You can probably guess that I am a huge Potter fan if I am writing about their snub at the Oscar's this year. It's true, Harry Potter doesn't always get the credit it deserves. The books are a real piece of art and while the films do an okay job living up to the book's reputation, none could do it better than the eighth and final film. The film stood apart from the other seven and was a real epic. It contained everything needed to make a great film - adventure, death, romance, and redemption. Not only did the film contain fantastic story telling elements that all film goers enjoy but it also contained a great score by Alexandre Desplat and each actor proved they weren't just there for the money - they were all at their best! Seriously, if anyone deserved an Oscar for best male character in a film it would have to be Alan Rickman as Snape.
So why the Oscar snub? If Potter eight really was that great, which it was according to fans and critics, why was it pushed aside and why was Hugo given a nomination instead? The answer seems obvious. While both are considered kids films (something that can be debated), Hugo is a single film while Harry Potter is a series of films and also known in Hollywood as a franchise. Let's be honest here - the Oscar's don't like movie franchise's. Sometimes it is for good reason but it's rare a franchise like Harry Potter comes around today with not only themes of love and redemption but of loss, love, death, growing up, and then darker themes such as loneliness (Harry loosing his parents), family (The Weasley's, Sirius, etc.), and the power of choice (Hogwart's houses, Voldemort's upbringing, etc.).
Apart from the Academy's dislike for big named franchise's, why else was Potter snubbed? Was it not different enough for the Academy? Sure you have
The Help which is about rebellion in a time of racism and
The Tree of Life that I've heard is just plain strange. But isn't that what they want? Something different? Something that pushes film to the limit - and is immoral a lot of times? Oh and they can't be family films except if they are Disney and even Disney gets snubbed at times. Harry Potter is a story about adversity just like The Help and Harry Potter has a lot of strange parts for example, horcruxes! It's intense but heart warming at the same time - the perfect balance. I guess Harry is just too moral for the Academy.
Daniel Radcliffe, who was constantly asked about the Oscar snub in interviews and said he didn't find it to be that big of a deal, finally became frustrated
and says, "I don't think the Oscars like
commercial films, or kids' films, unless they're directed by Martin Scorsese...There's a certain amount of snobbery. It's kind of disheartening. I never thought I'd care. But it would've been nice to have some recognition, just for the hours put in."
Potter is nominated for small Oscar's including Art Direction, Visual Effects, and Makeup. In my opinion, it is not getting the recognition it deserves. I have no doubt Hollywood will continue to snub great films in the future as they have also done in the past. Another great film that was snubbed at this year's Oscars is
Martha, Marcy, May, Marlene staring Elizabeth Olsen, younger sister to the famous Olsen twins.
So what do you think? Was Harry Potter not given the credit it deserved? Or are the Oscars right to ignore a franchise film?
No comments:
Post a Comment