If you missed it, the so-called Game “Awards” was broadcast a few days ago. I don’t usually pay a lot of attention to the event – I have my own End-of-Year Awards to prepare for, after all! – but one particularly striking image has come out of the highly-commercial event, and I wanted to share my two cents.
Overshadowing the awards ceremony itself, and even many of the award winners, was a simple phrase that was shown on a massive prompt facing the stage: “Please Wrap It Up.” After being given as little as thirty seconds to speak upon receiving an award, the message would be displayed to developers and award-winners – before music would begin to play and they’d be ushered off-stage. Out of the entire three-hour broadcast, barely ten minutes was given to the award-winners themselves – who are, surely, supposed to be the stars of any awards ceremony. The rest of the time was dedicated to advertisements, trailers, speeches by the presenters, and even musical acts. Some awards weren’t even presented at all, being skipped over in a mere couple of seconds.
The now-infamous sign.
I’m far from the only person to have noticed this, and that’s surely because the Game “Awards” has become incredibly unbalanced. By prioritising trailers and presenters plugging upcoming games live on stage over the actual awards, the Game “Awards” is in danger of losing its audience. People turned up hoping to see their favourite titles of the year being honoured, not ushered off-stage after thirty seconds to make way for an incoherent ramble from an overhyped developer about his latest (completely unseen) title. Yes, I’m talking about Hideo Kojima. Or to make way for yet another trailer or commercial – practically all of which, this year, were entirely CGI creations that didn’t show any gameplay.
There’s a line to walk here. I think a lot of folks would agree that the likes of the Academy Awards and Golden Globes, which honour the best films of the year, can be pretentious and can feel like an industry congratulating itself and inflating the egos of its stars a little too much. Fewer and fewer people pay attention to the Oscars and Golden Globes as a result; those broadcasts have been losing viewers by the boatload over the past few years.
Nicolas Cage at the 1997 Oscars.
But would more people tune in to the Oscars if half of the awards weren’t presented on-screen, actors and directors were given less time to speak, and the broadcast was overstuffed with adverts and trailers? I mean, more than half of the Game “Awards” three-hour presentation consisted of trailers and adverts. That seems excessive, and there has got to be a way to strike a better balance.
The creators and producers of the Game “Awards” are trying to frame the event as video gaming’s equivalent to the Oscars or the Golden Globes… but if the games industry wants that kind of prestige, the ceremony has to be handled better. Right now, it’s an overblown advertisement – worse, somehow, than the likes of E3, because at least with E3 I knew from the start what I was getting into. The Game “Awards,” by putting its emphasis on the statuettes it plans to hand out, feels deliberately dishonest in its marketing. But at least it has that in common, rather ironically, with many of the video games it advertises.
Look, it’s a new Jurassic Park game!
It feels incredibly disrespectful to developers to invite them to a fancy ceremony under the guise of potentially receiving an award – only to then give them in some cases literally no time whatsoever on the stage to accept that award. If these awards are, as the organisers would like you to believe, the most prestigious in the industry… shouldn’t they want to see people receiving them? Shouldn’t that part of the broadcast be the biggest deal? After all, if receiving a Game Award is so unimportant that it’s relegated to a footnote in its own live presentation, why should anyone give a shit about who the winners or nominees are? If the titular trophies are so meaningless to the Game “Awards” itself… what’s the point?
I don’t like to throw the word “scam” around lightly; I think too many people do that these days, leading to the word’s impact and severity being diminished. But if you entice audiences to turn up to your event under false pretences… we’re definitely getting close to “scam” territory. The Game “Awards” pretends to be an Oscars-style ceremony with fancy suits and statuettes, then it flips the script on viewers and shows them basically two-plus hours of ads and barely ten minutes of actual award-winners. What else can we call such duplicity?
Geoff Keighly, principal organiser and presenter of the Game “Awards.”
Maybe some folks like tuning in to watch the trailers – and that’s okay. I like a good trailer as much as the next person, and it can be fun to look ahead to games that we might hope to enjoy in the months and years to come. Some of these trailers can be well-made, with creative visual effects, great soundtracks, celebrity endorsements, and much more. But that isn’t the point I’m making. If I choose to watch ads and trailers, that’s up to me and I can do that all I want. But if the Game “Awards” pretends to be an awards ceremony just to trick me into watching two hours of ads… well, I don’t appreciate that.
