Oscar Contenders

If 'Argo' Wins Best Picture is that Bad for the Future of the Oscars?

Is it better to be reactionary or to simply be out of touch?

If Argo Wins Best Picture is that Bad for the Future of the Oscars?
Ben Affleck in Argo
Photo: Warner Bros.

There are two ways of looking at the Oscars: 1.) as film fans, aware of the Oscar race and what's considered "best" throughout most of the year, or 2.) as a member of the general public that doesn't pay attention to them but once a year. As much as those of us that keep a close eye on the Oscar race throughout the year would like to believe the rest of the world is just as invested in movies as we are, the fact of the matter is we are in the minority. So, when answering the question I pose in the headline we must realize we're merely reaching a conclusion on a rather small scale, but first let me explain why I even thought of the question in the first place.

Once Argo was announced Best Film at the BAFTA Awards this weekend, along with another Best Director win for Ben Affleck, the fact the Academy hadn't nominated Affleck for Best Director sunk in even deeper. I began to ponder the reality of Argo winning Best Picture at the Oscars while anyone other than Affleck would take home Best Director. The idea of a Best Picture and Best Director split isn't so curious, but a Best Picture win without the director even being nominated seems rather absurd.

At this point in the race, with Argo racking up wins at the Golden Globes, Critics Choice Awards, SAG Awards, Producers Guild, Directors Guild and now BAFTAs any award the Academy gives to Argo will appear reactionary. People are already questioning the validity of some of the awards I just mentioned as reactions to Affleck's Best Director snub, even those that had been voted on before the Oscar nominations were announced.

Fact of the matter is, we live in a different world than the last time a film won Best Picture without a director nomination. Back in 1990, Driving Miss Daisy took home the Oscar for Best Picture without Bruce Beresford being in contention for Best Director. Oliver Stone won for Born on the Fourth of July. Of course, back in 1990 we didn't live in a world of Twitter, Facebook and live blogs. Complaints were kept around the water cooler and in small cinephile circles. Now it's months worth of analysis from every corner. How can any decision not be considered reactionary?

Back in 1990 the Oscars were still held in late March. Nowadays that can't happen because people have moved on to other things. Attention spans are shorter and in an attempt to avoid reactionary bias the Academy even moved up the nomination announcement this year, giving voters less time to see all the movies and less time to be influenced by the precursor awards.

So here the Oscars sit. They can't change their nominations to fit into the popular Argo box that's been filled and at this point they would appear to be in a lose-lose situation.

If Argo wins Best Picture there's no doubt many will consider it a reaction to all that's gone on since the nominations were announced a month and a half prior to the ceremony.

On the other hand, if Argo doesn't win Best Picture and either Lincoln or Silver Linings Playbook win Best Picture, the Academy will appear more stuck in the mud than ever.

The only kind of result come February 24 that could possibly change the narrative would be wins for virtually any film, actor, director, craft category than the front-runners. Should Beasts of the Southern Wild come out the leading award getter or should Michael Haneke's Amour run away with the bulk of the night's awards, only then will the narrative surrounding the Academy change. Otherwise, what do we have to look forward to in the future?

Strangely, there is this idea of "getting it wrong" in the awards race. There's this idea that there actually is a "best" movie out there and "best" performances and direction. The Oscars are no longer looked at as a celebration of the medium, but more as a method of affirmation of taste. Yes! The Academy chose my favorite movie as Best Picture and therefore my taste is confirmed as being "right".

Should the Academy be looked at as "getting it wrong" this year with the Oscars, who's to say what will happen in the future?

Already, next year we're looking at an Oscars that will likely have to be moved into March due to scheduling issues with the Olympics and Super Bowl. Nominations will likely be announced later, precursors will be in place and predicting the winners may be easier than ever before. For the general public this might not make much of a difference, but the narrative in film-loving circles sure will be interesting.

Yes, the Academy has long been looked at as out of touch when it comes to their Oscar winners and nominations, and with so much attention placed on the precursor awards in recent years they look more and more reactionary. Yet, the snubbing of Ben Affleck and the 12 nominations for Lincoln versus only the seven for Argo seems to provide potential numerical evidence for their follies.

