400 Screens, 400 Blows - Dark Knight, Not-So-Bright Oscars
Filed under: Columns, 400 Screens, 400 Blows

I didn't do too badly in my Oscar predictions. At the last minute, I went sentimental and predicted Mickey Rourke over Sean Penn, which was a bad idea, given that the Oscars were all business and duty this week, with no room for anything sentimental or personal. The other big mistake I made was to predict The Dark Knight (55 screens) as a winner in most of its eight categories. Everyone in the free world saw the film and no one can deny that its achievements in these categories were ground-breaking in some cases, and superb in all cases. But the Academy dutifully chose The Curious Case of Benjamin Button for these awards.
I have yet to meet very many people who actually like Benjamin Button, so I think there are two factors at stake. One is the concept in which the movie that employed the most people subsequently gets the most Oscar votes. The other factor states that only a certain type of movie actually gets to win. Benjamin Button is an Oscar movie through-and-through. It's long, first of all, and has a high-class literary pedigree (F. Scott Fitzgerald). It has obvious award bait in all the categories, not only in acting, cinematography, editing and music, but also the lower categories like makeup, visual effects and sound that usually go to summer blockbusters.
So, unlike better movies like Frost/Nixon (381 screens) or Doubt (400 screens), it racks up a higher number of nominations, and thus grabs all the headlines. It has a Titanic-like romance and a Forrest Gump-like structure, so it makes viewers think of Oscars even while watching it. And if that's not enough, it takes place during Hurricane Katrina, so viewers feel like it has something important to say about society. (If all of these factors had wrapped up into a cohesive package, we might have had something.)
Now, I apologize if you're sick of the hype, but The Dark Knight was a truly superior film in almost every way; I was especially impressed by the complex editing and the ground-breaking score. (See my review for more details.) It was a summer blockbuster with a huge amount of hype, but even that would only account for about a $300 million gross; it made $550 million because people actually connected with the film; it spoke to people and made them feel that perhaps they weren't alone in some of the darkest, most troubled times they've ever faced. But the Academy balked at such a nominee; Christopher Nolan took a comic book and made Shakespeare out of it, but the Academy could only see the comic book, and thus it was not worthy.
The Oscars are always betting against history; the ultimate idea is to write in stone the names of the greatest works of art for future generations. But how to choose these films when they're only a couple of months old? How will they age? No one can say, but we can look to one of The Dark Knight's ancestors, Blade Runner, for an example. It was nominated for two Oscars and lost both, and now it's considered one of the best films of that decade, if not the best. The Oscars may seem powerful in determining how these things will turn out, but things turn out the way they do with or without them.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-28-2009 @ 7:14PM
Wayne said...
First "Memento" and now "The Dark Knight". I don't know what the Academy has against Christopher Nolan.
Reply
2-28-2009 @ 7:30PM
Richard said...
really good article. I don't usually make gratuitous comments, but this is a well deserved praise.
Reply
2-28-2009 @ 7:48PM
vegimorph said...
Benjamen Button was all right and had some good merits about it (like the lovely Cate Blanchett) but Frost/Nixon was better like you said. Frost/Nixon was a very challenging movie for the audience mentally wise and I kind of liked this because I'm usually a slam bang B-movie summer picture kind of guy or an animation buff so I don't go to films like this too much. I liked how Frost/Nixon tried to offer an accurate historical portrayal although I did like Benjamen Button for its fantasy view of history. While both films ended on a bitter sweet note, Frost/Nixon was more kind of well-balanced in its humor and its drama while offering a kid like me new insights and information on that kind of subject or story so I didn't really feel depressed leaving the film, but I did (and everbody's going to kill me for this one) feel sorry for Richard Nixon. Benjamen Button was the kind of film where i kind of knew what the ending was going to be like and i had kind of seen it before and it was more dramatic with its fantasy so it wasn't as stirring as Frost/Nixon for me but I did like both films. As for The Dark Knight, I had a mix of emotions about it so I have to watch it again before I can give a clear answer
Reply
2-28-2009 @ 8:31PM
Sam said...
Yeah, I enjoyed Dark Knight over Ben Button, and most other nominated films (to some degree), and wished it had received more recognition from the Academy. And while I liked Benjamin Button and thought it was a good enough time, I think some others might as well if they didn't take it too seriously. Fincher is a good director, and the movie, if it wasn't viewed as some epic masterpiece that deserved Oscar recognition, it might be enjoyed by more. In the end, the Academy and the Oscars are not the end all be all of naming the years greatest films, which we all know, so I just let them have their say and know that there are better choices. But good article.
Reply
2-28-2009 @ 8:41PM
Lee said...
