SCREEN-L Archives

April 1999, Week 1


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Kate Butler <[log in to unmask]>
Fri, 2 Apr 1999 14:15:58 +1000
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (55 lines)
I agree that each year brings its share of incredulous responses to Oscar
winners and nominations and there is a common understanding that the awards
are driven by money and PR. What clouds the issue and perpetuates the
outrage is that every now and then they get it right and the viewer,
whether 'filmy' or not, feels that perhaps they do fulfill their outward
appearance and reward quality acting and film craft. Susan Sarandon,
Frances McDormand being two that immediately spring to mind.

To say that it happens every year makes it no less worthy of continual
comment and criticism. They may be a travesty but they still can make or
break the international career of many an actor, especially non-American
ones and the Awards every year are an indication of how the industry wishes
to be seen. Surely this is worthy of constant scrutiny and is what I assume
the current debate is all about, as you say, the criteria and purpose of
such awards.

I think Darcy Paquet suggestion is the best one, talk about it, disagree
with it but never take it too seriously.

And Cate Blanchett is Australian.

Kate Butler

Derek Kompare writes
 While I'm not directing these comments to any
>individuals on this list, it seems like you could no doubt find similar (if
>not identical) reactions to the Oscars amongst us "filmies" (for want of a
>better term; I don't want to ignore those on the list who aren't academic
>film scholars) *every single year* since 1927.

>"How could they ignore Blanchett/Dench/Richardson/(insert name of
>well-regarded but Oscar-snubbed British actress)?"

>However, I'm wondering if we could shift (or broaden) our attention to the
>function of these particular awards (aside from the obvious money, money,
>and, um, money), and lists (eg, the AFI 100 and various other lists in the
>last year or so) in building and legitimating particular kinds of media
>texts.  What are the criteria AMPAS (and ATAS, or other awards, for that
>matter) uses?  What would your criteria be?  Do we even *need* criteria and
>accolades and lists?

Kate Butler
Department of Visual Communication
RMIT University, Australia
[log in to unmask]
 "If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure."
   -- Vice President Dan Quayle.

For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: