Why the Best Picture Oscar Doesn't Matter This Year... But the Animated Does

I know everyone's laser-focused on the Best Picture race, but honestly I think the stakes are significantly higher in the Animated category this year. I've seen seven of the ten Best Picture nominees, and - with the exception of Don't Look Up - I wouldn't be particularly surprised to see any of them win. And even if Don't Look Up picks up the trophy, I'll mostly just find the whole situation funny (in contrast to Don't Look Up, which I did not find funny in the least).

When all's said and done, I don't think any of the Best Picture Nominees I've seen are significantly better than the majority of the other nominees. And while I reserve to change my mind after watching the remaining 30%, I'd be surprised if that were the case (I've seen the ones that are commonly shortlisted as the best of the bunch). This year's crop is pretty uniformly good (again, with that one exception): really good picks, but nothing I'd consider the absolute best, hands down.

Likewise, four of the five animated movies up for that category are all fantastic (the odd one out being Raya and the Last Dragon, which is still fine). I have an opinion on which is best, but it's not a particularly strong opinion.

But I don't think these awards should only be about which is the "best" movie. Even setting aside the fact it's a hilariously subjective concept, I think that framework ignores some crucial aspects as to which elements should be rewarded and why.

First, I think we need to consider whether a movie innovates and changes its category. For what it's worth, I don't believe any of the Best Picture nominees I've seen really check this box (though I can imagine a case being made for Drive My Car). But at the end of the day, the Best Picture nominees are pretty straightforward in their approach. They're entries in their respective genres that do those genres proud, not entirely new creations that change how we look at those genres.

To put it another way, I don't think the 2032 Oscar nominees are going to be appreciably different because these ten movies were made. Tell me that's not the case for Jaws, Star Wars, Black Panther, or Get Out (to name a few past nominees that didn't win but maybe should have).

I want to be clear this isn't something I expect all nominees or winners to accomplish, but I do think it's valuable to take it into consideration when picking. If all your movies are equally "good" but one transforms the medium, isn't that the "best?"

Alternatively, I think there's value in asking whether a movie is important. Does a piece of art change the conversation about its topic outside of its medium? Does it have the power to influence the world, even a little?

This isn't just a matter of having a good theme; you need to convey that theme in an effective manner. The issues Don't Look Up is discussing are of incredible significance, but can you imagine it changing any minds? 

Granted, a lot of movies are at least somewhat important. I could make a case for several of this year's Best Picture nominees (West Side Story in particular) offering value beyond entertainment, but I don't think any of them are in the same league as Get Out, Promising Young Woman, or Parasite (hey, one of those actually did win).

Ultimately, none of this year's nine worthwhile Best Picture nominees has really sparked discussions beyond the limits of the films themselves or forced the medium to evolve. They're all just really well-made movies. And, again, that's not a flaw. There's no reason movies can't just be really good versions of what they are, and I think it's fine to hand the award to whichever one everyone decides is the best.

But when a movie is important or has the ability to influence its genre or medium... isn't it extremely valuable to reward that or at least consider it? And while I don't think that's the case with the Best Picture nominees, I absolutely think there are multiple animated nominees that excel in one or both of those categories.

With the possible exception of Luca, I actually think all of them are at least somewhat important, by virtue of offering representation for kids who haven't been able to see themselves in movies. The quality of that representation varies - Raya's portrayal of Southeast Asian cultures was fairly surface level - but none of them were entirely without merit. Even Luca is kind of a complex picture, for reasons I'll get to in a moment.

But first, I want to talk a little about Flee, because while I think all of these are sort of important, Flee is monumentally so. It's also the only one of the nominees that isn't a kid's movie, which makes that all the more striking. It's easy to make a kid's movie important by virtue of the audience. Kids are impressionable and many are in need of representation. When I say that Raya and the Last Dragon might be more "important" than at least six of the Best Picture nominees, you should absolutely take that as a sign the field isn't level.

Flee isn't a kid's film, though. I mean, you could probably show it to teenagers, assuming you can convince them to sit through it, but the themes are intense, the subject matter dark, and the story - while ultimately hopeful - is incredibly sad. Animated or not, this is a movie for adults.