Wonderful piece. You eloquently make many of they points I've been making to friends since the AMC Oscar Showcase got me through all 5 Best Movie nods. I thought Milk and The Reader were stellar, but the rest all left me disappointed, and I thought Dark Knight was superior in nearly every way I could conceive - screenplay, storytelling, direction, art direction, and overall "best pic".
Christian Bale was "only" very good. Heath Ledger was stellar. The story was, for lack of a better term, "brainy". Meanwhile, Slumdog was a music video. I don't get it.
Reply
2-28-2009 @ 8:44PM
uforeader said...
I think Dark Knight was great, and deserved a best picture nomination. And I liked it significantly more than Ben Button. But Ben Button only won three Oscars that Dark Knight was nominated for - visual effects, makeup, art direction. And I think Ben Button probably deserved the win for all of them. The Dark Knight was great, but it's effects weren't groundbreaking or innovative like Ben Button. The only really interesting makeup work was on the Joker and some of Two Face. Compare that to Ben Button that did some incredible aging techniques. And for art direction - Dark Knight had a modern city to work with, while Ben Button had to recreate several time periods in New Orleans and had some excellent set designs.
Reply
2-28-2009 @ 9:54PM
EatingPie said...
The Oscars are really unpredictable, which I think, is one reason why people still enjoy them. Compare to the Grammies, which pretty much guarantee cringe-inducing stupidity every year. With the Oscars... you can never tell.
That said, this was a TERRIBLE Oscar year. The Best Picture nominations largely stunk, and were films that did *not* connect with people at large.
The Dark Knight's snub-o-rama is a shining example of this, but the 2009 Oscars Horror didn't end there.
Benjamin Button beat Hellboy 2 for Makeup. Now that was a travesty of epic proportions!
The Best Song had only three nominees, two of which came from the same movie.
Josh Brolin garnered a Best Supporting Actor nom for Milk, but didn't appear until half way into the movie, was hardly shown even after that, and while well-acted, didn't stand out by any means.
This was simply a year where the Academy didn't get it... at all! Penn, Winslett, Wall-E were the three exceptions to heaps of disappointment and awards going to the wrong films.
-Pie
Reply
2-28-2009 @ 10:40PM
Fabrizio said...
(Please read everything).
Well written article, it made interesting points about how the Oscars work.
On the other hand I think that all the praise of The Dark Knight is getting out of controlSadly it’s the kind of movie that it is better for what it represents that the movie itself (getting "respect" for comic adaptations, kicking mayor ass at the box office at a global scale, Heath Ledger performance, it really connected with most persons).
Think for a second, without being a fan boy, a try to be objective, the movie has some serious issues, both technical and from logic (the editing in the showdown at the third act was a complete mess, the cellular device was borderline "deux ex machina" and it was like the only way for Batman to catch the Joker was with this massive technological cheat, not with is detective skills).
What happened with the Joker, meanwhile Batman was saving Rachael, when she was dropped from Bruce’s penthouse? (By the way, after that breakout, she stills thinks that place is the "safest in the whole city").
The list goes on and on (you can check more logical errors in the excellent parody "The Dork Knight” by Mad Magazine).
And after those critics, I still think it was one of the best movies I saw last year. (But in my opinion, Batman Begins was a better experience, because it was fresh, it put batman back on the right track and the moment when Gordon shows Batman, the joker card was just PRICELESS).
Best super hero movie ever? Maybe
It deserved more Oscar nominations? Maybe
It was a better than TCoBB? Maybe
“Shakespeare” quality? Maybe
We can debate these questions until the end of time and the answer will simply vary because everyone is different and it has the right to have a different opinion.
At the end of the day, the movie already made crazy ass money, it is almost universally loved. Batman, the fans, the people behind the film, the studio, already won!They don’t need the shiny awards.
So after all this, I’m trying to say that it is kind a silly make a rant about how Batman was robbed of his shiny naked men and kind a blame TTcBB for that.
(Yes it also’s totally silly write a rant about another rant ;) .
Oscar bait? Sure!
But I also completely enjoyed that one too: interesting story, great ambience, wonderful art direction and music, kudos to the fx team (Digital Domain, among others), powerful message and the last shot of that movie was, once again I my humble opinion, just BREATHTAKING.
And it also has terrible issues: “deja vue” with Forrest Gump, it is long, reallyyyy long,
if it was a old baby born, shouldn’t be an adult baby at the end? )
Really waiting the Mad parody on this one…
Also there are lots of movies which we can discuss that were ignored by the Oscars
(“Let the Right One” anyone? “Wendy and Lucy”, “The Wrestler”, and the list continues).
So now we can please give The Dark Knight a rest?
Lots of awesome movies are coming; we will probably be discussing more awesome movies, robbed at the Oscars in the future.
