A Statement About Why the BAFTAs are Bad

I know I should be talking about how poorly I did on my Oscar picks, but a) I don't really want to talk about it and b) I would prefer to talk about it after I get back to the States and watch the tape that my lovely Mommy made for me.

So for right now, I am going to talk about how much the BAFTAs are terrible.

I had the (dis)pleasure of watching them for real on television, presented by the BBC live from Covent Garden on the 10th of February. And it was appalling. All of the obvious people won (including Marion Cotillard, leading certain Gingers to announce that the BAFTAs are an indicator of the Oscars... not so, but more on that later). I should have known something was awry when people started pointing out that Atonement was the only British film nominated, but I didn't. And when it won Best Picture, I had the sinking feeling that that was the point I was being led to all evening.

Let's be perfectly clear: the Brits like to pretend that the BAFTAs are the British 'response' to the Oscars. It's not quite working out that way-- even the British press covers the Oscars more than the BAFTAs. So what it becomes is a night of self-congratulation for British and European film that seems completely unnecessary. Nevermind that more non-Americans have won Oscars in acting catagories in the last 8 years (and not a single American won this year), it all seems a bit bitter to announce Atonement the best film of the year just moments after stating that it's the only British film on the ballot.

Now, as to why the BAFTAs are not a good indicator of the Oscars: because they don't want to be. Sometimes there is overlap, as there should be if a performance is particularly spectacular, but Marion Cotillard's BAFTA-followed-by-Oscar does not a predictor make. If anything, it highlights her Oscar upset even more.

That is all.