Of course, the closer you look at Argo and its glorification of Hollywood it only seems natural Argo would be a major Best Picture contender. In that case, perhaps its not a reactionary method, but more of a narcissistic one. Either way, do you see a win for Argo as something that could damage the Academy's image further or are we simply looking at the latest in an ongoing narrative that will never seem to change?

Thanks for Reading! Join the Community!
Support the Site! Make it Faster! No Ads!

Your support goes a long way in ensuring RopeofSilicon.com stays stable. For less than the price of one small popcorn, you can can help support RopeofSilicon and, in turn, visit the site every day without ads! Including this one!

Subscribe Now!

  • http://cineenuruguay.blogspot.com/ Driver

    Holy sh... You are right on the point with this Brad. The oscars are at a dead end here, there will be a lot of repercussions even if Argo looses, so yeah, the nominations are killing them.

  • Mohammed

    The other film that wins better apologize to Affleck, knowing full well that it's a win by default. I am almost certain that the Academy will give it to Spielberg, because anything else would be humiliating for their Golden Boy.

  • http://www.criterion.com/my_criterion/27913-criterion10 Criterion10

    Really interesting article, Brad. Regardless of the quality of the films themselves, this has been an incredibly interesting Oscar race, and I personally can't wait to see the outcome of it all. If we are talking predictions, than obviously it makes sense to call Argo the frontrunner at the moment, although my gut is telling me that the Academy may pull a complete 180 this year and award something entirely unexpected.

    The truth of the matter though is that I really doubt that the general public cares all that much about the Oscars. Many people watch the show simply as a way of passing time, and then forget about it after a day or so. I still feel that the Oscars really don't have that much of an influence on the general public and their moviegoing tastes. And if the Academy does do something rather unexpected, a move that could deem them as being a deep stick in the mud, I personally will be pleased rather than annoyed as the winners themselves do not concern me as much as does an interesting, unexpected choices.

    I'll be rooting for both Amour and Zero Dark Thirty, as those are not only my two favorite films of the year, but they are also two films that do not have high chances of winning the big awards. (Although, I would make an argument for Amour...)

    • http://letterboxd.com/ragingtaxidrver/ RagingTaxiDriver

      I think the Academy does still have some influence on the general public. At my local movie rental store, they advertise on the DVD cases w/ special stickers, "Oscar Nominee" or "Oscar Winner". Even for films with a just a costume nomination. I have seen people rent them just because of the sticker. The impact may be little, but it is still there to an extent.

      • http://hypethemovies.wordpress.com Jordan B.

        Movie rental store? ... ;)

        • http://letterboxd.com/ragingtaxidrver/ RagingTaxiDriver

          Not sure what your question is? That there's still rental stores, and that I go to them, or that I'm using one in my comparison?

          • http://hypethemovies.wordpress.com Jordan B.

            Sorry. Tone is tough to convey at times, though I hoped the winky
            face would help convey my joking nature.

            I was simply making a sarcastic remark wondering what a "movie rental store" is, since they've all but disappeared from the public landscape. Just a joke!

  • http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/profile/Xarnis/ Xarnis

    Fantastic article Brad! These are some great points. I'll personally be rooting for Zero Dark Thirty, but even if it wins won't the Academy be deemed pro-torture?
    This is the best Oscar race in quite a while.

  • Ron Oneal Fresh

    Is is bad for the future of the Oscars?

    No.

    Argo being lumped together w/ Driving Miss Daisy in Oscar history may unfairly undermine it's quality down the line b/c of the great movies in 2012 that some may argue more deserving — Factions of people who believe their favorite movie is the 'Best Picture' will always exist. I don't know why Academy members faction is the end all be all of those factions.

    I've longed dismiss the notion they know or care what history will think of their Best Picture' winners. Oscar bloggers/pundits are the only ones who REALLY passionate about that stuff anyway. Even If they got votes like Baseball writers/journalist people w/ their end of year awards people would still bitch about who won or didn't win what.

    I doubt George Clooney & Ben Affleck are gonna be at the podium thinking they're in the same company as Driving Miss Daisy.

    Filmmakers, Producers, Writers, Actors wanna win Awards. I sincerely doubt that it HAS to always be in a certain fashion b/c Oscar bloggers & pundits will crucify them or their film for winning.

    They don't give a shit.

    And can we stop w/ the poor Ben Affleck narrative, he's won every award on the planet for Argo since the Globes and will most likely win another one on Oscar night. Giving him his second Oscar.

