By the time "The Hurt Locker" won best picture Sunday night, it
seemed almost a foregone conclusion since it previously earned
honors from the Producer's Guild, BAFTA, Broadcast Critics, the
National Society and critics groups in New York, L.A. and
elsewhere.
But "Hurt Locker" was anything but a sure thing. In a historical
context, its win is surprising.
After all, it is the lowest-grossing best picture winner of all
time; it was never on more than 535 movie screens; and it beat the
highest-grossing movie in modern history, one that has continued to
play on thousands of screens for nearly three months. In the era of
blockbusters, "Locker" cost a mere $11 million to make compared
with the more than $230 million cost of "Avatar."
To earn its gold, "Hurt Locker" had to break what producer Greg
Shapiro called "The Iraq War Curse," referring to all the movies
touching on that conflict that had failed to find an audience. It
had to weather attacks in the media and from some in the military
who questioned the realism of how it portrayed the bomb removal
unit.
The film also drew censure for the behavior of one of its
producers,
the first to be banned from attending the Academy Awards. And
it had to win with backing from Summit Entertainment, a relatively
new and small distributor that had never before won an Oscar.
There also is the parallel question of whether "Avatar" and
distributor Fox contributed to their own demise in the best picture
race.
The sci-fi epic had been critically acclaimed, far more widely seen
and was widely heralded for its breakthrough technology. And it
boasted the deep pocket backing of a major Hollywood studio.
Could it be explained as the ultimate example of the split
personality in Hollywood, where movie choices are mostly driven by
the need to make large amounts of money but where the people behind
the camera still want to be seen as making art? And was it hurt by
attacks from the political right on the movie's plot, which was
seen as a dig on America's Iraq incursion?
Or were "Avatar's" Oscar hopes doomed because it was sci-fi, a
genre that rarely has been rewarded by Oscar? After all, there are
precedents.
In 1977, when "Star Wars" was the breakthrough movie, it lost best
picture to Woody Allen's low-budget comedy "Annie Hall." And in
1982, when "E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial" was rewriting boxoffice
records, it was beaten for best picture by the biopic "Gandhi."
The path that "Hurt Locker" took was anything but standard. After
Summit picked up domestic distribution in September 2008, it put
the movie on the shelf because its release schedule was crowded.
Then Summit opened "Hurt Locker" in the summer as
counterprogramming instead of in the fall, when most serious dramas
get a showcase launch.
Summit turned the Oscar campaign strategy over to PR firm 42 West,
where veteran campaigner Cynthia Swartz called the shots. Swartz
was criticized for waiting until early December to send out the
DVDs, even though the whole strategy revolved around getting the
movie seen by as many voters as possible.
She also had to get attention from Academy voters and guild members
for a movie without any marquee names and a subject that put off
many people already weary of a war that never seemed to end.
What Swartz did right was to center the campaign around Bigelow, a
woman who directed with as much glory and guts as any man, and to
feature writer/producer Mark Boal for his screenplay and real-life
story as a journalist who was embedded with a bomb disposal unit in
Iraq.
She had bound copies of the "Hurt Locker" script sent to every
member of the WGA, earning guild honors for the original screenplay
and the same award at the Oscars.
Meanwhile, Fox seemed to downplay awards campaigning, letting
Cameron take the lead. And what Cameron wanted to talk about was
how frustrated he was that his actors, whose performances were
captured by CGI technology, were not taken as seriously as
live-action actors.
While his righteousness was sincere, that didn't go over well with
many real-life actors who feel threatened by the possibility that
they might be replaced by synthetic performers. That backlash might
have mattered, because actors are by far the largest bloc of voters
in the Academy.
At first, Summit's marketing tried to hide the Iraq War theme of
"Hurt Locker," just as "Avatar" tried to sidestep the
science-fiction label. In the end, both movies tried to position
themselves as important parts of screen history. That worked for
"Hurt Locker" but not for "Avatar," which will have to settle for
being the biggest-grossing movie, even though it didn't gain the
respect that comes with the best picture trophy.