Academy's Age-Bias Sinks "The Social Network"

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright February 28, 2011
All Rights Reserved.                                             

                In the grand scheme of things, the Academy Awards won’t settle revolutions in the Middle East, fix the nation’s sluggish economy or overhaul the broken health care system but it does try to fairly measure the world’s best movies.  Despite nominating the year’s 10 best films, the horse race for Best Picture and Best Director came down Director David Fincher’s American-made “The Social Network” and Tom Hooper’s British-made “The King’s Speech.”  No other films came close to the final cut, leaving a major demographic split favoring “The King’s Speech.”  While the Academy publishes no demographics on its over 6,000 voting members, the average age is well above 50, giving an age-bias to older members.  While there’s much second-guessing about yesterday’s results, something must be done to correct for age-bias that left “The Social Network” behind the 8-ball.

            When “The Social Network” won Best Director and Best Picture awards at the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn.’s Golden Globes Jan. 16, it leaped into frontrunner for the Oscars.  Winning the Broadcast Film Critic’s Assn.’s “The Critics Choice Awards” Best Picture and Best Director, “The Social Network” was well on its way for the Oscar, except for the Academy’s stubborn age-bias.  “The Social Network” packed a wallop of youth culture, covering the fierce competitiveness at Harvard, the nation’s top-rated private university.  Unlike “The King’s Speech,” a period piece about England’s King George VI overcoming a lifelong stuttering problem to prepare his nation for war against Germany’s Third Reich, the Social Network gives an inside look into today’s raw youth, with all its reckless sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll, contrasting with “The King Speech’s” stately pageantry of the British Crown.

            Older audiences connect more with the Greatest Generation’s moment of truth, facing down Adolf Hilter’s Nazi regime, saving Europe and the world from unspeakable tyranny.  “We were going to all these [events] and everyone was like ‘Social Network,’ ‘Social Network,’ ‘Social Network,’” said producer Dana Brunetti.  “And I kept saying, ‘This is not good.  There is going to be a backlash,” attributing the film’s fall at the Oscars to superstition and too much pre-Oscar hype.  Groping for an explanation, the Los Angeles Times speculated that Sony Studios did a poor job of campaigning during the run up to the Oscars, appearing overly confident and “seemed overly eager to win the best picture Oscar,” concluding that director David Fincher “often came across as prickly” in interviews, ironically reflecting the screenplay’s rebellious arrogance that turned off Academy members.

            Separating politics and age-bias for voting members is no easy task, in part because it’s difficult remaining objective while voting for personal preferences.  On presenting the nominees for Best Picture, Oscar Winning director Steven Spielberg reminded the audience about outstanding films or directors that never got Oscars.  “David Fincher did a mind-blowing job with an incredibly talented but very, very young cast,” said Oscar winning screenwriter Aaron Sorkin, who just won for “The Social Network” in the category of Best Adapted Screenplay.  “And that was the fear that, you know, this material isn’t for beginners,” noting the age-bias that tilted the Academy toward voting for “The King’s Speech.”  While there’s nothing wrong with “The King’s Speech” taking the Best Picture, there’s something very wrong with Hooper beating out Fincher for Best Director.

             Voting “The Social Network” the Best Editing reflects heavily on director David Fincher, who meticulously spliced together every piece of film.  While Hooper won Jan. 30 the prestigious Directors Guild Award for “The King’s Speech,” Fincher proved that outstanding filmmaking follows a great screenplay.  Sorkin’s creative adaptation of Ben Mezrich’s “Accidental Billionaires” proved that good screenwriting provides the best blueprint for award-winning moviemaking.   Calling Fincher’s direction “mind-blowing,” Sorkin sang high praise for the 48-year-old director, packing the best elements of artistic filmmaking into 209 satisfying minutes.  When you consider the complexity the story and various characters, Fincher’s direction demanded far more artful direction than “The King’s speech,” whose historic grandeur compensated for an otherwise simplistic and tedious story.

            Academy voting members need to do a better job of overcoming age-bias and evaluating good moviemaking on its merits, not based on familiarity and personal preferences.  Fincher’s “The Social Network” broke new ground telling a complex story of American greed and competitiveness.  While “The King’s Speech” recorded a piece of world history, “The Social Network” told a far more complex story of contemporary America, with all its brash hopes, dreams and competitiveness.  Apart from recording one man’s struggle with stuttering, “The King’s Speech” didn’t cover the gamut of human emotions involved in the back-biting world of entrepreneurial success.  Winning the Oscar for Best Original Score, “The Social Network” recreated the surreal electronic sounds of a new, brutally competitive generation, unfamiliar and uneasy with the older folks looking for comfort and predictability.

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.