  • Jake

    No matter what, they are still the freakin oscars and it the mentality that they need to somehow be the first awards show out there is what is causing the academy to someday move this show to December. I am one of those people who think the oscars should be back in march, where voters and the audiences can see the films nominated.

  • http://custodianfilmcritic.com Timbo

    I was talking to a friend recently about this and brought up the idea of pushing the nomination announcements by a week or two and then requiring every voter to vote within a quick span of the nominations coming out. Something like two or three days. It is understandable that they want to give voters time to watch all the nominated films, but giving a long period of time between nominee announcements and winner votes being submitted allows for politics to come into play and minds to be swayed based on other award show victories.

  • http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/profile/navaneethks/ navaneethks

    I really don't know why everyone is over looking Life of Pi. I mean, it clearly has better chances than Beasts and Amour for best picture. I've watched all the best picture nominees and Amour is good enough for a best foreign film. And beasts is pushing it for best film.

    So if not Lincoln and SLP, if the Academy does not want a split in best picture/director awards, the next frontrunner is Life of Pi with Ang Lee also nominated for director. It took a certain director skill to make it (I don't think SLP deserves a director award just like Argo, Lincoln maybe sure), great visual and cinematography. And finally it has a deep story line which the academy members would like more than the general american public.

    Brad, is there any particular reason you don't bring up Life of Pi into the conversation at all? It was actually considered to be 2nd next to the frontrunner Argo at BAFTA's for best film. Ang Lee was also considered to be 2nd for director. It might not be in many of our minds because of the whole faith conversation in the movie, but I do think it deserves to be talked about now that I read this article.

    Django and ZDT are most likely out of the picture. Les Mis is a stretch. Also, none of the 3 directors here got nominated.

  • dodrade

    I wonder if Argo would have done as well as it has had Affleck been Oscar nominated, or have the other awards felt obliged to make it up to him as it were and over compensated as a result?

    At the end of december it seemed as if Argo had peaked too early and Zero Dark Thirty would steal its thunder but the "torture" controversy effectively killed its campaign just as it was about to become best picture favourite, add to that the perception that Affleck has been "wronged" by the academy and suddenly it got a second wind which seems unstoppable.

    I wonder who will be the first person on the night to repeat Billy Crystal's famous line and say Argo "directed itself"?

    • Dave

      Would ARGO have gotten more or less or the same amount of notice or respect or award nominations if it had been directed by Affleck, but credited to an unknown? In other words, was his involvement a plus, nuetral, or negative?

  • Chris Etrata

    Has anyone considered the possibility that Argo won't win best picture? Awarding Best Picture to Argo in light of the director snub is only going to cause them to come under fire for lack of internal direction. Another film winning best picture may cause controversy as well but won't be as strange as Argo winning best picture without a best director because surprises have happened before. I don't think Argo even has a chance of winning. After Driving Miss Daisy won in 1990, the academy came under fire. Since then, all best picture winners at least had a best director nomination. Apollo 13 was considered the frontrunner in 1996, but then got snubbed out of best director and even with all those wins, lost best picture to braveheart. We are going to see a repeat of 1996, not 1990.

    • http://www.gmail.com shobhit bhatnagar

      But unlike Argo Apollo 13 did not win best picture in BAFTA and Golden globe awards.

      • Chris Etrata

        I would be shocked if Argo won. After a best director snub, giving the award to Argo shows that they love the movie, but hate the director. The academy would come under fire for that and it would be a long time before they would be able to shake it off. They don't want a repeat of the Driving Miss Daisy fiasco. Besides, even though Brokeback Mountain did have a best director nomination, it won every best picture award except for the one that matters.

  • http://www.twitter.com/marlonwallace marlonwallace

    I think you have it backwards, Brad. If 'Argo' doesn't win the Oscar for Best Picture, then that will be a reaction to all that's happening. If 'Argo' does win, then that won't be a reaction, it will just be a movement of the tide. Here's my reasoning.

    'Argo' winning the PGA, DGA, SAG and the BAFTA is basically a lot of Academy members getting to vote early. Obviously, not all but many PGA, DGA, SAG and BAFTA members are also Academy members. It would be like the Oscars were the general election and the PGA, DGA, SAG and BAFTA awards were the straw polls or perhaps the primaries.

