I personally think all awards shows in the arts are self- congratulatory bunk. I again contend that good is good, and crap is crap - no matter the genre or era. Which doesn't preclude the idea that one fan's gem is another's dross. P can't abide Metallica, and says they are crap. I'm not a big fan, but I recognize the talent behind the stirring "Enter Sandman" and various other tracks by the band. If you perceive the genre itself as crap, you're probably not gonna discern the good-of-kind. That said, many of the various catagories in the awards shows do indeed pit apples against oranges, Tom. I'd prefer we measure success through the twin (and often conflicting) gauges of fan appeal (box office, sales, downloads, ratings, etc.) and critical praise (kudos from acknowledged experts). But the various branches of the entertainment industry want to throw these tedious wank-fests/parties in the guise of recognizing acheivement. It should be about the art, not about celebrities fawning all over one another, and certainly not about seemingly rigged "competitive" accolades.
On Feb 23, 6:09 pm, PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Tom Wolper <[email protected]> wrote: > > Emmys are safe choices because their voters, the people who make > > television, don't have time to watch a lot of television and they will > > vote by reputation. > > Oscars aren't always safe choices. There are always small independent > > films nominated and when they win there's criticism. If by safe > > choices we mean keeping out really obscure films, there have to be > > some eligibility requirements, especially as the large studios have > > been the force behind the awards. (SNIP) > > > And over time cultural rebels either become part of the mainstream > > culture or they flame out. It's breathtaking to see a cultural rebel > > emerge and speak truth to power. But who can keep up the quality of > > the work consistently over decades and still remain a rebel idol? I'm > > thinking of somebody like Lou Reed and I think Lou's core audience is > > as old as he is. > > If by "safe" we mean commercial success and not critical favorite than I > agree with you - last year the Hurt Locker was not a "safe" pick in that > sense. But if by safe we mean "middlebrow" - a film made to be slightly > challenging entertainment but not serious art, intended to make its audience > feel educated and "classy" without actually putting in the hard work > necessary for either, and that is ultimately manipulative and overly > sentimental rather than honest, then the Oscars are almost the definition of > middlebrow. Ghandi, Chariots of Fire, The King's Speech are all > prototypical. > > I enjoy a lot of middlebrow fare, but we can't confuse it with art. OTOH, > real artists can't bitch that their work is not recognized by the > constituters of middlebrow entertainment.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
