Written by: Kevin Berge
If I was really trying to get people to click on this article, I should have called it "Black Panther Deserves Best Picture at the Academy Awards 2019". (Image Courtesy of: npr.com)
The greatest trick the film industry ever pulled was convincing the world that genres define quality, and now the industry is struggling to overcome its mistake. The limit of labels has come to bare with no one seemingly willing to accept that there is more to individual movies than what genre label that is slapped onto them.
I know I am complicit in this tragedy. When asked what type of movies I like, I don't answer good films or even with examples of my favorites. I just say fantasy and science fiction because it's easier. Many of my favorites slip into one of those two labels, but that doesn't mean I will just go see anything with either label.
Whether a movie is called drama or comedy or horror or romance, none of the labels means anything for the quality. Unfortunately, the industry has become so insulated that it feels like everything always comes down to what genre it sits in rather than how much it is worth watching.
I know I am complicit in this tragedy. When asked what type of movies I like, I don't answer good films or even with examples of my favorites. I just say fantasy and science fiction because it's easier. Many of my favorites slip into one of those two labels, but that doesn't mean I will just go see anything with either label.
Whether a movie is called drama or comedy or horror or romance, none of the labels means anything for the quality. Unfortunately, the industry has become so insulated that it feels like everything always comes down to what genre it sits in rather than how much it is worth watching.
The biggest movie not named Black Panther in theaters right now is Ready Player One, an 80s nostalgia trip future science fiction experience. Director of the film, the legendary Steven Spielberg, introduced his latest creation at its premiere at South by Southwest as a movie, not a film.
While Spielberg's views on cinema are not all objective truths (see: his weird take on Netflix movies), his point on film vs. movie is a far more genuine discussion than fantasy vs. drama. Spielberg has built his whole career around shifting from making "movies" and making "films".
In 1993, Spielberg basically hit the apex of that balance in releasing both the landmark blockbuster Jurassic Park and Academy Award-winning Schindler's List. Even Spielberg's catalogue can blur the lines at times though. How do you classify Close Encounters of a Third Kind or Jaws? They're fun, but they also have some deep thematic messages.
For fans, it should just be a matter of if the film is fun and if it is important. Some of the greatest science fiction movies of all time are just as important as they are fun, and that's not just because they pushed the genre forward with stronger special effects. They added something more to the conversation about film and life.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with a movie just being made to be fun. Some of my favorite movies of all time are pure fun and don't reach far with their themes. The problem is when people assume a movie cannot be more, cannot have greater importance, because it lives in a certain genre.
While Spielberg's views on cinema are not all objective truths (see: his weird take on Netflix movies), his point on film vs. movie is a far more genuine discussion than fantasy vs. drama. Spielberg has built his whole career around shifting from making "movies" and making "films".
In 1993, Spielberg basically hit the apex of that balance in releasing both the landmark blockbuster Jurassic Park and Academy Award-winning Schindler's List. Even Spielberg's catalogue can blur the lines at times though. How do you classify Close Encounters of a Third Kind or Jaws? They're fun, but they also have some deep thematic messages.
For fans, it should just be a matter of if the film is fun and if it is important. Some of the greatest science fiction movies of all time are just as important as they are fun, and that's not just because they pushed the genre forward with stronger special effects. They added something more to the conversation about film and life.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with a movie just being made to be fun. Some of my favorite movies of all time are pure fun and don't reach far with their themes. The problem is when people assume a movie cannot be more, cannot have greater importance, because it lives in a certain genre.
Oh no, here I go diving back into The Last Jedi. This can only go well I'm sure. (Image Courtesy of: youtube.com)
What really sparked this discussion for me was two fold: the constant debate over what constitutes an Oscar film and, more directly, getting far too bogged down in discussion about The Last Jedi. I wouldn't venture to say The Last Jedi deserved a Best Picture nomination (though if Avatar can get one...).
My point instead is that The Last Jedi never had a chance no matter its quality despite introducing the Star Wars universe to techniques more often reserved for "films". The franchise has its themes and focus points, but the eighth film in all its imperfections was the first to feel thematically consistent. I think that term is often what defines something as a film rather than just a movie.
The Empire Strikes Back is a better (one of the absolute best) movie, but it is most certainly a movie. George Lucas wasn't looking to tell a complex tale in the original trilogy. It was just myths brought to life, the classic heroes quest of the farm boy overcoming challenges and rising up against the mighty evil.
Everything in The Last Jedi is focused on one of two themes: failure and fallacy. Everyone in this story is trying to live up to a false ideal or destroy it. Both sides fail, and they have to accept that because the fallacy of these ideals is never a complete certainty. There's importance to idealism even if it cannot be absolute.
That's the type of storytelling Lucas would never try to touch because he was not making films. He was making movies. The backlash to The Last Jedi (beyond the more debatable flaws) honestly feels tied to fans not wanting to accept that Star Wars can be a film rather than just a silly fantasy space opera.
More often than not, when you hear science fiction or fantasy movie, you think about the special effects, the action, and the adventure. However, that is not always what defines these genres. That is what people come to expect of these genres just as they expect deep cut moments and crying in dramas.
No film is entirely defined its genre. A movie often is because it is built to satisfy those going in expecting to be purely entertained, and there's nothing wrong with that. However, a film is built around a unique vision rather than the strong foundation and can truly go anywhere.