    It would be like if people in your state were asked to vote twice on the same issue. It would be like if you, Brad, were asked to vote between Obama and Romney twice, the first time for SAG and the second time for the Oscars. If you voted for Obama for SAG, it'd be reasonable that a month later, you'd vote for Obama again for the Oscar.

    The only question as far as I can see is why wasn't Ben Affleck nominated to begin with. But, the true anomalies to me are the directors who get nominated for Best Director but their movies don't get nominated for Best Picture like Julian Schnabel for 'The Diving Bell and the Butterfly' and Paul Greengrass for 'United 93' - now what sense does that make?

    • Chris Etrata

      Brokeback Mountain also won the DGA and PGA awards, around 60% of academy award members but when the Academy Awards ended, Crash won. Argo winning in light of the snub would look bad for the academy because the media will feel they lack internal direction and huge changes would come next year. Another film winning would also lead to controversy but at the end, almost everyone will respect their decision. Best director may be determined by only 6 percent of the academy board but they influence the other 94 percent in a huge way. I do believe the academy made a huge mistake but can't admit to it without coming under fire so they have to play along with the mistake instead of coming clean which would mean Argo winning best picture.

      • dodrade

        "I do believe the academy made a huge mistake but can't admit to it without coming under fire so they have to play along with the mistake instead of coming clean which would mean Argo winning best picture."

        You don't fix a "mistake" by compounding the error, even the academy isn't that stupid.

        • Chris Etrata

          That's not fixing the mistake. It's trying to salvage its reputation rather than give in and admit that their reputaiton sucks.

      • http://www.twitter.com/marlonwallace marlonwallace

        Chris Etrata, you're right. There is crossover between the guilds and the Academy but the memberships aren't the same, so it is possible to change the tide, but statistically speaking, the Academy generally goes with the tide, meaning Best Picture matches Best Director, which matches PGA and DGA.

        But, I would argue that the Academy didn't make a mistake, at least not one that we can prove because there are 9 nominees for Best Picture but only 5 nominees for Best Director, so obviously not all 9 nominees can have their Director nominated. 4 were going to be snubbed just by mere happenstance.

        If there were only 5 nominees for Best Picture and 'Argo' was one of them, then that would have been a "provable" mistake by the Academy. But, I'm starting to believe that the only reason 'Argo' is sweeping is because it's the safer choice. It doesn't bring controversy like 'Django' or 'Zero Dark' when arguably those two films were better directed than 'Argo'.

        • Chris Etrata

          I don't think the academy is going with the tide in light of that snub. They initally believed that Argo directed itself, snubbing Ben Affleck. When he started winning sympathy, the academy knew it made a mistake. That said, its too late to add Ben Affleck back in. The academy faces a decision either to give Argo best picture and lose credibility for going with the tide instead of true honest opinion or give someone else best picture and come under a temporary attack from Argo fans but retain credibility at the end.

          • http://www.twitter.com/marlonwallace marlonwallace

            Hey Chris, just so I'm clear, are you saying that you think that 'Argo' won't win? Because you mentioned 'Brokeback Mountain' losing Best Picture, which proves that the Academy can go against the tide... but would you say that 'Brokeback Mountain' losing is the Academy retaining credibility? I don't know if I understand. Or, would it have been more credible if 'Munich' won that year over both 'Crash' and 'Brokeback'?

            • Chris Etrata

              Understand that Brokeback mountain did get nominated for best director and everyone picked it to be best picture. Well, the academy went against it in favor of Crash. Argo however did not get a nomination for best director and ever since little miss daisy and the outrage. the academy awards vowed secretly to only give best picture to those with a best director nomination. Awarding Argo best picture will cause the academy to go under fire for snubbing Affleck out as a director. A best picture win for another film will let us know that the snub wasn't personal. Therfore, they would retain respect.

            • Chris Etrata

              By the way, I said this before but Argo is not going to win best picture. I don't think Argo will lose best picture. I know it will lose.

              • http://www.twitter.com/marlonwallace marlonwallace

                I hope you're right. I personally don't want 'Argo' to win, but I have a funny feeling that it will. I think the tide will carry it, but I think I agree with you, and going back to Brad's original question, I think it would be better for the Academy if it gave the award to anything else.

    • http://hypethemovies.wordpress.com Jordan B.

