Editor’s Note
I’ve never truly understood the entire brouhaha over the Oscars. Every year, a select group of celebrities (let’s not undermine their true social standing by referring to them as mere actors alone) endure a tense, nail-biting (truly an Academy Award winning performance!) ‘televised’ 3 hours to learn, who among them have been voted the best in their field. It’s no doubt a highly historic occasion, considering tonight is the 91st Academy Awards (that too without a host, mind you) and past winners have gone on to do more exemplary work or simply faded into the background.
The golden statue is a highly coveted imagery of the best an artist can hope to achieve in Hollywood.
But do we really need an Oscars to tell us who is the best actor/director/cinematographer among a roomful of equally talented people? Not to forget the ones who might not have made it to the room but whose contribution to world cinema is nonetheless important?
Cinema, after all, is highly subjective. While a true critic would never bring his personal likes and dislikes into his review, for the average cinema goer, the experience is highly subjective. From the mood you are in when you enter the theatre to the antics of the person sitting next to you (cue the chip crunching foodie we were seated next to during our previous outing to the movies), there are a wide range of factors that come between you and your response to a movie.
While I am no doubt curious to find out who will win the Oscars by the end of the day, that’s not going to be the benchmark by which I curate my movie watching list.
I’d be truly whooping for joy only if first timer Roma actress Yalitza Aparicio, who is of indigenous Mexican background, walks away with the trophy. That would surely be a moment worth celebrating. Of course, Lady Gaga would make for a spectacular cover too...