What happens when you reach awards season after one of the best years for film in recent history? You still get disappointed by the academy’s flagrant nominations. There will always be a clear snub and a darling every year, but the 2024 film season’s awards picks have some other surprises up its sleeve.
Artificial intelligence voice acting, resurfaced tweets and Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande’s wickedly weird finger-holding friendship have been put through the wringer these past few months. I am sure plenty more scandals will come before the biggest night in film, but with all the controversy outside the cinema, I think the academy forgot that their job is to award the best and brightest in the art of filmmaking.
In the past, the academy has managed to consistently favor optics over substance and true examples of good film, with the lowlights of this pattern being pretty substantial this year.
“Emilia Perez” managed to secure 13 nominations, an egregious amount considering it was a musical with no singing. Sorry, no good singing. The film may be deserving of its best cinematography nomination, but the list ends there. Notably ahead of its lead actresses, Karla Sofia Gascon as the titular character and Zoe Saldana as Rita Mora Castro, the two nominations for best original song and the best picture nomination.
How that film managed to scrounge up more nominations than this year’s blockbuster musical “Wicked,” is striking. The highly anticipated adaptation of the Broadway hit got plenty of buzz from awards shows, with 10 nominations. Voters seem to have a soft spot for the two leading ladies, as well as the production design and costumes. These Oscar nominations also solidified what we knew to be true, that the “Gladiator II” and “Wicked” box office bloodbath was nothing close to the “Barbenheimer” takeover of the year prior. “Wicked” clearly won out in acclaim, as well as cultural impact. “Gladiator II” should be overjoyed that it stands next to the popular “Wicked” in the best costumes category.
Demi Moore’s nomination in the body horror film “The Substance” may seem like a win for the horror genre that has been constantly overlooked. While the other praise “The Substance” is getting is the exciting news from horror fans and filmmakers alike, Moore’s nomination is an example of the academy’s choices in nominees and winners being misguided by the politics of the film world.
Moore’s shocking win at the Golden Globes came off as more of a means to mark the actress’s lack of recognition in film up until late in her career. While a valiant effort to recognize someone so integral to the industry, wasn’t she not awarded because her performances haven’t matched her adversaries come awards season in the past? I don’t think Moore’s performance as Elisabeth Sparkle was any different, and maybe the academy wanted to give this seasoned veteran of cinema her flowers, but she didn’t earn them with this performance. I can only hope the Oscars don’t fall into the same trap and call Mikey Madison’s name for “Anora” in March.
On the other hand, longtime snubbed Hollywood darling, Timothee Chalamet will surely be leaving this year’s ceremony a winner. Being the lead in two best picture nominees as Paul Atredes in “Dune: Part Two” and Bob Dylan in “A Complete Unknown,” both films with plenty other nominations across the board, the actor will surely be seeing some recognition.
Chalamet is likely to unseat his fellow nominee Adrien Brody’s spot as youngest best actor winner come the awards show, but he honestly should have done so in 2018 with his nomination for “Call Me By Your Name.” Chalamet has continued to keep busy since he began in the industry but that has won him very few awards across the circuit, so being in prime Oscar bait like a biopic should serve the 29-year-old well.
Noticeably missing from this year’s accolades with Luca Guadagnino’s “Challengers.” The summer blockbuster brought some attention to tennis and managed to have some of the most iconic scenes of the cinematic year. Clearly, the film did not score with the academy, which didn’t even give it a nomination for its original score, despite it winning in that category at the Golden Globes weeks prior.
At least audiences can rest assured that some of the critics had the sense to nominate stars of the season like “Anora” and “A Real Pain” which both saw some recognition for their stellar stars. Kieran Culkin made his return to Hollywood sweeping television awards with his work in “Succession,” and this excitement for the child star turned full-blown celebrity in film is a much-welcomed sight.
Madison’s performance as “Anora” is one of the best, if not the star of the season. With a sensitivity and fire that lit up the screen, she made “Anora” another instant classic from Sean Baker. While the competition is tough in many of the other categories Baker’s film is in, I think the leading performance is enough to stand up against the other nominees.
Another leading lady, Gascon as “Emilia Perez,” was trailing behind the other actresses in her performance, a trend I hope the academy recognizes. When it comes to proving their political correctness, the film critics and voters in the academy sometimes overdo it, granting recognition disingenuously. Gascon may be the first transgender woman to receive recognition in this category, but that milestone does not excuse a poor performance. This is a step in the right direction to recognize the talent of good performances by queer actors, but she should not be the first to do it.
As March 2 grows closer and more about these films develops, whether that be scandal or more praise, you can rest assured that you will be disappointed by Hollywood stars and the academy’s choices. The least we can do is hope that cinema continues to be competitive and drama-filled for us to watch with popcorn in hand, as the best of the industry fumble their own reputations in their own messed-up masterpiece.