      "But, the true anomalies to me are the directors who get nominated for Best Director but their movies don't get nominated for Best Picture like Julian Schnabel for 'The Diving Bell and the Butterfly' and Paul Greengrass for 'United 93' - now what sense does that make?"

      I think it makes sense, though it is a bit odd. Just because a film has among the best direction of all the films in a given year (according, of course, to the Academy), doesn't mean that it is one of the best films of the year, overall. It just means that the director's craft and handiwork are important and notable for said film -- whether that's how well the subject matter was tackled, how well the film was constructed, or just the small technical things that a director does to make a film work -- perhaps more so than for a film nominated for Best Picture.

      Of course, it's going to be far less likely for this situation to occur in today's Oscars (Director nom without a Picture nom) given the expansion of the Best Picture field. However, if I were to venture a guess, if the Best Picture field were still limited to 5 films, I have a strong feeling that either Zeitlin or Haneke, or perhaps both, would be among those directors nominated for Best Director with their films left out of the Best Picture pool.

  • Dale

    Great article, Brad. I'm betting "Argo" will take the prize as a direct reaction to all it's won up until now.

  • http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/profile/Cordia/ Cordia

    Great article brad, thinking just the same. they can't get it 'right' i guess.

  • adu

    I hope Life of Pi wins, I'd love to see the reactions to that (also it was my 2nd favorite movie of the past year)

  • Winchester

    I don't think the Best Picture Award is the problem as such, the problem comes from the Best Director 'snub' to me. At least looking at it from where I see it. My feeling is that the wins are correlated in part to Affleck not being nominated and there's been in part a backlash to make a point to the Academy over that omission. A lot of the Argo momentum had seemed lost until around that time and while some awards were pre the Oscars announcement I still believe emotions are involved here regarding Affleck.

    I don't know if it would have a long term impact on the Oscars though.

    • Dave

      The Academy could avoid this conundrum if they had less Best Picture nominees than Best Director ones. The directors of Best Picture nominees would get an automatic Best Director nomination, and then they would add more Best Director nominees.

  • The Jackal

    Poor Ben Affleck, he'll have to settle for a Best Picture statuette as a producer instead of another trophy for Best Director. He deserved a nod, he didn't get it, move on. Some amazing films were nominated. Just because a film wins Best Picture shouldn't automatically make it the default winner of Best Director as well.

    In 2002, Roman Polanski won director for The Pianist, but didn't win Picture. In 2005, Ang Lee won for Director but Brokeback Mountain lost out to Crash. Again, in 1998 Mr. Spielberg won top directing honors but Saving Private Ryan lost out to Shakespeare in Love on the Picture front. Of course, each Picture loss was eased in these categories by the fact that these films were nominated in both categories. If Peter Jackson had won Best Picture for Return of the King in 2003 but lost Best Director to Clint Eastwood (Mystic River), I wouldn't have been too disappointed. I'm very tired of being able to predict who will win the Oscars before even the telecast.

    To say Ben Affleck deserves a nod over the brilliant directors currently up for the award is unfair. I enjoyed each of the films up for Picture and Director immensely; however, while I have my personal favorites, each film is worthy of the award. The media (including you, Brad) have hyped this thing up into what it is. To say "Ben Affleck should have got the nom" is to say one of the nominated directors is unworthy. That is a call no one should be making.

    Thems the facts

    • http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/ Brad Brevet

      Not sure the point of your argument since none of what you are discussing was the basis for this post. But okay.

    • Chris Etrata

      Whats more likely to happen is that Argo gets snubbed out of best picture and the other awards.

    • Lewis

      Like I said in my post, the director who wins has to give the Oscar to Ben. Call him up on stage and give it to him. Like what Ving Rhames did at the Globes several years ago when he won for the Don King biopic on TV, yet gave the Acting award to Jack Lemmon. That would be a brilliant, and history-making, moment for the Oscars.

