Skip to Content

Listen to the Joystiq Podcast (because your ears can't read)

Does Oscar need a high-tech makeover?

Filed under: Awards, Newsstand, Oscar Watch

Film critic and historian David Thomson had an interesting piece up yesterday in the Los Angeles Times on the history of the Oscars and the Academy - and what he would do to make the Oscars more relevant to today's audience. For starters, he'd toss out the awards for some of my favorite categories - Foreign, Documentary, and Short - along with the craftsy stuff like costume design and art direction.

I don't agree with him on that bit, but I do think his next suggestion has some merit: play up the importance of the technical categories. Celebrate people like Gary Demos, who "did much of the theoretical work in computer imagery"; Demos received an honorary Oscar on February 18 for his tremendous contribution to computer animation, but you won't see him in the front row come Oscar night.

 

Movies today, Thomson argues, are all about the high-tech and the computer effects, the pow and the kabang that make movies fun and exciting. That's what today's younger audience expects out of movies, and Oscar needs to focus more on that aspect of movies and give the poor techie guys their due, already. I have mixed feelings about Thomson's arguments. Yes, computer technology has significantly changed movies, forever. It brought us Jurassic Park, The Matrix, Independence Day, X-Men and Spider-Man, and it brought us Toy Story 1 and 2, The Incredibles, and Shrek. It's cool, sure. I get it.

But for me, computer tricks and gizmos, killer CGI-enhanced kung-fu fight scenes, computer-generated aliens that look like they could leap off the screen, aren't what make a film a film. They can't replace sharply written dialogue, meticulously shot scenes, brilliant stories, luminous acting, tight direction - all the bits and pieces that make a movie speak to the audience. Bang-it-up action and nifty computer effects are fine for an afternoon's entertainment, but it's the art of film, all those wonderful ingredients put together and cooked up just right, that combine to create a cinematic feast that feeds your soul for weeks after you watch it. Computer effects can enhance a film, but they do not in and of themselves make a film.

That's what movies are to me and, I hope, still are to a lot of people out there. So even while we poke fun at the Academy for its fine feathers and vainglory on Oscar day, we know, deep inside, Oscar is supposed to stand for something. In spite of the ranks of spectacular actors and directors and films who haven't won a golden statuette, in spite of the times that Oscar misses the mark, the Academy Awards still represent, on some level, a nod to art, to reaching higher, to making a film that will live in the hearts of film fans long after the curtain closes on Oscar night.

What do you think, film fans? Is it passé to think that film should still be about more than just the high-tech niftiness and snazzy computer effects? Can't we give the techies their due without bidding adieu to the art of film?

[via Hollywood Elsewhere ]

Related Headlines

 

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

.