‘Harry Potter,’ meanwhile, was shut out of its two nominations — but couldn’t the YA franchises’ stars get involved?
By Kara Warner
There’s still a lot to discuss and digest from the 2012 Oscars, from the glitz and glamour, to the surprises, snubs and glaring omissions.
Speaking to the snubs and omissions category, MTV News couldn’t help but notice that, for an awards show designed to appeal to all movie fans, three of the most buzz-worthy film franchises of the last decade were mostly left out of the festivities: “Harry Potter,” “Twilight” and “The Hunger Games.”
This is not a story about the lack of nominations for the films; we’ve already complained about the “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2” shutout and “The Hunger Games” hasn’t even been released yet. But why not involve a few of these noteworthy films’ castmembers in the telecast? We consulted a few experts on the subject.
“I think this year is more glaring than most, for sure,” said Entertainment Weekly senior writer Sara Vilkomerson. “Personally, I’m surprised there was not a lot of ‘Potter’ stuff; that was a very lucrative franchise for a lot of people and really critically acclaimed, the last movie. I feel like there was a definite lack of youth. I know in my house, when the ‘Hunger Games’ ad came on, it felt a little more exciting than certain parts of the telecast.”
“The Academy obviously went out of their way to acknowledge the lack of youth appeal — but a handful of jokes in Billy Crystal’s video montage and a little token Bieber isn’t enough to fix it,” added Brooke Tarnoff, senior editor for NextMovie.com. “It’s a hard line to walk, enticing younger viewers but still voting with integrity. Maybe the answer is expanding Academy membership to more young actors who will be able to choose ‘young people movies’ with a clear conscience.”
“I’m a house divided on the Oscars and the youth audience,” said Shylah Addante, who runs “Hunger Games” fan site Down With the Capitol. “On one hand, as a card-carrying fangirl, I absolutely understand the outrage about last night’s ‘Potter’ snub. For a franchise that has touched the hearts and minds, not to mention the wallets, of so many people around the world for a decade, the absence of Oscar gold left me feeling like the Academy was full of Dementors. On the other hand, the fiercely proud side of me wants a film to win an Oscar because it deserves it — not because it’s a tentpole franchise or because it made one bajillion dollars worldwide. If ‘Hugo’ was any lesson to young Oscar viewers, it is that, in the right hands, a children’s/young adult book can become a film worthy of major awards.”
“It’s a very, very hard line to teeter on. I have full sympathy for the people who are trying to organize it,” Vilkomerson said. “It just shows how challenging it is to put on a really good Oscar telecast that makes everyone happy, that hits everything that everybody wants. It’s a hard, hard show to put on. Maybe next year, ‘The Hunger Games’ will be nominated and that will be the easiest way to interlace these two worlds.”
Addante agreed with next year’s potential for “The Hunger Games.” ” ‘Potter’ and ‘Twilight’ may not have wooed the Academy, but ‘Hunger Games,’ with its decorated cast and crew, contemporary social and political messages and dramatic plot, may just have what it takes to finally give some critical legitimacy to young adult series and their fans.”