Earlier on in this editorial, I mentioned Jurassic Park as being a "movie", but I do actually think it skirts the lines. It is action-packed and often intense certainly, but it also has a running consistent theme. Spielberg knew that the essence of the material he was adapting was man vs. nature and the dangers of attempting to step beyond our bounds, to play god.
My point instead is that The Last Jedi never had a chance no matter its quality despite introducing the Star Wars universe to techniques more often reserved for "films". The franchise has its themes and focus points, but the eighth film in all its imperfections was the first to feel thematically consistent. I think that term is often what defines something as a film rather than just a movie.
The Empire Strikes Back is a better (one of the absolute best) movie, but it is most certainly a movie. George Lucas wasn't looking to tell a complex tale in the original trilogy. It was just myths brought to life, the classic heroes quest of the farm boy overcoming challenges and rising up against the mighty evil.
Everything in The Last Jedi is focused on one of two themes: failure and fallacy. Everyone in this story is trying to live up to a false ideal or destroy it. Both sides fail, and they have to accept that because the fallacy of these ideals is never a complete certainty. There's importance to idealism even if it cannot be absolute.
That's the type of storytelling Lucas would never try to touch because he was not making films. He was making movies. The backlash to The Last Jedi (beyond the more debatable flaws) honestly feels tied to fans not wanting to accept that Star Wars can be a film rather than just a silly fantasy space opera.
More often than not, when you hear science fiction or fantasy movie, you think about the special effects, the action, and the adventure. However, that is not always what defines these genres. That is what people come to expect of these genres just as they expect deep cut moments and crying in dramas.
No film is entirely defined its genre. A movie often is because it is built to satisfy those going in expecting to be purely entertained, and there's nothing wrong with that. However, a film is built around a unique vision rather than the strong foundation and can truly go anywhere.
Earlier on in this editorial, I mentioned Jurassic Park as being a "movie", but I do actually think it skirts the lines. It is action-packed and often intense certainly, but it also has a running consistent theme. Spielberg knew that the essence of the material he was adapting was man vs. nature and the dangers of attempting to step beyond our bounds, to play god.
Time to talk more Lord of the Rings because I always want to talk more LOTR. (Image Courtesy of: syfy.com)
While I do think the Academy Awards are evolving with the lowest of lethargic precision, the stigma against fantastical genres is still too widespread. The Oscars may not matter as much as they once did, but they still are seen as a measuring stick for cinema quality.
Black Panther has become an unmitigated blockbuster success and cultural phenomenon, and that deserves to be celebrated at an award show like the Oscars. However, it is being held back by a label "comic book movie" that will likely doom it to a couple visual effect nominations.
It still absolutely boggles my mind that The Dark Knight could not make it on the Best Picture ballot over The Reader. Christopher Nolan's best film stands right next to the previous two winners, The Departed and No Country for Old Men, except it stars a superhero.
This year, Guillermo Del Toro's science fiction film The Shape of Water won Best Picture, and it was the first sci-fi film to ever take that honor at the 90th Academy Awards. The film is a solid argument that sci-fi should not be a restriction on quality as it is basically a classic cinema love story just with a fishman attached.
However, it is a safe first choice that could be standing alone for a long time. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King still stands as the only fantasy film to do it, now 15 years later, though, to be fair, fantasy movies have not been hitting a high bar since.
Superhero films are hitting some of the highest bars they have ever hit, becoming films as often as they stay movies. 2017 has Logan and Wonder Woman, and 2018 has at least Black Panther. However, the genre which is most often criticizing for staying in too narrow a lane has always been branching out.
The best comic book stories brought to the big screen are all borrowing from genres as divergent as westerns and straight comedies. The genre will continue to thrive as long as the creators bringing the superhero films to the screen outshine those who try to simply cash in with generic action.
Where these labels are at their worst is simply the limiting critical scope. Not all films are defined by the framework of a single genre. They are multi-faceted and should be celebrated as such. As long as these genre labels pervade society though, we may continue to only look at everything as the next of its selected single genre.
Black Panther has become an unmitigated blockbuster success and cultural phenomenon, and that deserves to be celebrated at an award show like the Oscars. However, it is being held back by a label "comic book movie" that will likely doom it to a couple visual effect nominations.
It still absolutely boggles my mind that The Dark Knight could not make it on the Best Picture ballot over The Reader. Christopher Nolan's best film stands right next to the previous two winners, The Departed and No Country for Old Men, except it stars a superhero.
This year, Guillermo Del Toro's science fiction film The Shape of Water won Best Picture, and it was the first sci-fi film to ever take that honor at the 90th Academy Awards. The film is a solid argument that sci-fi should not be a restriction on quality as it is basically a classic cinema love story just with a fishman attached.
However, it is a safe first choice that could be standing alone for a long time. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King still stands as the only fantasy film to do it, now 15 years later, though, to be fair, fantasy movies have not been hitting a high bar since.
Superhero films are hitting some of the highest bars they have ever hit, becoming films as often as they stay movies. 2017 has Logan and Wonder Woman, and 2018 has at least Black Panther. However, the genre which is most often criticizing for staying in too narrow a lane has always been branching out.
The best comic book stories brought to the big screen are all borrowing from genres as divergent as westerns and straight comedies. The genre will continue to thrive as long as the creators bringing the superhero films to the screen outshine those who try to simply cash in with generic action.
Where these labels are at their worst is simply the limiting critical scope. Not all films are defined by the framework of a single genre. They are multi-faceted and should be celebrated as such. As long as these genre labels pervade society though, we may continue to only look at everything as the next of its selected single genre.