It's also maybe the most important film of the year. It provides insight into what refugees experience, in the words of a survivor. It shows us how we appear to those displaced by our wars who are then turned away at our borders. It's heart-breaking, and if you're from the US, Russia, or Europe and it doesn't make you ashamed of your country's policies, I don't know what to tell you.

So, yeah, I think Flee is pretty goddamn important. It's also one of two movies I believe will have a significant impact on animation. The nature of that impact is somewhat unusual in that it's not related to the visual or technical side of the medium, but rather the way it's employed. Having a movie like Flee get this level of attention illustrates that animation is far more versatile than the limited ways it's been used by major US studios suggests. I'd be shocked if there weren't imitators, but more than that I expect we'll see studios and producers greenlighting projects they'd never have seriously considered otherwise.

Is all that enough to justify a win in this category? That's probably irrelevant. Flee was made on a micro-budget, and my guess is the majority of those voting in this category won't even have seen it. Even among those who have, I think it'd be fair to pick one of the other nominees on the basis that the animation in Flee is comparatively simplistic. If Flee somehow wins, I'll be elated with the choice, but I think it's extremely unlikely.

Let's turn our attention back to the other contenders. Of these, the only one I believe makes a substantial stylistic contribution to animation is Mitchells vs. the Machines. It's continuing the work of Into the Spider-Verse by exploring other styles 3D animation can be presented in and further integrating 2D and 3D effects.

You could probably make a case for Luca expanding Pixar's stylistic range (which is good!), but I don't think the philosophy they're using is all that different from numerous films from other studios. Ultimately, I think Mitchells is by far the nominee pushing animation the furthest.

Is it also the best? I think that's a harder question. Encanto is really, really good. My personal opinion leans slightly towards Mitchells, but if we were just talking about which is "best," it'd probably be a toss-up, with Luca at most a hair's breath away.

But, again, I don't just think this should be about which is the best. And on top of everything else, there's an elephant-sized mouse in the room we need to discuss. Three of the five movies up for this award are from Disney, which isn't a surprise - they're kind of the leaders when it comes to animation, after all. And the company deserves recognition for some kinds of representation: it's gotten much better at including characters from different cultures and backgrounds. But there's still one area where their studio is outright regressive, and that's LGBTQ+ representation.

To be fair, their competitors have also been fairly slow to change in this area. Television shows have been better, with Steven Universe and She-Ra leading the way. But animated movies have been much slower, likely out of concern they'll anger far-right groups and damage their films' prospects overseas. As a result, the little representation that makes it through tends to be brief and - more often than not - the kind that can be easily cut when distributing to foreign markets.

A few weeks ago, I really thought Encanto was more or less a lock for the Oscar. But then, right when the Academy was starting to cast votes, something happened to highlight Disney's failure to include same-sex couples and queer individuals in their movies. I refer, of course, to Florida's draconian "Don't Say Gay" bill and Disney's fumbled response.

When Disney's CEO defended his company by claiming their movies were proof they were allies, employees came forward to say publicly what's been obvious for years: that Disney executives have been vetoing attempts by creatives to include queer characters in their movies.

Remember when I hedged on saying Luca wasn't "important?" A lot of people looked at the relationship between its two protagonists as a sort of ambiguous love story. While I'd hope some kids felt represented by the characters, imagine how much more powerful that would have been if it were acknowledged.

I don't want to put too much emphasis on Luca. Again, I'm not even sure it was intentional, just as I'm not 100% sure that Raya's relationship with Namaari or Elsa's story in Frozen 2 were originally going to include queer aspects... but I'd probably be willing to put money on any or all of them.

I shouldn't need to say this, but this kind of representation is important, especially in films intended for young audience. It's important kids are shown that same-sex relationships are normal and healthy. It's also important they're not stigmatized. Actively censoring these characters and romances sends a message that they're somehow less appropriate than opposite-sex couples.

I'm thrilled Disney's finally being called out on this, and I'm hopeful the outcry may result in some of these policies changing. But you know what would really give that a boost? Giving the award that one of their movies was almost a lock for to a different studio for a film that prominently features a gay protagonist.

Actually, the Academy has two choices for this, as the main characters in both Flee and Mitchells vs. the Machines are queer. But, again, I don't think Flee is going to take this. If anything wins over Encanto, I'm betting it'll be Mitchells. And doing so will reinforce the message that Disney needs to be better if they want to continue to be seen as leaders.

I hope that happens.