      • carrie

        it's a ridiculous idea!
        i liked Argo but the idea that Affleck would deserve to win because he is snubbed is ridiculous (Affleck is not Hitchcock or Orson Welles) Bigelow or Tarantino are more snubbed than affleck in my opinion

  • Lena

    I hope Affleck wins best picture. Why should the tiny director's branch decide who wins best picture? If I was a member of the acting branch, for instance, I wouldn't care that they didn't nominate the director of the film that I wanted to choose for best picture. To say you "need" a director's nomination to vote for a movie for best picture, is giving that little branch all the power to dictate what the best picture should be. I wouldn't make the error of saying he is winning because of "sympathy". Argo actually was starting its momentum again when the nominations came out. 2 prizes (Golden Globes and critics choice) were actually voted on before anyone knew that Affleck (who with Bigalow and Speilberg, were the only nomination "locks" according to Oscar bloggers ) was snubbed. If it is just sympathy I think it would have ended after the first two award sweeps or at least Bigelow or Hopper would have won something too.

    • Chris Etrata

      It may be a small branch but their decisions influence the rest of the board in terms od position. Giving Argo best picture after a director snub will cause them to come under fire for lack of direction. Only another movie winning best picture will save them from media fire.

  • Chris138

    "The Oscars are no longer looked at as a celebration of the medium, but more as a method of affirmation of taste. Yes! The Academy chose my favorite movie as Best Picture and therefore my taste is confirmed as being "right"."

    Well said. This reason is exactly why I have stopped caring about these awards much as of late. I'll still watch the Oscars, but I don't really tune into the BAFTA, Golden Globe, SAG or Critics Choice awards anymore. It's interesting to see what a group of people in the movie industry consider the best of each year, but I think people get way too caught up in the whole thing. I won't mention any names, and it's not anyone involved with this website, but a number of other 'Oscar bloggers' or journalists take these things way, WAY too seriously.

    Interesting stuff about the use of social media these days and the way people have reacted to Affleck being shut out of a directing Oscar nod. Personally I don't think Argo winning Best Picture will be bad for the future of the Oscars. I actually wish they would announce these things every year as early as they did this time. They have some more interesting choices when they aren't overly influenced by precursor awards, in my opinion.

    • Dave

      Look over the list of past winners and compare them to films that came out the same year. Now, it boils down to your personal opinion, but you'll probably find many that you don't consider the best of that year and certainly not "one for the ages." KRAMER VS KRAMER? THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH? It's a snapshot of what catches the Academy members' zieitgeist/fancy at the time votes are due. It does, though, for the Academy, represent the best film made during the previous year that they were given a choice to vote on. By the same token, years later reassessments by critics who tell us that film X, Y, or Z was *really* the Best Picture of year X, Y, or Z, though interesting to read about, are still only snapshots of what is considered best NOW. And one could argue that it's kind of arrogant, let's call it Presentism, or Nowism--what I believe now is right and better than those poor unevolved souls from a few years past.

  • Kailia

    I'm hoping the pity party is over for Argo and the Academy keeps all the background noise out. Probably won't happen, but I don't feel Argo is worthy of all the awards compared to the others - esp Lincoln. My favorite was SLP but I know different movies speak to different people.

  • Newbourne

    Due to Argo being stampeding through every awards ceremony around,
    if the Academy awards Lincoln, Pi or Playbook, it will seem as if they overlooked the year's actual Best Picture.

    HOWEVER... if the Academy awards Amour or Beasts, they could spin it around! Everyone ELSE overlooked the small indie darling which was in fact the actual Best Picture of the year!

    • Chris Etrata

      After the mistake, instead of admitting the mistake of snubbing affleck and probably cause significant changes to the board while losing creditibility, they will award it to Lincoln or playbook and retain credibility and gain respect for going against the tide.

  • Lewis

    I hope whoever wins Director will, on stage, call up Ben Affleck and give the Oscar to him. Remember the Ving Rhames moment at the Globes in which he offered up his award to his idol, Jack Lemmon? So there. That would be an incredible moment at the Oscars, and make history I'm sure.

    Who agrees with me?

    • http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/profile/Fox/ Fox

      Why on earth would they do that. It's not like he was heads and tails above everyone else. I think Argo was a fairly simple movie to direct; it wasn't ambitious.I'd say all 5 nominees deserve it more than him.
      You're asking someone who's arguably more deserving than Ben Affleck to just hand him the award because a few guilds went with Argo?

  • Art

    Yea it is quite obvious that the Oscars did rob Affleck of at the very least a nomination. I am personally very glad to see a guy turn his career from a critical joke to the beautiful work that he delivers nowadays. Hope and think he will keep his head up and keep on delivering for us fans that appreciate good film.

