Frustrating patterns, hopeful changes, and what we've learned.

It's that time of year again. That time when we pretend not to care about arbitrary classifications of art but then become completely unhinged when our favorites are excluded from the list.

The list, of course, is the 2020 Oscar Nominations. [check out the full list of nominees if you haven't already]

So why do we care so much? Instead of rehashing and repeating, let's start by looking at opinions from experts and enthusiasts from across the internet...

Writing Oscar Snubs and Surprises: Jennifer Lopez, ‘Frozen II,’ Female Directors

"Carpetbagger" Kyle Buchanan, The New York Times (Jan 13, 2020)

An #OscarsSoWhite outcome was just barely averted, but the best-director lineup is all male once again.

The Ultimate Guide to Awards Season

The Little Gold Men Team, Vanity Fair (ongoing)

...for the first time ever, we’ve distilled all our hard-earned knowledge into one easily digestible list of 20 must-see movies, listed in order of release date, so you can see at a glance which films, directors, and actors are the likeliest bets for which awards. Scroll on for a crash course in this year’s ever evolving (and inevitably idiosyncratic) Oscar race, and don’t forget to check back for updates to the Little Gold Men team’s updated predictions for individual nominees and winners.

The Fossilized 2020 Oscar Nominations

Richard Brody, The New Yorker (Jan 13, 2020)

The year’s best movies offer comprehensive visions of American society—which doesn’t mean that they show everything but, rather, that they show the machinery underlying everything—four underworld films, literally or figuratively.

NOTABLE TAKEAWAYS:

The shutout of Uncut Gems reveals "the industry’s over-all protectionism—stylistic as well as substantive."

[Why were there no noms for Us when Peele's Get Out was so successful in 2017?] "Because, unlike his first movie, which was centered on what was widely perceived as a clear line on the politics of race, 'Us' includes the experience of a black American family in a shuddering story that pulls out the struts of societal comforts and certainties over all—including of the media business itself. The Academy has a disturbingly specific idea of what black filmmakers should do—namely, to stay in their lane."

"The industry’s crisis is reflected in the prominence of streaming in addition to the commercial shift toward franchise films as the most reliable and largest source of income—compounded by the fear that competition among streaming services will cut further into theatrical revenue...That’s why the Academy, feeling the sands shifting beneath its feet and wondering whether it is standing in an hourglass, is clinging to existing structures and styles with a backward-looking desperation."

Editorial: The Oscars are still so white. And male

The Times' Editorial Board, The Los Angeles Times (Jan 13, 2020)

The

NOTABLE TAKEAWAYS:

"Ultimately, increases in the number of women and people of color directing films are more important than increases in diversity in the Oscar slate"

"Ultimately, if the Oscars are going to be more diverse, what’s needed is for the industry to be more diverse. And that is a long-term transformation that we hope is already underway and that shows clear results in the years ahead."

The Alternative Oscars, 2020 Edition

Richard Brody, The New Yorker (Jan 24, 2020)

The Oscar nominations have disappointed many observers once again. So it’s time for the Brodys—where the film critic Richard Brody makes his own picks for the best actor, actress, director, and film of 2019. Plus, WNYC’s Kai Wright talks with two prison abolitionists about the failures of the criminal-justice system and what a future of decarceration would mean. And Ezra Klein explains how political beliefs have collapsed into a kind of identity politics.

Stephen King: The Oscars are still rigged in favor of white people

Stephen King, The Washington Post (Jan 27, 2020)

The prolific horror author writes an op-ed in response to his tweets on Jan 14.

NOTABLE TAKEAWAYS:

"Here’s another piece of the puzzle. Voters are supposed to look at all films in serious contention. This year, that would be about 60. There’s no way of checking how many voters actually do, because viewing is on the honor system. How many of the older, whiter contingent actually saw 'Harriet,' about Harriet Tubman, or 'The Last Black Man in San Francisco'? Just asking the question. If they did see all the films, were they moved by what they saw? Did they feel the catharsis that’s the basis of all that artists aspire to? Did they understand?"

"The response reflects my overall attitude that, as with justice, judgments of creative excellence should be blind. But that would be the case in a perfect world, one where the game isn’t rigged in favor of the white folks...We don’t live in that perfect world, and this year’s less-than-diverse Academy Awards nominations once more prove it. Maybe someday we will. I can dream, can’t I? After all, I make stuff up for a living."