Oscars 2013: Things I Don’t Understand

I don’t want to talk about Seth McFarlane (although I technically already did). By my count, nobody in the Twitter-era has enjoyed the Oscars host and they likely never will. I do have questions, though. Questions that need answers! Like this one…

When the director of the Best Picture winner isn’t nominated for Best Director, what are we saying? Best Director has been synonymous for Best Picture since 2002, when Roman Polanski won for The Pianist while Chicago earned Best Picture. In movies, good directors control every nuance of the film, so of course there’s correlation between to the two Oscar categories. But let’s say Argo is slightly penalized for portraying an amazing historical event rather than completely fictional material (which is a slanted hypothetical since directing is directing whether the material is historical or fiction, but bear with me), Ben Affleck did just direct the “best” film of the year–how does that not warrant nomination?

How about…

Zero Dark Thirty nabbed a Best Original Screenplay nomination despite being based on a true, documented, story. I know there are rules to these nominations, I’m just saying I don’t know what they are.

And…

Are we sure Argo was the best film this year? I mean, I kind of want it to be. I’m a sucker for a redemption story and it doesn’t get much better than Ben Affleck going from Gigli and Pearl Harbor to one of Hollywood’s most accomplished directors. The Academy is noted, though, for patting itself (the industry) on the back (see: The Artist) and the whole fake-movie angle in Argo essentially makes the story. Not that Argo isn’t good but who’s to say the Academy didn’t mind rewarding itself for putting an end to the Iran hostage crisis.

I’d vote for Zero Dark Thirty for the reasons I outlined here. Again, I’m pulling for Affleck. I enjoy his work and thought his speech was terrific. I’m just not sure he made the best movie in 2012.

Image Source: Belief Net