And The Winner Is...
Do we really need awards ceremonies any more? This is a question that struck me today and I can't help but wonder why we place so much faith in them. I've never judged a film by the number of awards it holds, purely because there are movies I've loved without any wins to their name and some I disliked, such as Slumdog Millionaire, that scored big in all the major trophy giving ceremonies. So why should we even care about which film the voting committees thought was best, especially when there are now about three thousand of them every year?
Celebrity culture is ingrained into every aspect of the modern world, much to the chagrin of any Joe Ordinary who cares less about what some drugged up actress did last night or what the intelligence-challenged pop star wore to Harrods. Even sports stars, most of whom would have been recognised in the past for being great at what they do and nothing more, are now snapped by every paparazzi in the vicinity while models, merely people who look concerned in a number of black and white photographs, are treated like people we should worship.
What this means is that being a celebrity is now a self sustaining industry. In fact, people can break into this infinite cycle of fame by doing nothing except talking about celebrities who do nothing (such as the despicable human being known as Perez Hilton) and are followed and talked about as much as all the others. At least acting is a little bit like a skill. This brings me to the Oscars, the Grammy's, the Golden Globes etc. I turned on the TV to see the latter this year, and there was a special two hour program on before the actual presentation about the red carpet and all the people arriving on it. When there is more coverage of the entrance than the actual awards there's something majorly wrong.
Which leads us to ask what the awards actually mean nowadays. As far as I know, the winner of each award is determined by a very select few people all sitting down together and coming to an agreement about which person or which film should take the prize. But isn't it human nature to vary in our tastes and our opinions? So why do we need to be told who is the greatest actor of the current year by the basis of what they filmed in that period of time? After any winners list is revealed, there are always disagreements where some people believe certain individuals were cheated out of a win, and then other times people will feel an actor/actress deserves it this year for always missing out on it previously, and essentially it become a jumble of conflicting thoughts and beliefs and nobody ever agrees. Ever.
The worth of a film or a performance should be judged by all the people who watch it. That's why sites such as RottenTomatoes and Metacritic are so successful, because they take a vast number of opinions and generate a success rate or an average score and a pattern forms telling us whether it is universally liked, disliked or mixed. The few decisions reached by a tiny number of probably like minded people shouldn't really have the power to determine who is a success this year, that should be down to the audience as a whole. If you are a great actor, this will show through your work. If you produce a great film, the people who see it will love it. That's how you should find out if you've won.
In conclusion, it seems that today awards ceremonies have become celebrity zoos where people watch to see the exhibit that makes a fool of them self or the one that's been groomed the best. Thus I propose three options for the future; i) radically change the methods in how winners are chosen ii) get rid of anything that turns the ceremony into a celebrity fuelled experience such as the red carpet and the glitziness or iii) get rid of awards ceremonies completely.
Celebrity culture is ingrained into every aspect of the modern world, much to the chagrin of any Joe Ordinary who cares less about what some drugged up actress did last night or what the intelligence-challenged pop star wore to Harrods. Even sports stars, most of whom would have been recognised in the past for being great at what they do and nothing more, are now snapped by every paparazzi in the vicinity while models, merely people who look concerned in a number of black and white photographs, are treated like people we should worship.
What this means is that being a celebrity is now a self sustaining industry. In fact, people can break into this infinite cycle of fame by doing nothing except talking about celebrities who do nothing (such as the despicable human being known as Perez Hilton) and are followed and talked about as much as all the others. At least acting is a little bit like a skill. This brings me to the Oscars, the Grammy's, the Golden Globes etc. I turned on the TV to see the latter this year, and there was a special two hour program on before the actual presentation about the red carpet and all the people arriving on it. When there is more coverage of the entrance than the actual awards there's something majorly wrong.
Which leads us to ask what the awards actually mean nowadays. As far as I know, the winner of each award is determined by a very select few people all sitting down together and coming to an agreement about which person or which film should take the prize. But isn't it human nature to vary in our tastes and our opinions? So why do we need to be told who is the greatest actor of the current year by the basis of what they filmed in that period of time? After any winners list is revealed, there are always disagreements where some people believe certain individuals were cheated out of a win, and then other times people will feel an actor/actress deserves it this year for always missing out on it previously, and essentially it become a jumble of conflicting thoughts and beliefs and nobody ever agrees. Ever.
The worth of a film or a performance should be judged by all the people who watch it. That's why sites such as RottenTomatoes and Metacritic are so successful, because they take a vast number of opinions and generate a success rate or an average score and a pattern forms telling us whether it is universally liked, disliked or mixed. The few decisions reached by a tiny number of probably like minded people shouldn't really have the power to determine who is a success this year, that should be down to the audience as a whole. If you are a great actor, this will show through your work. If you produce a great film, the people who see it will love it. That's how you should find out if you've won.
In conclusion, it seems that today awards ceremonies have become celebrity zoos where people watch to see the exhibit that makes a fool of them self or the one that's been groomed the best. Thus I propose three options for the future; i) radically change the methods in how winners are chosen ii) get rid of anything that turns the ceremony into a celebrity fuelled experience such as the red carpet and the glitziness or iii) get rid of awards ceremonies completely.
posted by epiq at
6:30 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home