image

This coming Sunday in Hollywood, people nominated for awards, people presenting awards, people with big upcoming movies to promote and retired industry has-beens with nothing better to do will assemble for the yearly production of The Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences Awards, otherwise known as the Oscars. For the second year in a row, the prevailing buzz is that everyone is preparing for a terrible show. A prevailing buzz that, for a change, I tend to agree with.

A plurality of awards, likely including Best Picture, are all-but-assured to be scooped up by The Artist. An empty, momentarily diverting, gimmick-driven nothing of a movie destined to join the ranks of other immediately forgotten Best Picture honorees like ... um ... "That one with the kids in, uh, India I think?" and "That one about racism in LA, or something?" The night's big too-close-to-call question is whether Best Actress will be awarded to Meryl Streep's great performance in a thuddingly mediocre period drama or Viola Davis' great performance in a thuddingly mediocre period drama. The show will be hosted by AMPAAS fave Billy Crystal, whose schtick was considered overly safe and oldschool when he last did it almost a decade ago. Hastily yanked out of comedy hypersleep when The Academy's head-slappingly bad attempt at relevance in hiring Brett Ratner (a filmmaker who hasn't been relevant himself in years) and Eddie Murphy (who hasn't been relevant for even longer) to helm things blew up in their faces. At this point, if this doesn't wind up as one of lowest-rated Oscars ever it will be close to a miracle. If opportunistic political bloggers don't try to spin the coincidental contrast between these inevitably low ratings and the potentially heavy box office take of the military drama Act of Valor into something meaningful it will be an actual miracle.

Meanwhile, the news cycle delivers one story after another of ideas that might have enlivened the evening getting shot down: The Muppets getting to perform their Oscar-nominated song? Not gonna happen. Sacha Baron-Cohen showing up in the guise of his character for The Dictator? He's been banned from appearing to make sure he can't do just that. Y'know, because heaven forbid something funny might occur.

How did this happen, exactly? Not necessarily the lack of import attached to the Oscars themselves - it's been general smartypants common knowledge that The Academy (and other awards galas) is "just marketing" and "usually gets it wrong" since the beneficial demolition of faith in the media of the 1960s, and serious cineastes have rejected their picks out of hand for longer than that. But when did the show lose the value of its own spectacle? Forget about The Academy's taste or lack thereof, when did this stop being interesting?

Part of it, to be sure, is a downward movement of popular culture. Interest in The Oscars once came from the desire to see beloved movie stars assembled together while popular entertainments battled for supremacy. Today, the couch culture has so thoroughly debased both of those things that it's no exaggeration to say that J-Wow, The Situation and The Real Housewives are bigger stars to a strong plurality of Michael Bay's America than most of the accomplished actors and filmmakers who'll walk the red carpet on Sunday.

But that's only part of the problem, and not the big part. The big problem isn't downward cultural movement but a much more pronounced lateral cultural movement. American pop culture has shifted tremendously not into higher or lower realms but rather different and diverse realms in recent decades, and Oscar hasn't.

A study recently published as part of an Awards Season article by the LA Times revealed some unsurprising but sobering facts about Academy Membership: overwhelmingly male (77%), amazingly un-diverse (black and Latino membership? 2% each), and overwhelmingly, well ... "getting up there." The median age is 62, with total members under the age of 50 bottoming out at just 14%. It is, in other words, an Old Boys' Club, right down to membership being available only to those who are first recommended by existing members, i.e. you can't earn your way through the ranks.

Now, obviously, a lack of diversity isn't in and of itself the worst thing in the world, but that Oscar's voting pool is so tremendously unrepresentative of its own audience and by extension the culture it exists within is both depressing and expected. In fact, it probably does a lot to explain why Oscar and American moviegoers don't see eye-to-eye anymore. Way back when, Oscar exclusively reflecting the tastes of Old White Men meant it was also reflecting the tastes of an American pop culture also dominated by the tastes of Old White Men, but that's not where the popular culture has been for a long time now - it's not even where the Hollywood industry is. Women, children, teenagers, racial and religious minorities, gays, etc. are growing, powerful markets unto themselves, and the infusion of their input and tastes into the Melting Pot has fundamentally changed what constitutes things like "cultural events," "blockbuster movies," "important topics" "acceptable content" and yes, even "movie stars."

RELATED CONTENT
Comments on