Is 12 Years a Slave Too Good For The Oscars?

Despite having seen it twice, and having 3 months to mediate on the film between viewings, it's still hard to find the exact words to describe 12 Years a Slave. Incredible? Horrible? Controversial? A sell-out? One thing that can be agreed on by most parties is that it's exactly the sort of film that deserves to win ALL THE OSCARS. But after a disappointing result at Sunday's Golden Globes, (where it only received one award out of the seven that it was nominated for) I'm beginning to think that maybe it won't do too well when March rolls around.

The cast and crew celebrate winning Best Drama Film at a ceremony where they should've won everything.

Let's start with the obvious - The Academy do have an annoying habit of effing up, especially when it comes to the Best Picture award. A film by Ben Affleck won last year. Rocky won instead of Taxi Driver, Forest Gump won instead of Pulp Fiction. How Green Was My Valley won instead of Citizen Kane. And let's not forget the oddest travesty of all - way back in 2005, Crash won in the place of Ang Lee's extraordinary Brokeback Mountain. What do all four of the films that were cruelly ignored have in common? They're all timeless classics, made by esteemed directors. The winning films are still famous of course, but I'm not sure anyone would ever deign to describe any of them as the "best film ever".

Even Jack Nicholson, who was giving out the award, was not expecting Crash to win.

Secondly, with the exception of actors like Daniel Day-Lewis and Meryl Streep, who give consistently good performances regardless of the quality of their films, I feel like The Academy never really give Best Actor or Actress to quite the right people. Although, that's mainly because most of the time they haven't even nominated the actors that gave the best performances of the year - Sam Rockwell in 2009 and Denis Levant in 2012, come on guys - The Oscars also have a tendency to go for the obviously. It seems very unlikely that Chiwetel Ejiofor will miss out on a Best Actor nomination - ditto Michael Fassbender and Lupita Nyong'o for Supporting Actor/Actress - but will they really be rewarded? After all three missed out on winning at the Golden Globes, it seems as though their chances are slipping somewhat.

We're all aware that The Academy love true stories, but that also means that Matthew McConaughey, Jared Leto or (groan) Jennifer Lawrence could easily overshadow them. Plus, there's something important that sets American Hustle and The Wolf of Wall Street apart from 12 Years - they're "fun"! Were I voting, this would put me off, but we should all be aware that sometimes fun films with a "dark" side (e.g. Chicago, The Artist and Silver Linings Playbook) win big awards. Dallas Buyer's Club is pretty much the opposite of fun, but it still has some optimism running through it. 12 Years a Slave of course does not. The only time I felt optimistic whilst watching it is when Michael Fassbender showed up. Then I realised he was an evil psychopath and the horror continued on.

The cast of the "fun" American Hustle doing their thang.

There's another angle to look at all of this though, one that sounds less like a miserable rant against the tyranny of the Oscars and more like praise of the film. Maybe that film doesn't need Oscars. I'm not saying that statues wouldn't be the perfect recognition of Ejiofor, Fassbender and Nyong'o's incredible performances, Mcqueen's direction, Zimmer's score, Ridley's script and the (hopefully) many others that get nominated, because it would of course. It would also suggest some radical change within the film industry, as Mcqueen and Ejiofor would be the first black britons to win Best Director and Actor. It would also show the Academy genuinely giving awards to the right people for once, instead of messing it up. But what will happen if the film doesn't pick up any awards? Will it just disappear from existence in a ball of flames, never to be thought of again? No. The opposite in fact. Can you imagine how many angry articles similar to this will be published if the film gets snubbed? How many debates about race in Hollywood will start? There will be even more furore over the incompetence and unfairness of awards than ever. 12 Years has been getting us to look at our past with different eyes, so perhaps it being snubbed will get us to reexamine our present and future with regards to the film industry.

And really, shouldn't the film itself be the perfect reward for the cast and crew? It is a perfect piece of cinema as it stands, and the addition of the words "Oscar Winner" to its poster will do nothing to alter this for good or bad. Surely being able to watch themselves transform into these characters should be enough for the cast? And surely watching his vision completed on the big screen should be enough for McQueen? If the worst comes to the worst when the nominations are announced tomorrow, or on the big day, I think that this will be enough for me. We all know that 12 Years a Slave is a good film. Now we'll have to see if the Oscars are good enough to reward it. 

Grace Barber-Plentie