runner. Villeneuve realised the vision of the future world so astoundingly well. I really felt every scene was perfectly directed, from the biggest action set-pieces to the simplest conversation between two characters. And let's not forget the outstanding performances Villeneuve managed to draw from his cast (Direction of actors is an important aspect of a director's job). I think the best praise I can heap for both Villeneuve and the film is that despite being the longest film I have seen this year, it was also the film that most engaged and intrigued me.
Who should be replaced: Greta Gerwig (Lady Bird)
This one was extremely, extremely tough for me to decide. I loved The Shape of Water and Get Out, and really really liked Dunkirk, Lady Bird and Phantom Thread. And I think all five directors did excellent work on their respective films. Both Nolan and Del Toro might have actually given their career best directorial work in my opinion, and Paul Thomas Anderson did a masterful job behind the camera as usual (really don't expect anything less from him). As for Jordan Peele and Greta Gerwig, they really could not have asked for a better directorial debut. Both prove extremely adept at blending and juggling the various tones of their respective films and both show a sense of mastery behind the camera that really makes me extremely excited for their follow-up films.
Honestly, I really cannot fault the Academy for choosing these five nominees as they are a great set. However, this is my personal opinion and as much as I hate leaving Gerwig out for doing such a great job, she is sadly number six on my personal Best Director list. (Honestly its years like these where I feel like the Academy should also extend their Best Director list like they did with Best Picture). It's just a shame Villeneuve didn't get in, although I should have seen this snub coming as BAFTA was the only major awards body that nominated him.
(On a side note though, I am kinda glad Gerwig still got in. Imagine the backlash the Oscars would have gotten if she hadn't got in. Natalie Portman certainly won't be the only one voicing her opinion at the lack of female Director nominees. And I can only imagine the backlash Phantom Thread, The Shape of Water and Blade Runner 2049 may have received if Villeneuve really got in over Gerwig. Then again, this is why I really hate it when politics gets mixed in with art and film. But I guess this is unavoidable nowadays.)
Best Picture
The Snub(s): Blade Runner 2049/I, Tonya
What it should have replaced: Darkest Hour
The Best Picture nomination for Darkest Hour was really head-scratching to me, considering it is honestly quite average outside of the brilliant lead performance of Gary Oldman and its solid supporting cast. It also missed out on screenplay and director nods (which was no surprise really). The only way I can explain this is that the Academy members really really took to the film. This still doesn't explain why only 9 films made the cut when the limit was increased to 10 a few years back. I, Tonya or Blade Runner 2049 definitely should have taken that 10th spot. And to be honest, either of the films should have knocked out Darkest Hour too from the final 9. I guess the only explanation is that the Academy is a sucker for period films set during the WW2 with a British actor playing the lead character (i.e. The King's Speech, The Imitation Game).
I’d add Armie Hammer and Michael Stuhlbarg. They really should have been nominated.
ReplyDelete@Giuseppe: I agree that either Hammer or Stuhlbarg probably should have gotten in (personally prefer Stuhlbarg slightly more). Reason why I didn't add them in was because firstly they have been one of the more frequently talked-about snubs and I didn't feel like I'be adding anything new that hasn't already been mentioned.
ReplyDelete