  • Thornsy

    This year is weird because unlike the past few years, most of the nominees are popular hits as well. So of the 3 most likely best picture winners - Argo, Lincoln, and Silver Linings Playbook - the outcome seems positive. I'm a SLP fanboy, but nobody hates Argo, and it wouldn't be unworthy Best Picture winner.

  • Petros

    I didn't think the Academy's image could be damaged since all the cinephiles I know accept the fact that the academy has been out of touch for years and it no longer cares about a film's quality but rather how politically correct a film is. Did this same snub not also occur when Inception was nominated for best film but Christopher Nolan did not receive a "Best Director" nomination. I don't really understand the fixation on the Oscars anymore, I find it absurd. At least for me personally they hold no more credibility than an IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes movie rating.

    • Central Ohio

      You think the Academy cares more about being politically correct rather than choosing quality films? Three out of the last six best picture winners were: The Hurt Locker, The Departed, and No Country for Old Men.

      • Petros

        The Academy will nominate anything made by the Cohens or Scorcese even if it's not that good. Hurt Locker won because the Academy wished to uphold it's femministic and American values. I doubt either the Hurt Locker or The Departed deserved to win imo, but hey that's my opinion. Also I personally disliked No Country For Old Men but I concede it is probably just a matter of me not liking it than it being bad.

    • Lewis

      Inception is no Argo. Come on, they might as well nominated every freakin' movie that comes out.

      • Petros

        My point is that if there is no agenda other than the film's quality the Academy will not back it. Examples are numerous.

  • Jack

    Okay so you think you know more than the Academy. Fine. Just answer me one question: What SHOULD win? For real. What is the most relevant and worthy film? Answer that question.

    • Petros

      Are you asking which one of the nominations I enjoyed more or which is the best made film overall? I enjoyed Silver Linings Playbook most but id'say Argo was the best overall movie

  • http://www.gmail.com shobhit bhatnagar

    If "Argo " will win "Best Picture" it will became a handicap "Best Picture" winner because Ben Affleck has been already snubbed as "Best Director" nominee at Oscar and there is a very low chance that "Argo will win the "Best Adopted screenplay" because Lincoln and Silver linings playbook are the top leading contenders of "Adopted Screenplay" Screenplay and Direction are the two major qualities required in "Best Picture" and in the absence of both movie is just like a handicap or incomplete . Now "Lincoln" or "Silver Linings playbook" should win the "Best picture" otherwise it will became a worst Oscar ceremony in past 20 years. The another option is they should declare the "Best Director" nominee again and include "Ben Affleck" there.

  • Central Ohio

    Don't worry everyone, Lincoln will win Best Picture. This conversation is really unnecessary. This Best Picture race is not as close as people think. I think Lincoln is a no-brainer for the Academy. Think about it. When's the last time a movie about a great American historical figure won best picture? What about a great historical figure at all? The Last Emperor? Amadeus? It's been thirty years since Ghandi took home best picture. The Academy has a knack for seeing all the angles. This is the Academy's chance to award probably the most famous American President in history. And when the Academy finds oppurtunities like this they jump at it.

    • Petros

      Exactly my point.

  • http://hauntedbyhumans.wordpress.com Jesse

    I may be one of the only people on here who thinks this way, but you're blowing this way out of proportion. Really the ONLY issue here is Affleck not getting a director's nomination. But even that isn't that crazy, because Bigelow and Hooper both got left off as well and sometimes movies that split votes like that could adversely affect the potential nominees.

    Its a little bit of bragging, but I did the analysis, I crunched numbers, I looked at sources, a got data and put it all together just the same way as I've done in the past. In the past, that number crunching predicted Best Picture Wins for The King's Speech and The Artist, and even before it won any awards, it predicted Argo as best picture. I'm not revealing what I do because I like it mysterious like that. But yeah, it was on my blog at the very start of the year. http://hauntedbyhumans.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/awardwinners2012/

    There's really no issue here for the Oscars, it isn't reactionary voting, it was always going to win.

  • http://twitter.com/s2heoxu/status/296917808195985408 small business taxes

    Great items from you, man. I've bear in mind your stuff previous to and you're simply extremely great.
    I actually like what you've received right here, certainly like what you are saying and the way in which through which you say it. You're making it enjoyable and you still take care
    of to keep it smart. I can't wait to read much more from you. This is actually a tremendous website.