03-06-09 is almost upon us and we are going to need all of or strength to discuss that one…
P.S: Sorry about the length of this reply, if I offended anyone, and if I made writing mistakes (english is not my born language, I am from Bolivia).
I think the work of the staff of CINEMATICAL is just awesome and thank you for reading.
Reply
2-28-2009 @ 11:50PM
Riley Freeman said...
i dont even know why people pay attention to oscars anymore. its terrible they award movies nobody goes to see.
Reply
3-01-2009 @ 2:41AM
Arivind Abraham said...
I have to agree with you and I think the problem truly lies with the voting system that is used to decide upon the nominees. The system in such a way that things like this happen.
The Dark Knight is one of the finest motion pictures we will see in our lifetimes and really noms should have been given for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Screenplay & Best Score, but hey, who's known the Academy to get it right for what are now considered cinematic masterpieces.
Reply
3-01-2009 @ 7:44AM
joe said...
Don't you realize the the Oscars are political? The nominations and winners were all left wing and gay. No way was Dark Knight or Clint Eastwood were going to win, only if you were PC.
Reply
3-01-2009 @ 11:12AM
Bill said...
I think that there is a blockbuster factor. Big, money-making genre films often have a handicap in the Oscar race. Benjamin Button was almost-a-genre film but safe to vote for because it is really a drama and doesn't have a hero doing martial arts (as far as I know). I think a lot of people resent successful genre films and they show it with Oscar votes.
Steven Speilberg had to get away from his successful popcorn sci-fi films before winning an Oscar (Maybe E.T. wasn't better than Ghandi. I don't know). I remember the year Beauty and the Beast was nominated for best picture, an actress in her Oscar presentation sort of put it down like "why are we celebrating this cartoon musical when we should be doing movies with real actors?"
That's just the way the Oscars are. Every year, a lot of movies I am not interested in are nominated. I would not want them to become a sci-fi awards show but what are you gonna do? You can't please everyone and nothing prevents us from voting with our dollars. Obviously Dark Knight won that contest so maybe fans of the film should just take that consolation prize and just stick their tongues out at Oscar.
Reply
3-01-2009 @ 12:45PM
Kurt said...
The Oscars seemed a lot more relevant before we had critic aggregators. Now that the "goodness" of a movie can be quantified consistently and reliably, we can look at the Academy choices and say "The Reader? Really? It only had 60% on Rotten Tomatoes."
Reply
3-01-2009 @ 1:35PM
Jim said...
I agree with the criticism of the editing towards then end of The Dark Knight (in a response above). When The Joker was taking over the crime syndicates in Gotham City, the editing was kind of poor. I didn't things were as clear as they could have been (does this mean I didn't understand the story elements? No. I'm saying that they could have been clearer; the edits smoother).
I did not think TDK was as fantastic as most other people. I liked the film and thought it was very enjoyable. However, I thought that Iron Man had a way stronger story structure and flowed extremely well (great editing). My only criticism ofAs fo that movie is that the finale (i.e., the battle between the two at the end) didn't last NEARLY long enough.
As for the Oscar issues with TDK, the art direction in that movie has been criticized a bit because they didn't try hard enough to mask Chicago. I think that, and the fact that TCCoBB had GREAT art direction, is the clear reason TDK lost there.
Reply
3-01-2009 @ 1:59PM
Wayne said...
Iron Man had too many plot holes for my taste. The biggest being that Jeff Bridges required zero acclimation time to perfectly control a mega suit when Tony, the genius behind the design, spent weeks learning to control a smaller suit.
3-01-2009 @ 11:31PM
folrsi30 said...
I was happily surprised that it won TWO oscars -- I thought for sure it was going to get shut out completely, so we should be happy about that. But I think it's crazy that all the guilds (the writers, the directors, the producers -- all supported and nominated the dark knight).
Reply
3-02-2009 @ 10:50AM
Kevin said...
Agreed. If TDK had been ignored by EVERYONE then fine, I'd be willing to chalk up my love for the movie to simply "fanboyism" like its detractors claim. But the fact is that it was one of the best reviewed movies of the year (look at RT and Metacritic), it made a huge amount of cash (connects with fans), and every guild nominated it as one of the best movies of the year. The Oscars know more about directing than the DGA? Really? I can't think of a stronger case for an oscar nomination than critical, popular, and guild success, and yet somehow the oscars disagreed with pretty much EVERYONE else. It just doesn't make sense to me.
3-02-2009 @ 4:17PM
ML said...
I agree with EatingPie, Hellboy II deserved the Oscar for makeup. I've seen good age make-up over and over ... how creative can you be with it and get it right? But Hellboy ...! Now that was something. The Academy isn't voting for the project that took the most talent and skill, but the project that it thinks will best represent the Academy.
This is why I don't take awards seriously.
Reply