the relevancy of award season

I went to Variety's 10 Actors to Watch event last Friday, and while I assumed it was merely because I'm old that I didn't recognize any one of the new talent emerging, the event is timed to kick off an annual awards season that begs for relevancy.

Anne Thompson recently went off about the Hollywood Film Festival's Awards (http://blogs.indiewire.com/thompsononhollywood/2009/10/20/industry_gives_hollywood_film_festival_free_pass/ ) and her disdain for Carlos de Abreu's rather transparent use of the awards to bolster his somewhat sub-par film festival as well as his own celebrity standing. But why pick on Carlos? She outlines his background profile as if from that bio would emerge proof of some nefarious Hollywood collusion.

HFF is simply the beginning of a long line of "awards" all timed perfectly to maximize press attention and photo opportunities just before the January voting by the Academy for the Oscars. The awards, and awardees, are all pawns of the master planning and manipulation by publicists, managers, and the like, to get maximum exposure at just the right time so that their clients are in the forefront of Academy members minds at the time of voting.

So, for example, if I had't heard of any one of Variety's 10 actors to watch prior to Friday, I now will hear of them constently. I will know them, and others likely to be in the running for bigger awards, quite well by the time awards season is over.

The collusion, if there is any, comes from the needs of a press who are fighting for celebrity coverage and events (such as the Hollywood Film Festival) who are fighting for press coverage. The negotiations regarding awardees begins months before these events, and award confirmation always hinges on the guarantee of attendance by the talent (even Varitey changed their event schedule to accommodate actor attendance).

So, if you want to rant and rave about a particular awards event as being irrelevant I think you need to rant and rave about the entire awards season being irrelevant.

Since we all know, what with the monetization of awards and the ever-present thirst by the public for all things celebrity, that the big awards shows are unlikely to disappear, we should also know that as day follows night, smaller events will try to grab some of that spotlight.

Rather than being disingenous about the awards season, I'd prefer to see the press do some critical analysis of the awardees instead. Forget about railing against the inevitable, and instead educated your audience about what they are consuming. Was there a performance by any of the Variety 10 worth awarding? If so, tell me. Compare and contrast for me. For god's sake, do some work as a journalist or as a critical film essayist.

Don't waste my time telling me someone in Hollywood is undeservedly in the spotlight. Tell me something I don't know.