Culture and Life

by Rob Gowland

The high cost of Oscars

It used to be said in Hollywood that being nominated for an Oscar was a 
better indicator of your real talent than winning one, since the 
nominations were made by your peers in your chosen part of the profession. 
The nominees for Best Editing were selected by the film editors, the 
nominees for Best Actor by the actors, etc.

The actual winner on the other hand was voted on by all the members 
of the pretentiously named Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences; 
people who designed costumes or wrote scripts passed judgement on film 
editing about which they might know nothing, composers and producers voted 
on the costumes award regardless of whether they knew diddly-squat about 
the history of clothing and design.

As the Oscars became popular and their box-office potential became clear, 
so the studios began jostling to secure a vote for their films. Special 
screenings were held for Academy members in New York and Los Angeles. Huge 
ads were taken in the trade papers.

But that was kid stuff compared to what they do today. Tapes of the major 
nominated films are mailed to hundreds if not thousands of Academy members. 
Public relations firms expend tremendous amounts of time and money 
promoting the main contenders — in magazines, newspapers, on talkshows, 
talkback radio, trade papers and entertainment programs.

For this year's Oscar awards, the money spent on buying and otherwise 
influencing votes was so great that more than one commentator likened it to 
an Olympic bid.

It certainly ran into the millions. And the biggest chunk of it was spent 
by Miramax, who set new heights — or plumbed new depths — by their 
spending to promote the merits of Shakespeare In Love.

Only recently, Saving Private Ryan seemed a dead cert to carry off 
the Best Picture Oscar and the obligatory clutch of other Oscars as well. 
Steven Spielberg's movie about how ordinary (white) American soldiers saved 
the world from Hitler had Oscar written all over it.

But Miramax chairman Harvey Weinstein knew the power of money and seriously 
outspent Spielberg's DreamWorks SKG. On Oscar night, Spielberg won Best 
Director but Shakespeare In Love won Best Picture (how can the best 
picture not be made by the best director?) and six other Oscars.

The Best Picture Oscar is awarded to the film's producer, whose artistic or 
creative contribution to the finished film is usually nil. The producer is 
concerned with the deal, with getting the finance in place, with 
contracting the people who do make an artistic or creative 
contribution.

But the producer is also the person who determines how much to spend on 
securing votes for the film from members of the Academy so it is probably 
only reasonable that he gets to keep the statuette.

This year's Academy Award "ceremonies" were also remarkable on two other 
counts. An Italian Red won three Oscars and an American anti-Communist 
renegade was given an honorary Oscar for his "lifetime achievement".

Roberto Benigni, prominent Italian left-wing actor-director-screenwriter, 
was singularly honoured for his splendid Life Is Beautiful. Besides 
collecting the award for Best Foreign Language Film, he also picked up 
gongs for Best Actor and Best Dramatic Score.

This was only the second time in the history of the Academy Awards that a 
best actor award had gone to a foreign film. The previous one was Best 
Actress to Sophia Loren in Two Women in 1961. That was also an 
Italian film, but I doubt that it indicates a trend.

Benigni's life-affirming film about surviving and combatting fascism was 
reviewed in The Guardian issue of January 27, 1999.

That such a film could receive three Oscars restores a little of one's 
confidence in the Academy Awards — until one realises that the US 
distributor of Life Is Beautiful is Miramax.

Nevertheless, I like to think that so much of Harvey Weinstein's money was 
spent on Shakespeare In Love that there wasn't much left over to 
spend on Benigni's lovely film. Its awards are probably more a genuine 
tribute to Benigni's talent and his film's artistry — and its tremendously 
humane message.

There were other humane messages at the Oscar presentation.

Hundreds of people protested outside at the honouring of Elia Kazan, who 
ratted on his friends and co-workers before the McCarthyite House 
UnAmerican Activities Committee in 1952, saving his own skin (and career) 
by "naming names", identifying eight other actors, directors, writers as 
Communists, destroying their careers and in some cases their lives in the 
process.

While outside demonstrators reviled Kazan and the Academy for honouring 
him, numerous guests inside also showed their disgust.

They refused to join the now-obligatory "standing ovation" for the honorary 
Oscar recipient, steadfastly keeping their seats and pointedly not 
applauding. They included two of the nominees, Nick Nolte, (nominated for 
Best Actor) and Ed Harris (nominated for Best Supporting Actor).

They are both good actors, that we knew already. Now we know they are also 
men of principle.