1,001 words, 5 minutes read time.
The 97th Academy Awards continued the tradition of surprises, snubs, and debates that have long defined Hollywood’s most prestigious ceremony. Anora was the biggest winner of the night, sweeping multiple categories. Still, other films had been widely expected to do well. Films like A Complete Unknown and Conclave were left with little or no recognition. The results raise questions about the Academy’s decision-making process. They also make us ponder the factors that influence Oscar outcomes. Additionally, one wonders if patterns from earlier years can help make sense of this year’s awards.
One of the most striking elements of the night was Anora’s overwhelming success. It is an independent film directed by Sean Baker. With a budget of just $6 million, it triumphed over bigger-budgeted, star-driven films. This reinforced the Academy’s recent tendency to favor independent cinema. In the past, films like Moonlight (2016) and Nomadland (2020) rose above traditional studio contenders. This signaled a shift away from the dominance of big-budget prestige dramas. Moonlight and Nomadland were seen as profound and politically resonant films. In contrast, Anora won on the strength of its storytelling. Its performances also contributed to its success. Whether its sweep was an anomaly remains to be seen. It could be the continuation of a trend. Its dominance undoubtedly shaped the landscape of this year’s Oscars.
A Complete Unknown, the Bob Dylan biopic starring Timothée Chalamet, was at the other end of the spectrum. It failed to win any awards. Biopics have traditionally performed well at the Oscars, particularly those centered on musical figures. Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) earned Rami Malek an Oscar for his portrayal of Freddie Mercury. Ray (2004) won Jamie Foxx Best Actor for his depiction of Ray Charles. Walk the Line (2005) saw Reese Witherspoon take home Best Actress for playing June Carter Cash. Given this pattern, it seemed reasonable to expect A Complete Unknown to be a strong contender. However, it was completely shut out, and Chalamet wasn’t even nominated for Best Actor.
The film’s lack of recognition suggests that the Academy was either unimpressed by its execution or simply prioritized other performances. Unlike Malek’s transformation into Mercury, which included extensive prosthetics and dramatic physicality, Chalamet’s portrayal of Dylan was more nuanced. He captured Dylan’s essence rather than relying on mimicry. The Academy has historically favored dramatic transformations. Gary Oldman’s heavily made-up performance as Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour (2017) is one example. Another is Brendan Fraser’s prosthetic-laden role in The Whale (2022). Without such a drastic physical transformation, Chalamet may have been overlooked. Showier performances, particularly Adrien Brody’s, might have been favored instead.
Brody’s win for The Brutalist marked his second Oscar, more than two decades after his first for The Pianist (2002). His performance in The Brutalist was widely praised for its intensity and depth. It fit into the Academy’s long-standing preference for roles that showcase hardship. They prefer roles that display suffering or transformation. Historically, actors who take on weighty, emotionally demanding roles tend to fare well. Daniel Day-Lewis’s performance in There Will Be Blood (2007) fits this mold. Joaquin Phoenix in Joker (2019) fits this mold. Matthew McConaughey in Dallas Buyers Club (2013) fits this mold. Brody’s win was in line with this tradition. It reinforces the idea that a deeply transformative role, along with a strong narrative, often carries more weight. This is true when compared to a subtler performance like Chalamet’s.
Another major talking point of the night was the fate of Conclave. The film seemed primed for awards success. However, it ultimately walked away with only one win—Best Adapted Screenplay. Despite receiving eight nominations, it failed to secure wins in any of the major categories. The film is a tense political drama about the selection of a new pope. It was widely praised for its sharp screenplay. The restrained storytelling also received acclaim. However, this very restraint may have worked against it. The Academy has a complicated relationship with films that are more intellectual than emotionally gripping. In 2011, The Social Network was a critically acclaimed, razor-sharp drama. It lost Best Picture to the more traditional and emotionally stirring The King’s Speech. Similarly, Conclave may have been seen as too cold or cerebral compared to the films that ultimately won big.
One of the fascinating aspects of the Oscars is the unpredictability of the Academy’s decisions. While trends can sometimes be identified, there are always surprises that defy expectations. In 1998, Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan was widely expected to win Best Picture. It lost to Shakespeare in Love. This remains a controversial decision to this day. Similarly, in 2006, Brokeback Mountain was the clear frontrunner. It was defeated by Crash. This film has since been criticized for its heavy-handed storytelling. The Academy’s choices are often influenced by factors beyond just the quality of a film. These factors include industry politics, campaign strategies, and cultural movements.
This year’s results reflect a combination of these influences. Anora’s success signals the Academy’s continued appreciation for independent, character-driven films. A Full Unknown’s shutout suggests that not all music biopics are guaranteed wins. This is particularly true if they lack a highly transformative central performance. Conclave’s underperformance highlights the Academy’s preference for emotionally driven narratives over intellectual ones. And Adrien Brody’s win reaffirms the Academy’s admiration for weighty, intense performances over more understated portrayals.
Despite the confusion, frustration, and debate that often follow the Oscars, this unpredictability is compelling. It is part of what makes them so engaging. The confusion, frustration, and debate often follow the Oscars. This unpredictability is part of what makes them so compelling. If the winners were entirely predictable, there would be little reason to stay engaged. The Academy Awards are fundamentally designed to surprise. They spark discussion and remind audiences that film appreciation is inherently subjective. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the results, the Oscars reflect Hollywood’s ever-changing landscape. They offer insight into the industry’s present values. They also show its evolving priorities.
By Patrick Harrington
