This week, Neil Calloway questions whether the BAFTAs promote British films as much as they should…
Variety magazine called the BAFTAs one of the most significant bellwethers for the Oscars, which is high praise indeed, but it makes me wonder if BAFTA is deliberately setting itself up to be a bellwether for the Oscars, so that it is seen as having some value, because to a fan of British films the nominations are eyebrow raising to say the least.
Since the ceremony was moved to take place before the Oscars in 2001, the BAFTAs have attempted to become part of the US awards season, rather than a hangover that awards Brits who lost out to Americans at the Academy Awards, which is what it used to be. To do this it has increasingly celebrated US films over UK ones, to the extent that it will even nominate films that have not been seen by UK audiences.
This year the nominations were announced on 8th January, a month after voting opened. The Big Short, The Revenant and Spotlight – three of the five best film nominees – had yet to be released in the UK at that point.
Of the five best picture nominations (along with the above, the other two are Carol and Bridge of Spies), only Bridge of Spies is remotely British in any way – it was written by Matt Charman and one of the main characters is British (though he’s a Soviet spy in the US). Yes, there is a dedicated Best British Film category, but that doesn’t mean the main category can’t have any British films. I would argue that BAFTA have put the Oscar baiting films in the main category purely because they want to be seen as relevant in Hollywood.
Even the Best British Film nominees this year have some issues. Of the six films nominated, one is directed by an Irishman, is based on a novel by an Irishman and named after an area of New York (Brooklyn) and one is called The Danish Girl (yes, it’s directed by and stars a Brit, but it’s hardly a British story). The Lobster is an international co-production written and directed by a guy from Greece. I suppose we should just be glad that they didn’t nominate The Force Awakens, which was (mostly) shot here at least.
There’s nothing wrong with an award ceremony nominating films that aren’t British, and some years BAFTA would be scrapping the bottom of a very poor quality barrel if it limited itself to films that were British, as its nearest equivalent in the music industry, the Brit Awards has to in lean years, and the British music scene is in far ruder health than its film industry, but if they do that, they need to decamp to Hollywood and remove prizes that are exclusively for British films.
The fact is, British cinema, with its Ken Loachs, Mike Leighs and Ben Wheatleys isn’t very glamorous, and Hollywood stars won’t come across the Atlantic for an award ceremony if they’re just going to lose out to Timothy Spall. To be relevant, and to be noticed in the US, Hollywood actors have to be nominated and they have to have a chance of winning. Inviting them to a ceremony after the Oscars where they aren’t going to win won’t work. The BAFTAs wants to be thought of as the Golden Globes, but also as a celebration of British film; they can be either, but they can’t be both.
Still, the BAFTAs get it right sometimes – in my opinion Boyhood was the best film of last year and that won best film, but this year’s absence of Mad Max: Fury Road from all but the technical nominations suggests they don’t get everything correct. Still, that’s what award ceremonies are; the arguments about films you have in the pub with a bit of added glamour, and I’ll argue forever that the BAFTAs should place more emphasis on British films.
Neil Calloway is a pub quiz extraordinaire and Top Gun obsessive. Check back here every Sunday for future instalments.
https://youtu.be/2bSRrPDqhqo?list=PL18yMRIfoszEaHYNDTy5C-cH9Oa2gN5ng