And let’s be honest: that’s exactly what’s happening here. The organisers of the Game “Awards” would ditch the statuettes in a heartbeat and make the entire event nothing but trailers, celebrities, and advertisements if they could get away with it. They don’t give the tiniest of shits about handing out awards or honouring the best and most creative titles of the year – all they care about is selling more and more advertising space and making a metric fuckton of cash, and they’ve done that by diminishing and minimising the actual awards portion of the broadcast so much that it feels like a footnote.
Baldur’s Gate 3 won “game of the year.”
So what’s the solution? I don’t really have one, if I’m honest. Maybe the complaints received about the “Please Wrap It Up” screen will prompt some minor changes, and perhaps for the next year or two you might see award recipients being given sixty or perhaps even ninety seconds to speak. But sooner or later the desperation to grab as much cash as possible will overwhelm the Game “Awards” organisers once again, and the excessive ad-to-award ratio will be back.
The only thing we can do, as consumers in this marketplace, is register our disapproval. Don’t tune in to the next Game “Awards” and let the organisers know that we care as little about their made-up trophies as they seem to. If fewer and fewer people tune in, and make it clear that the reason we aren’t bothering to watch is because of how unbalanced the broadcast is in favour of trailers and ads, maybe the message will get through. As we’ve seen with the collapse of E3, no event in gaming is sacred or safe – they rely on our viewership and patronage to remain relevant.
I won’t bother watching another Game “Awards,” because what’s the point? If the organisers care so little about the actual awards, why should I?
All titles mentioned above are the copyright of their respective developer, studio, and/or publisher. The Game Awards can be streamed now on YouTube. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Because my health has been poor for some time now, I don’t get to the cinema any more. Which is unfortunate – not because I miss the “cinema experience” particularly, though going to see films with friends was an important part of my youth – but because it means I almost always end up seeing films several months after their release! By that point any hype and buzz has died down, and the conversation online has shifted to newer titles.
Nevertheless, as someone who follows the world of cinema and entertainment, I do stay as up-to-date as possible with at least some of the latest titles, and with the 92nd Academy Awards now a mere three days away, I wanted to have a first ever attempt at the longstanding tradition of making predictions!
You know how this works – I’ll make a few guesses at who might win in a few of the biggest categories. And then when we get the actual results on Sunday night (Monday morning here in the UK) you can have a good chuckle at how wrong I was!
My choices are from a combination of films I’ve seen and films I only know by reputation and review. These picks try to stay true to what I think the Academy will choose, but of course my own biases come into play as will my own hopes and preferences.
Let’s get started!
Best Visual Effects: The Lion King
This one might be a controversial choice. Should 2019’s The Lion King count as an animated film or not? I’d absolutely argue that it does – any film made using entirely digital creations is, by definition, a computer-animated film is it not? Notwithstanding that argument, the CGI used in The Lion King was outstanding. The animals and the environments looked photorealistic, such that it was impossible to tell you were looking at something wholly artificial.
This is a new direction for cinema. We’ve seen glimpses at this in other titles – 2016’s Rogue One springs to mind with CGI recreations of actors – but never quite on this level. For me personally, The Lion King was actually the worse for going down the route of extreme realism. In what should have been a fun kids’ film, with a story that is a modern-day Disney classic, the photorealism detracted from the story and the performances. Whether that’s simply because it’s something we’ve never seen before is a good question.
However, for me at least, I felt that the original film had much more character to it. It had more soul, more heart, and a uniquely “Disney” visual style. Whether photorealism will catch on for animation in a big way is thus something I’d question. The style and techniques used could absolutely feature in other titles, though, to supplement physical actors and props. The visual effects seen in The Lion King are unparalleled, and set an incredibly high bar for future titles to reach.
Best Film Editing and/or Best Cinematography: 1917
War epic 1917 had been on my radar for ages as one of the films I’ve been most interested in. It wasn’t until fairly recently, however, when director Sam Mendes was giving interviews regarding the film in the run-up to its release, that I learned how visually different the film was going to be.
1917 is filmed as if it were one continuous take, with the action following two British Army soldiers who are tasked with delivering a message to call off an attack and save lives. The film follows their journey through enemy-held territory to deliver the message in time, and was inspired by Mendes’ grandfather’s service in the First World War.
I think it’s absolutely up for Best Film Editing, but it could also nab Best Cinematography on the back of this incredibly ambitious one-take effect. It’s certainly something which is unique among 2019’s films, and the Academy loves uniqueness! There’s also a personal story – Mendes has talked at length in interviews about his grandfather, and because the First World War affected so many people, many families will have a connection to someone who fought in that conflict.
