Pop Culture

Attack of the Gongs

The Australian, 4 July 2008

It wasn’t a typical awards night. The serial award-winner No Country for Old Men received only one award (the latest for actor Javier Bardem), while the four awards for best film went to the likes of Enchanted and Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. Meanwhile, Ratatouille and Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End each won two awards, There will be Blood won nothing, and Juno wasn’t even nominated. It wasn’t televised free-to-air like the Oscars, but considering the box-office of the winning films, compared with any of this year’s Oscar frontrunners, perhaps it should have been.

            The Saturn Awards celebrate science fiction, fantasy, horror and, in more recent years, action movies – genres that are usually scorned by those who follow the more exalted film awards like the Oscars and the Baftas. In 80 years of Oscar ceremonies, only one horror film (The Silence of the Lambs) has won the best film trophy – or two if you count No Country for Old Men, the thinking person’s splatter film. No fantasy film won until 2004 (The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King), and no science fiction film has yet won.

            The Saturn Awards give them their due. They might not have the stature of the Oscars, but scores of Hollywood elite, from Vincent Price to Steven Spielberg, have come to the awards night – one of the few occasions where they can win awards for their favourite genres, and perhaps the only one in which Brandon Routh can be named best actor.

            For fans of other neglected genres, never fear; there is probably an awards night for you. Westerns are not as popular as they used to be, but fans of cowboy films can still see them recognised in the Western Heritage Awards.  The Nickelodeon Kids' Choice Awards claims to have votes from almost 90 million children, allowing Alvin and the Chipmunks to take out the major prize. There is even the Eroticline Award, for perhaps the only film genre that is more derided than science fiction. Good news for anyone who thinks that Robinson Crusoe on Sin Island wasn’t given its due by by the Oscars.

            The Saturn or Kids’ Choice Awards might be a nice idea, but they were also inevitable in the most over-awarded business in the world. In an industry known for its egos, the term “award-winning actor” is slightly less impressive than it was in 1929. “It's awfully tough to fit the words ‘Cameron Diaz’ and ‘actress’ into the same sentence,” wrote aForbes magazine scribe in 2005. Yet Diaz has won an impressive number trophies over the past decade: two ALMA Awards and an Imagen Foundation Award (for her positive portrayals of Hispanics), four audience-voted Blockbuster Entertainment Awards, a People’s Choice Award, an American Comedy Award, two MTV Movie Awards (including “best dance sequence”), and perhaps surprisingly, various critics’ awards. Oh, and a Teen Choice Award for “most disgusting scene”. (Yes, even notorious “hair gel” incidents can win awards.) How many doctors, philanthropists or scholars could boast such a crowded mantelpiece? And we’re talking Cameron Diaz! Let’s not get started on Cate Blanchett.

            Many awards were devised as alternatives to the Oscars, which have long been considered (often but not always fairly) as overly safe and conservative. But even if you are ignored by Hollywood, you can still win countless film festival awards. Who needs an Oscar when you win a Golden Bear in Berlin, a Golden Alexander in Thessaloniki, or a Golden Shell in San Sebastian?

            Occasionally, someone is so incredible that they win almost everything. (Bardem won 19 awards for No Country for Old Men.) More frequently, however, this plethora of awards is spread out among the gamut of movies and actors. These actors, among the more recognisable people on the planet, can now proudly claim the “recognition” of their peers, their critics, or at least, their public.

            Australia has no shortage of awards. The 24 Australian features made last year can share numerous AFI Awards, IF Awards, Film Critics Circle Awards and other trophies, but local film awards had an unspectacular start. The Commonwealth Government held its first film competition in 1930. As the winners were decided using a very peculiar points system, only one prize was awarded: third place. Only three Australian films were made that year, so it was a dubious honour. For the record, the winner was Fellers, an obscure World War I buddy movie. (As one of the other films was The Cheaters, now regarded by film historians as an exceptional crime drama, perhaps the judges got it wrong even then.)

            Most awards are not so humble. Film awards lend glamour to and boost egos in one of the world’s most glamorous, ego-boosting businesses. The glamour element is no less important than the excellence (which explains why the pre-Oscars red-carpet fashion parade rates higher than the presentations themselves). Glamour attracts the media, allowing awards to serve their main purpose: as a promotional stunt. Warren Beatty probably didn’t need another trophy when the American Film Institute gave him a life achievement award last month, but (like the previous 35 honorees), he gave the Institute some handy publicity.

            It pays to put it into perspective. If you win an MTV Award, don’t forget that you were chosen by MTV viewers, who have thrice given awards to Keanu Reeves. Even if you win the prestigious Palm d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival, remember that you were chosen by a small team of judges – and you didn’t have much competition.

            Perhaps, for all its faults, the Oscars still deserve the title of the best and fairest award. Though the voting bloc is skewed towards older white males, and they are bombarded with more multi-million-dollar campaigns than the U.S. Democratic primaries, at least they vote in their thousands, and they all know a little about movies.

            Of course, as many critics and film buffs will happily tell you, they still usually get it wrong.