Nationalistic artifice infringes on Oscars

cinema scope: Too soon? Controversy in Bigelow's 'Zero Dark Thirty'

Plenty of ink has spilled over the polarizing new Kathryn Bigelow film “Zero Dark Thirty.” During the past few months it has sparked perhaps the most heated discussion over politics in cinema in recent memory. “Zero Dark Thirty” has its share of vehement defenders and detractors; the debates concerning its merit had been fought long before it’s release. The discussion surrounding the film—chronicling a scrupulous procedural depiction of the ten-year C.I.A. investigation that led to the epic nighttime raid on Osama Bin Laden’s compound and the terrorist’s execution—has spurred political scrutiny. It’s difficult to assess a film like this without also considering its moral and ethical dilemmas.

cinema scope: Sordid stereotypes in 'Spring Breakers'

Every couple of years the film community gets a picture that is critically divisive to the point of riots; a picture that compels nearly anyone with a pen and a Film 101 course to their name to provide personal input (“Zero Dark Thirty”, “Amour” and “The Tree of Life” are a few from recent memory).
Such films ascribe to the moniker of “art-cinema”, but are generally well-known enough to gain considerable viewership and invite debate as to the value of their worth as popular entertainment (God forbid something of that sort should carry something resembling a moral agenda).
Regardless of whether we consider such works “good” movies, their value lies in their ability to spark intellectual debates, which allow critics to constantly reassess the (gasp!) purpose of cinema and popular entertainment (the worth of criticism itself frequently crops up in this conversation).

cinema scope

Nationalistic artifice infringes on Oscars

This piece represents the opinion of the author:

Sam Fichtner

Columnist

March 1, 2013

That was a rather strange Oscar night, wouldn’t you say? From the take-it-or-leave-it misogynistic and racist jokes of the first-time host to the bizarre exaltation of the Hollywood musical (since when was “Chicago” a landmark picture?), the 85th Academy Awards were full of surprises—there was even a tie (they might as well just chop the statue in half).

But to me nothing was stranger than the quick jump over to Washington for Michelle Obama’s oddly intrusive presentation of the Best Picture Award.

Nothing against our lovely first lady, but didn’t it seem like she showed up at the wrong party? (That party being one in which the entertainment industry’s moguls and beautiful people pretend for one night that they are the most important people in the universe.)

If nothing else, the speech from our first lady put everyone in their place.

Perhaps this is just a touchy response to an all-around bizarre evening, but, given the overtly political overtones of half of the Best Picture nominees, her appearance seemed hardly accidental.

“Argo,” which depicts the rescue of six U.S. agents from Iran in 1979, is a terrific piece of filmmaking. Who could have guessed a decade ago that Ben Affleck would become a superb chronicler of American values? His knack for constructing thrill scenes is impeccable; he’s been in enough cheap thrillers to know how to build suspense and not risk sacrificing the integrity of his political motives.

A few nights ago, a class of mine was recounting the oddities of this year’s Oscars when Professor of English Marilyn Reizbaum astutely offered two conditions of Argo’s success that explain its victory: 1) The film exalts a major American agency’s heroic ability to step into an international system gone haywire and save the day, and 2) it also exalts an industry that provides an international language capable of assuaging even the most severe of circumstances.

While the C.I.A. plays a central role, make no mistake: this is a movie about Hollywood.

This is evidenced by the film’s compelling climax, in which the character that has expressed the most doubts over the persuasiveness of the Hollywood system delivers an elevator film-pitch worthy of a professional—a better one than the actual fake producer can even muster.

Given the true subject of the film, I couldn’t help but find the movie’s introductory cartoon strangely didactic and misguided. It’s odd that Hollywood feels so compelled to give its viewers a history lesson every time we enter a land remotely foreign to us.

Yes Ben Affleck, I know you were majoring in Middle Eastern studies; I also know that you dropped out. The cartoon, designed no doubt to feel like a storyboard (in hopes to link this section to the aforementioned climax) ended up feeling more like child’s pop-up book.

Was “Argo” the best film of the year? In my mind, not by a long shot, but only Spielberg’s “Lincoln” would have deserving of an award concerned less with the artistic merit of a film than the exaltation of American values.

However, when I think about Michelle Obama’s speech, I am brought back to Professor Reizbaum’s comments and can’t help but see a corollary between the film’s plot and this particular presentation of the award.

American politics steps onto the moviemaking turf in the hopes of creating a common ground and reverence for the power of filmmaking.

Michelle Obama’s speech drifted strangely into what seemed like an appraisal the human spirit: “We can overcome any obstacle if we dig deep enough and fight hard enough and find the courage to believe in ourselves”.

Surely the Academy knew beforehand that “Argo” would win the award, and that it was an easy film for the White House to champion.

There’s a little bit of necessary artifice employed to lionize the efforts of C.I.A. agents of yesteryear, who bear a powerful resemblance with those of today’s operatives.

“Argo” swims far from the testy waters of torture found in “Zero Dark Thirty”—the winner of only half of its five nominations, no doubt because of its attendant political controversy.
In “Argo,” Hollywood provided a fitting middle ground for the White House and the Kodak Theater to come together.

As Obama championed our national unity, the rest of us were simply eager for her to announce the award, so that Ben Affleck could cry and we could take to Twitter to begin tearing apart the night’s peculiarities.

Comments are permanently closed.