Best Original Song: (I’m Gonna) Love Me Again from Rocketman – Elton John & Bernie Taupin
Rocketman was very much a poor second to the other great musical biopic of the last couple of years, Bohemian Rhapsody. However, (I’m Gonna) Love Me Again, which was written specifically for the film, has picked up a lot of buzz when it comes to winning Best Original Song – picking up the Critics’ Choice Award and Golden Globe in this category, which are often seen as good indications for the Oscars.
As an interesting aside, the song I’m Standing With You – a competitor in the Best Original Song category – was written by Diane Warren, who penned Faith of the Heart, the theme song to Star Trek: Enterprise. The film it’s taken from, Breakthrough, was directed by Roxann Dawson, who is of course well known for playing B’Elanna on Star Trek: Voyager. As a Star Trek fan I wish them good luck, but it looks like (I’m Gonna) Love Me Again has this one in the bag!
Best Documentary: The Edge of Democracy
If you’ve been reading my articles for a while, you’ll know that I’m a big fan of documentaries as a genre. This year it’s interesting to see that all of the contenders in the Best Documentary category are foreign films, either wholly or partially in a foreign language. Of all of these, The Edge of Democracy is one that I think has a great deal of relevance.
Documenting the crisis in Brazilian politics, with a focus on the fall of Brazil’s last two presidents and the rise of Jair Bolsonaro, there are some parallels for the United States considering that Bolsonaro is called “the tropical Trump”, and his politics are somewhat comparable to the current American president.
Because it’s been on Netflix, and the Academy hasn’t always appreciated that, it might arguably be more of a long-shot, but I think the political themes present in The Edge of Democracy might push a few extra votes its way.
Best Animated Feature Film: Missing Link
There are some great animated films in the running this time. Netflix’s Klaus was a really cute Christmas film, but as mentioned above the streaming service isn’t exactly popular with the Academy. There was also Toy Story 4, the latest in that series and which was well-received, and of course the debate over whether The Lion King counts or not! But the Academy likes something different, and in an era of CGI and computer-aided animation, Missing Link absolutely fits that bill.
A stop-motion film with a great cast that unfortunately didn’t fare well upon release, Missing Link was nevertheless very well received by critics, and is exactly the kind of underappreciated, somewhat different and artistic film that the Oscars often like to honour. If it were to win, it would be the first stop-motion film, and the first film not to be computer-animated, to do so since the 78th Academy Awards in 2006.
Best Adapted Screenplay: Joker
Spoiler alert for the end of the list, but I don’t think Joker is going to be crowned Best Picture. To throw a bone to the superhero/comic book film genre though, it could well be awarded Best Adapted Screenplay instead.
Several high-profile folks in the film industry, like director Martin Scorsese, have gone on record saying that comic book films “aren’t real cinema” – a kind of artistic snobbery looking down on what “common people” like to watch, quite frankly. As a result, many comic-based films which have been hugely popular have ended up missing out on the industry’s top awards. And I don’t expect Joker to break the mould and win the top awards, but as the Academy often does, they may see fit to dish out a “lesser” award like Best Adapted Screenplay, or one of the Supporting Actor/Actress gongs.
Even though I’m not a particularly big fan of comic book films as a whole, there are some great films that have emerged from the genre, and Joker is absolutely among them. The film deserves some kind of recognition at least, and I think this could be one way of acknowledging it.
Best Original Screenplay: Knives Out
This one is going to be controversial in some circles because Rian Johnson is involved. Some Star Wars “fans” have been incredibly hateful toward the director of The Last Jedi; hate which is still present more than two years after the release of the middle part of the Star Wars sequel trilogy. Though I personally think that The Last Jedi was a good film, the trilogy as a whole has been a bit of a mess – you can find my thoughts on the production of the trilogy by clicking or tapping here if you’re interested to read more.
But Rian Johnson’s most recent project has been Knives Out, a murder mystery film featuring an ensemble cast. I don’t want to spoil the plot but the film has been incredibly well received by critics for its writing and sense of humour in particular, as well as the mystery and the “whodunnit” nature of the film. These elements in particular lead me to think it could be in the running for Best Original Screenplay, and from a personal perspective it would be a hilarious middle finger to some of the Star Wars haters, and that would really just be the icing on the cake!
Best Supporting Actor: Tom Hanks for A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood
Tom Hanks in the trailer for A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood.
