Oscar Fever: Avatar FTW
As the Oscars approach, we'll be taking a look at some of the films, people and stories that will make the 2010 Oscars the most recent yet. And don't forget to stop by on Sunday when we'll be liveblogging the Oscars from our ivory tower.
Each year at the Oscars, the Best Picture award is accepted by the producer of the winning film. Movie producers are the ones with all the power in Hollywood, and they’re the ones who put on the Academy Awards. So it’s really no surprise they are the ones hoisting the year’s biggest prize at the end of the night. But it also serves as a reminder that the Best Picture award is meant to commend ALL of the work that goes into making that year’s winner. Until 1950, the award was presented to the production company as a whole, and at one time it was called Outstanding Production. Discussion about the award often focuses on themes and emotions, but clearly technical excellence is not at all to be discounted.
Unfortunately, for most people, the nominees are often reduced to only the elements they care about most. Generally, those directly related to the story: the performances, the script, the direction. But think about all those awards we don’t pay as much attention to. The ones we suffer through. The Best Picture award is the culmination of the whole night, and that includes the sound awards, the editing awards, the costume awards, and the special effects awards.
Ah, special effects. The backlash against Avatar seems to be based primarily on the perception that it is a “special effects movie.” There is a certain stigma attached to “special effects” in some circles. Basically, they’re reviled. They are computer-generated fireworks added to summer blockbusters to distract dumb American moviegoers from just how shitty these movies are. And while that last statement is true, let us never believe that special effects are inherently evil, or even a lesser aspect of filmmaking. They’re an absolutely integral part of filmmaking as we know it. When was it decided that special effects were antithetical to storytelling, anyway? Surely it was sometime after Fritz Lang looked into the future. After a giant ape scaled the Empire State Building. After Hitchcock went 3D. After Kubrick went into outer space.
Of course those are all old movies. They’re part of cinema history. We’re comfortable with those special effects. They seem like a natural part of filmmaking. The people who were old enough to view these new techniques skeptically are all gone now. All that’s left are people who viewed them with wide-eyed wonder. The people who thought all the cuts in Battleship Potemkin were annoying and nonsensical in 1925 are dead. All that’s left are people who see it as common film language. Isn’t it a certainty that the same will happen to the special effects we view as gimmicks today? Why fight it?
It’s understandable to have a romantic attachment to the way things were done, especially with something as ingrained in our childhood and collective culture as major motion pictures. But that’s a lousy reason to condemn the work of those who attempt to ensure that the next generation has just as lasting a connection to the way movies were made when they were kids. Avatar may well be one of those landmark moments for many of today’s youth.
When Jake is put in control of his avatar, he immediately breaks out of the facility and starts running. As a paraplegic, he is thrilled by the sensation of feet hitting dirt, and wind rushing through hair. I felt a similar exhilaration, but it had nothing to do with a blue giant running through a field. I was thrilled because the avatar looked life like. It didn’t look “human” or “real” obviously. But it moved like an actual living being. All the little details were there, and I immediately felt like I was witnessing something different and new.
Similarly, Avatar’s use of 3D created new sensations. 3D has been used in film going all the way back to 1922’s The Power of Love. But in most commercial efforts, it has come off as a cheesy gimmick. For the first time, I thought the effect actually made the experience more immersive. And it’s largely in the little touches, not in things flying at the screen. The deeper field of vision. The bugs floating in the air, seemingly right in front of you.
Do I want Avatar to win the Best Picture award? I actually don’t care one way or the other. It’s the Oscars. Fucking Kim Basinger has one. But I don’t have a problem with people heaping praise on it. For one, I enjoyed it. Maybe the visual feast and thrilling action sequences made a weak script and cheap allegory easier to swallow. Oh well. I like movies that look good. Let’s not forget it is primarily a visual medium. Should Avatar automatically be at a disadvantage because its special effects are its strongest attribute? Are movies where the script or the performances shine brightest inherently better? The answer to both is “no.” More important than my personal reaction to it though, is that I’m happy to see a film make such big strides in technological areas and still delight audiences. It’s far from a perfect movie, and maybe stripped off its massive budget for special effects it’s not even a good one. But you can’t separate the parts of it now, we can only judge the whole.
The Best Picture award is the only major award that goes to someone who has a very hands off role in the actual story. They don’t create the story, or bring it to life. Instead, they put all the pieces together. And the production of Avatar was one hell of a jigsaw puzzle. The amount of time, effort and money that was funneled into it is staggering. And the final product is not a mess at all. If you criticize the script, don’t forget about the impressive attention to detail throughout the whole movie. If you didn’t care for the characters or the story, make sure to balance that with the sheer amount of things that had to be created from the ground up specifically for this film, from the animals and plants of the alien world to the equipment used to bring them to life. You will not see another movie like this in your lifetime, so whether you liked it or not, it doesn’t seem like such a bad idea to celebrate it.
3 Responses »
Leave a Response

Entries(RSS)
When James Cameron finally cracks the code on fully immersive cinema and gives us HORSEY, a touching period piece about a Depression era immigrant and her untamable mare, where you can taste the oats and smell the pony shit, a 60 year old Jeremiah will whip off his VR mask and exclaim "best picture of the year, haters!"
That's Avatar in a nutshell. An amazing leap forward in visual artistry used to capture the equivalent of a horse farting.
By comparing Avatar to films like King Kong and 2001 you expose the massive disconnect in your argument. Those are COMPLETE films with effects built around stories and performances with soul. Avatar is inherently incomplete. It has the depth of a video game demo. Cameron created some ground-breaking tech, sure, but he used it to create the equivalent of Independence Day. It should hands down win all the effect awards - but if Best Picture is really Best Production, as you assert - how does it excel in acting, directing, writing, editing, costume design, music, etc? It doesn't. It lacks imagination in any discipline outside special effects.
I'm pretty sure the major disconnect is actually in YOUR argument. You literally just said Independence Day = a horse farting.
WELCOME TO EARF.