Oscar Upsets

Well, the Academy Awards came and went yesterday and went (mostly) as expected. That doesn't mean there weren't a few surprises... Below I'm going to look at a couple of the races that didn't go as predicted, and one that did, and look at what it says about the Academy and movies.

Best Actress: Meryl Streep, "The Iron Lady."

Let me preface this by saying that Meryl Streep did a fantastic job, as per usual, with this role. Her acting ability is not in question. She is great, and has been great over the course of her career. That being said, I was not only surprised, but a little disappointed when her name was called. Of course, this is where subjectivity comes into the process. Of the five nominated performances, I saw four of the films — Glen Close in "Albert Nobbs," Rooney Mara in "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo," Viola Davis in "The Help," and Streep. Of those I saw, I would have ranked the performances in this order — Mara, Davis, Close, then Streep. Yet Streep won. You could argue her part was more showy and that she is a bigger name — especially with an Academy that is mostly older white men. You would like to think that doesn't matter, but it does. Which is why the content of the films for Mara, Davis, and Close probably didn't help their chances. Still, this also goes to the fact that the Academy is increasingly out of touch with the general public. I would argue that Mara gave the best performance. Hers was a difficult, near impossible role, and she pulled it off seemingly effortlessly. That movie would be unwatchable with a lesser performer in that role. Still, I had resigned myself to the fact she had little chance. The real snub here is Davis, who was not only incredible in her role, but was in a much better film. For all of Streep's good work — and it was good because she at least made the dreck of her film somewhat watchable — her film wasn't that good. Davis took an important part, knocked it out of the park, and helped make her movie a fan and critical favorite. Yet she was passed over. We're all scratching our heads.

Best Actor: Jean Dujardin, "The Artist"

It's hard to quibble with this too much. Dujardin gave a great performance in a great film. It was hard work, something unexpected, and he was simply great. And I would feel better about that if I thought that he was being rewarded simply for his talent, but I can't be sure. In many ways, this felt almost like a vote against George Clooney as much as it was a vote for Jean Dujardin. There are some actors that are regarded more as personalities and celebrities than as artists, and no matter how great of work they do, it seems to get overlooked. Without a doubt, Clooney turned in a career-best performance in "The Descendants." He was incredible, and what made it better is the fact he did it in a character and role that seems distant from who he is, which was one of the criticisms of his work in "Up In The Air." He deftly moved between comedy and drama, and he carried that film, which had some difficult subject matter. He was great, and I thought he was probably the best. Now, as I said, I loved Dujardin's work, and he is a fine choice. What lingers is the feeling there was a more political motive to the selection.

Best Picture: "The Artist"

Of course I predicted this would win. Most people did. It seemed the clear front-runner and, it won. "The Artist" is an incredible achievement and a great piece of art. It's the rare film that seems to buck the trend of technology. It's beautifully made and feels like a loving ode to a bygone era of filmmaking and film craft. It's a thoughtful choice for Best Picture. But, it's been seen by only a few people and isn't the kind of commercial film that resonates with mass audiences in this country. I don't say this as a knock on the film, or to suggest that the Academy Awards should pander to the public, but more to say this is why there is a disconnect between movie fans, critics, and industry insiders. Sometimes that gap is an outrage — such as last year's decision to select "The King's Speech" over "The Social Network" or the fact that "The Dark Knight," the best film of the last decade, failed to get a Best Picture nomination at all, but this year it's more of a curiosity. I love movies and I love the Academy Awards. It is one of my favorite events of the year. But you have to wonder how long it will continue to be an event when in celebrates films that the public rarely sees? Or maybe it's that the public should make more of an effort to see films of substance? I think both things are true.