Growing up in the UK, I wasn’t aware who Fred Rogers (better known as Mister Rogers) was. But over in the United States its not unfair to say he’s a cultural icon – someone who many Americans will be familiar with from their childhoods. His long-running show, Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, was a mainstay of preschool and young childrens’ television for more than three decades, and Tom Hanks’ portrayal of the legendary figure in A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood has received almost universal acclaim.
Hanks is one of contemporary American cinema’s greatest actors, and has performed some incredible roles in his career. He’s already claimed two Academy Awards for Best Actor – for Philadelphia and Forrest Gump. A combination of Hanks’ performance with the nostalgia and wholesomeness of Mister Rogers could absolutely net him his first award in the Best Supporting Actor category this time around.
Best Supporting Actress: Scarlett Johannson for Jojo Rabbit
Scarlett Johannson in the trailer for Jojo Rabbit.
Jojo Rabbit looks like an incredibly funny film – with a very serious subject matter. That can lead to a jarring disconnect for some viewers, and until I’ve seen it for myself it’s hard to judge. However, Scarlett Johannson has picked up incredibly strong support from critics for her role in the film, and could well be in with a shot here.
Interestingly, she could be the first ever actress (or actor of any gender) to win both Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress in the same year if she also wins for her role in Marriage Story. I’m not convinced she will, but the Academy does like to surprise us sometimes, so you can never tell!
Best Actor: Adam Driver for Marriage Story
Adam Driver in the trailer for Marriage Story.
Adam Driver is a phenomenal actor, and the range he shows in Marriage Story is incredible. I mentioned the Star Wars sequels earlier, but they lucked out to get someone of Driver’s calibre to play Kylo Ren.
Marriage Story being on Netflix may count against him here, unfortunately, and there has been a tidal wave of support for Joaquin Phoenix’s role in Joker. But the Academy doesn’t always like to follow trends, and if they decide to stay away from Joker for whatever reason, Adam Driver could still be in the running.
Best Actress: Saoirse Ronan for Little Women
Saoirse Ronan in the trailer for Little Women.
After being nominated twice before, for her roles in Brooklyn and Lady Bird, I think this could finally be Saoirse Ronan’s year. Little Women is perhaps an under-appreciated film from a popular point of view, but her performance has won praise across the board.
After having been nominated and rejected twice, she’s also in a strong position to stake a claim this time around. The Academy can be quite particular about bringing in a younger actor or actress into the club of Best Actor/Actress winners, but as she’s a little older and more experienced now than she was when nominated for her previous work, this could absolutely be her moment.
Best Director: Bong Joon-ho for Parasite
Parasite has been an incredibly well-received film. It would be a rarity for the Best Director award to go to the director of a non-English film, but with all the buzz surrounding Parasite it could very well happen this time.
The film looks at social class, and the division between classes. In that respect it’s not dissimilar to Bong’s other significant film Snowpiercer – which, by the way, is set to be remade as a television series soon.
The Oscars in recent years have been plagued by accusations of racism and racial bias keeping non-white actors and directors away from the biggest awards, and there could well be a swing toward giving one of the top awards to Bong Joon-ho and Parasite as a counter to that argument. Members of the Academy will, at the very least, be aware of the criticism.
But Parasite and Bong’s direction are absolutely worthy of an award in their own right, and after winning the Palme d’Or at Cannes, as well as many other awards, it could be a great night for the director at the Oscars too.
Best Picture: 1917
This award could absolutely go to Parasite as well, or the Academy could surprise me and give it to Joker. But as mentioned above, 1917 is a unique and visually distinctive film, one which I think has the potential to become a classic of the drama and war genres that people will be coming back to for decades.
Sam Mendes won for American Beauty twenty years ago, but hasn’t featured prominently at the Oscars since. This could definitely be his second win, though, because the Academy likes nothing better than a unique film with a dramatic premise.
There’s also that personal side, the story from the director’s grandfather, which paints a picture of 1917 as an homage to the First World War generation but with a distinctly personal take. In terms of being something altogether different from the other titles in contention, 1917′s appeal is cemented.
So that’s it. My predictions or picks for the 2020 Academy Awards. We’ll have to wait a few days to see if I’m right!
All films mentioned above are the copyright of their respective studio and/or distributor. The 92nd Academy Awards ceremony takes place on Sunday the 9th of February at 5pm local time – 1am on the 10th of February in the UK. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.
Trekking with Dennis 