I love the Oscars and I have never, ever missed it, even if it means that I have to wake up the next morning with big eye bags. This time I insisted about watching it because of the tribute about the musicals, James Bond and Seth MacFarlane, who happens to be a quite funny guy. It also had really good singers and pretty good musical moments, and some cool jokes too; there were some directors and movies that I expected to win and did it, such as the Life of Pi – which blew my mind – and the short animations “Paperman” and “Brave” (Wreck it Ralph could have also won, because of its originality) which where good films, and Adele’s great 007 song “Skyfall”. I have watch better Oscar’s shows to be honest, and this year’s one wasn’t particularly special but it was good, until things like “Argo” winning for Best Picture happened, and my complete and truthful disappointment came along.
There are some of you that might say “are you crazy? It was a fantastic movie, and the critics and Rotten Tomatoes give it high ratings bla bla bla bla bla…” Well, I didn’t say that I didn’t like it, because I did. It was an entertaining movie, with lot of tension and action; but “Zero Dark Thirty” also had lot of action and was very patriotic, and was quite better than “Argo”, I think. I knew, from the moment that Michelle Obama appeared – surprisingly – at the Oscars’ big screen that neither ”Lincoln” nor “Silver Linings Playbook” nor “Life of Pi” nor “Amour” nor the other nominees were going to get the Oscars this year, but either of the two ‘patriotic’ films.
If it was about ‘patriotism’, I think that Katherine Bigelow’s film was much more interesting. But, wait a minute, it shows the American Government torturing people (which I bet you the tortures that are portrayed in that film are much milder than what really happens), and there were also allegations that Obama’s administration helped Bigelow to access confidential information (wether that is true or not, we’ll never know). So, no, it had to be Affleck’s movie. Why not ‘Lincoln’? or ‘Life of Pie‘ which was pretty innovative and told a very cool story? NO!…
For starters, I believe that ‘Argo’ shouldn’t have won ( and I am not a professional reviewer, just an amateur blogger) because a political film like that one should always be told from different points of view, different perspectives, where no body takes sides, and give the opportunity to the viewer to make his/her own conclusion. ‘Syriana’ could be a good example of that. Another thing that I didn’t like about ‘Argo’ is that they only focus on 6 people but, what about the story of the other 52 Americans that were held hostage at the Embassy? or the attempt of rescue that was a entire disaster and killed many people? They don’t any of it in the movie. Or, what about telling the story from the Canadian point of view? The Canadian support was key and outmost important for the rescue, besides were taking a very high risk by keeping the diplomats hidden and safe. But Canada was entirely minimized in the film.
Saying that ‘Argo’ was a true story is not entirely true. it’s just the true story of one specific part: the American one. I am not saying that it was a bad film, it was actually a good story, but not a great one. And Argo’s story is a very predictable one with very exiting development, and with the ending that we already know. Just the typical Hollywood movie. Honestly, the last part of the ceremony was, in my humble opinion, complete biased and politicized and completely ignoring innovation. In general, the whole Oscars this year was pretty dull, with a few good performances here and there, nothing more.