On March 2, the 97th Academy Award ceremony was held, bringing an end to the awards season for the films of 2024 and, in doing so, a lot of controversy. Now, it’s certainly nothing new for the Oscars and indeed the awards season as a whole to garner discourse and disagreements. Even so, I was struck by the number of incidents that really defined the 2025 race, especially in comparison to the stacked line-up that was last year (I think about Barbenheimer every day of my life).
By far the most controversial and honestly baffling film in contention for this year’s awards was Emilia Perez, which was acclaimed by critics but I can honestly say was one of the worst films I’ve sat through. Not only is the overall tone incredibly confusing and the songs pretty terrible (and yes, that one is unironically the best one), it came under heavy criticism from parts of Mexico and the trans community for its offensive portrayals. Despite this, it gained 13 Oscar nominations, winning two, as well as countless other awards. This feels like an extreme example of the disconnect sometimes present between critics and audience.
Obviously, not everyone will have the same opinion on a film or whether it deserves every accolade it receives, but in this case, there seems to be a massive gulf between those two camps, adding to the controversy. The film’s lead, Karla Sofía Gascón, became the first trans woman to be nominated for Best Actress, but this was quickly overshadowed by the emergence of a slew of horrifically racist and bigoted tweets she had posted in the past. Adding this to the already present discourse makes this ultimately disappointing. At a time when trans people and their rights are under sustained attack by governments around the world, especially in the US, the community ended up not even being mentioned in both acceptance speeches on the night. If there was any reason to me, this perfectly signifies the Academy’s preference for rewarding surface level representation in order to pat themselves on the back, rather than any sincere desire to address these issues.
One of the biggest issues of the day also got people talking was about The Brutalist – specifically its use of generative AI. Also during the race, it was revealed AI was allegedly used to both ‘enhance’ the lead Adrien Brody’s Hungarian accent as well as some of the architecture shown in the film. I haven’t personally see it so I can’t comment on the overall quality of the film or whether the use of AI really noticeably affected it, but this definitely raises red flags for me.
Nowadays it feels impossible to access the internet without being bombarded with the latest generative AI feature every app seems to have introduced almost overnight. This has ended up leaving me exhausted and disillusioned. The practice of crafting anything yourself, whether it be a piece of writing or visual art, seems to have become diluted in favour of the easiest option possible, rather than taking the time to work and come out with something truly loved.
Overall, while the use of AI in The Brutalist doesn’t seem that big of a deal in isolation, it’s part of a worrying pattern of AI across the film industry, notably in works that claim to be innovative. The Brutalist’s success might be seen as sending a signal that this pays off and enhances works of art instead of, in my opinion, stifling them.
It’s fair to say that this controversy in particular fed into the more general outrage over interviews conducted with anonymous Academy voters. Some claimed they would not be voting Ralph Fiennes for Best Actor due to the mistaken belief that he had already won in the past, and instead for Adrien Brody – who actually has, and who won on the night too. This kind of misinformation acted as another indicator of the inherent issues in the voting process for many, coupled with the revelation some hadn’t even watched all the films they were supposed to be voting on.
As a result, I feel the events of this race have soured people’s trust, but these issues go hand in hand with many longstanding criticisms of the awards ceremony. From a lack of diversity to horror movies often being consistently shut out from any consideration, there seems to be little point in seeing the Oscars for what it is supposed to represent – simply the best films from the previous year.
In an ideal world, the Oscars would be able to represent all our preferences at once, but that isn’t possible. Sadly we now live in a world where Emilia Perez has more Oscars than Conclave, but at least Anora saved it from taking Best Picture (even if I’m not a huge fan of that film, sorry). And despite the negative tone of this article, I want to emphasise that this year was not a complete dud! Seeing the growth of communities talking about the year’s new releases often does more to promote them in the eyes of the public than an award ever could. The awards race has demonstrated All that to say – the Oscars are temporary, but Twitter account ClubConcrave is forever.