70 years ago, a little film called Citizen Kane opened in the United States. The film was a thinly veiled story recounting the life of newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst. Hearst was the face of mass media at the time, one of the most important figures of the era dictating how information was often spread in that era. Orson Welles played his character, named Charles Foster Kane in the film, as a young man driven to be as successful as he can be at the cost of everyone around him to the point where his greed became his ultimate downfall. Was it appreciated at its time? Of course it was! Critics went crazy enough for it, and it won as many critics awards as there were at the time — the New York Film Critics Circle Awards and the National Board of Review. The film went up for 9 Oscars in a 10 Best Picture year including Picture, Director, Actor, Screenplay, Cinematography, Editing, Sound and Score. But what ended up winning? Why, the heartfelt and more traditional How Green Was My Valley, of course. The film received 10 nominations and virtually swept that year at the Oscars thanks to its mega producer Darryl F. Zanuck. Citizen Kane was left with just one consolation prize in the form of an Oscar for Best Screenplay.
Are the comparisons I'm trying to make ever so clear holding up every step of the way? Well, of course not. The King's Speech will probably win a lot more than How Green Was My Valley's dinky five Oscars. But, in essence, with everyone grappling for examples to look for to find precedent in The King's Speech sudden shattering of The Social Network's buzz I think we need to look no further than the film that it's been controversially compared to in the first place The comparisons, often credited to Peter Travers, were made largely on pretty agreeable and thematic grounds, with The Social Network recounting a similarly dehumanizing rise to power with the social networking service that has shaped the way that this generation communicates. Arguable, and it has been argued, but okay. I think, in general, it holds. Most of the controversy had to do with the legacy of the initial film, but so far it seems to be following the same, doomed (in terms of Oscar success), path.
Ever since the Academy's return to a 10 film Best Picture lineup last year, it's been smartest to search for precedents in the early years of Academy voting which followed a similar preferential ballot to see some trends in voting. Luckily, Citizen Kane was within this time frame and is the film we have to work with as being most often compared to The Social Network. Barring a few obvious circumstantial differences — Hearst himself actively working his influence against the film, a more seasoned director at the helm of How Green Was My Valley, the French New Wave theorists bringing rise to the claim of Citizen Kane as the golden standard for film — I think Citizen Kane today would largely follow the same path. There are truly an absurd number of critics organizations now out there handing out awards, and for the first time I can think of since so many have popped up out of every pocket of the country, one can count on their hands the number of awards The Social Network did not win. The awards it did win do include the NBR and the NYFCC. Critics are pretty damn sure that this is the best movie of the year. But, when you get right down to it, those in the industry respond quicker and easier to a film with so-called "heart." How Green Was My Valley and The King's Speech simply conform better to the genre elements that are proven formulas for Oscar success (see Richard Corliss' excellent piece on The King's Speech from last year's Toronto Film Festival). The industry awards would have broken down the exact same way.
Unless The King's Speech magically finds itself in competition with The Social Network for the WGA, the writers are (shockingly) the only guild that will have reward The Social Network with some substantial prize. Otherwise, the industry just adores The King's Speech. As I said before, if Tom Hooper won that DGA then the race was over. Especially now that it also won the SAG prize that was expected to go to The Fighter, you can call it signed, sealed and delivered. It's a straight up lock, ladies and gentlemen. Whether or not The Social Network will be remembered in the future in quite the same terms of fondness that Citizen Kane currently is remains to be seen; I, myself, was always unsure of the comparison and found it a bit jumping the gun. But no one seems to even be having the same conversation concerning The King's Speech, which is simply filled with too much sameness to properly stand out from this year's crop of visionary work years from now. But, it is slated to sweep, including in many tech categories where it's up against The Social Network while the undeniably fresher Social Network seems destined to leave with just a screenplay prize for Aaron Sorkin and an outside shot at one or two additional tech prizes.
Looking as I am at the current state of the awards race, I must concede that The Social Network really is looking like a Citizen Kane right about now.
No comments:
Post a Comment