In the blink of an eye, 2011 is about to enter March. With the end of the 83rd Academy Awards, the Hollywood scene in 2010 has finally come to an end, and the awards season, which lasted for nearly four months, has finally settled and is dormant again, like a giant beast that has entered hibernation, waiting to wake up again at the end of the year.

The so-called awards season, which also means that there are winners and losers, and some people are happy and some people are worried.

The battle between "The King's Speech" and "The Social Network" ended with "The King's Speech", which won the four heavyweights of Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor and Best Original Screenplay, while "The Social Network" had the last laugh in the three categories of Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Score and Best Editing.

In addition to the technical department, "Inception" became the biggest winner, with four trophies for Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Effects, Best Cinematography, and Best Visual Effects, and the number of trophies that night, along with "The King's Speech".

In addition, the highly acclaimed "The Children Are Fine" and "127 Hours", as well as the nomination of "Earth Thunder", which revealed a strong counterattack, and the representative independent films "Winter Bones" and "Buried Alive", all returned empty-handed.

The results of such awards have attracted criticism from the media, especially the direction of the best director.

The "Hollywood Reporter" said mercilessly, "This is the best director in the history of the Oscars", without giving Tom Hopper any face, and directly regarded him as a typical example, and named him to complain and criticize. Not because the "King's Speech" was not good enough, but because there were more worthy of praise this year.

In the 83-year journey of the Oscars so far, there have been many controversies, especially the best picture, but this is not unexpected, because the best picture considers the comprehensive quality, the right time, the right place, and the right people, all of which are indispensable-

"Chicago" triumphed over "The Pianist" because the Iraq War officially broke out in early 2003, and people needed more soothing singing and dancing than heavy reflection.

"Crash" defeated "Brokeback Mountain", because at that time, gay movies still failed to break the blockade of conservative forces, and racial issues easily prevailed.

"Forrest Gump" defeated "The Shawshank Redemption" and "Vulgarity" because the movie reflects the American spirit, the ultimate meaning of the American dream, which the United States, which has experienced the race riots, the Gulf War and the financial crisis in the past two years, needs such a dream.

Therefore, in the long history, there has never been a shortage of controversies about the best picture, everyone has their own choice for the best picture, and the choice of the academy is not necessarily correct, but it is in line with the times. Even if there is a historical "mistake" such as "Shakespeare's love history" overturning "saving Private Ryan", people have also witnessed the brilliant debut of the college's public relations.

However, relatively speaking, the debate about the position of best director is very rare.

Even moments like Stanley Kubrick's loss to Milos-Forman and Alfred-Hithcock's loss to John-Ford can only be a sigh of "time, fate", which is suffocating but convincing.

Because the best director is an individual award, the competition is the level of personal ability, showing the peak of personal skills, and the influence of political factors, the influence of the current situation, and historical causes have been weakened to the minimum, and only the hero is judged by art. Art can't be judged by winning or losing, but there is only one golden statuette, and only one person is destined to win, which is the difference between art and award ceremonies.

In this year's competition, David Fincher can almost be said to be in the first place.

"The Social Network" itself may not be likable, because it is too up-to-date, because it is too sharp, because it is too vitriol, because it is too real and dark, and it is really not easy for an old-fashioned conservative college to say "love you", but no one can deny David Fincher is brilliant.

As a director, David shows a strong personal style, sharp and clean, deep and heavy, cruel and wise, every detail of the whole movie can feel David's strong temperament, which is simply amazing;

Not to mention Tom Hopper, there is almost no director who can compete with David throughout the awards season, and he has swept the Golden Globe Awards, the British Academy of Film and Television Arts Awards, the National Board of Review Awards, the North American Broadcast Film Critics Association Awards, the New York Film Critics Circle Awards, the Boston Film Critics Circle Awards, the Chicago Film Critics Circle Awards......

To put it simply, almost all heavyweight weather vanes are included. Compared with Colin Firth's Best Actor, Best Director is the least suspenseful award of this year's awards season.

However, after the Golden Globe Awards, the situation took a turn for the worse, and "The King's Speech" was operated by the Weinstein brothers, and Tom's figure appeared in major publicity occasions; on the other hand, the negative news about "social networks" flew all over the sky, bringing the art of college public relations to the extreme, and then the Directors Guild of America Awards broke out, Tom beat David, and then the Oscars broke out another upset, and Tom came out strong.

It's not a triumph of strength, it's a triumph of PR. Typical of the Weinstein model. Following the defeat of "Shakespeare in Love" over "Saving Private Ryan", the Weinstein brothers have once again written a PR miracle. This is not a time to celebrate, but a time of anger, sadness, disappointment.

Tom Hopper's defeat of David Fincher, and the "King's Speech" comprehensively crushed the "social network", was not just a PR victory, but another victory for the conservative forces of the Academy.

Again.

First of all, after "The Lord of the Rings 3: The Return of the King" won the Oscar for Best Picture, in the next seven years, there were only two commercial films nominated for the Oscar for Best Picture, last year's "Avatar" and this year's "Inception", last year James Cameron was overturned by the "Bomb Disposal Unit" in a situation of momentum, and this year Christopher Nolan was even more disregarded, and he did not even get the nomination for Best Director.

Second, for the third year in a row, the Academy has made a conservative choice since 2008, when two black indie works, "No Country for Old Men" and "The Blood Coming" shone throughout the awards season, this time, they have abandoned the "social network" of forging ahead, innovating and bold, and keeping pace with the times, and once again chose the "King's Speech" that is stable, ingenious, and reminiscent of the past.

The Oscar, which prides itself on constantly pursuing a balance between business and art, has lost its commercial domineering and boldness, and has lost its artistic breakthrough and focus, and the conservative forces are losing their enterprising spirit and becoming more and more decadent, utilitarian, arrogant and arrogant.

Once upon a time, works like "Male and Female", "Sunset Boulevard", "Midnight/Cow/Lang", "Vulgar", "A Clockwork Orange", and "2001: A Space Odyssey" could shine at the Oscars, but now, it is "The King's Speech" that is so unsuccessful that academic works are popular.

In fact, such a result was expected before the awards ceremony began, and in the second half of the awards season, the "King's Speech" was so powerful that it could almost be said to be unstoppable, and it was not surprising that the winners were released. But it is precisely the result of such a lack of surprises that proves the conservatism and stubbornness of the college all the more.

The Oscar awards are becoming "predictable", which makes opportunists like the Weinstein brothers becoming "experts", turning the film industry upside down as businessmen, "The King's Speech" is one case, Natalie Portman is another, the typical PR victory, the lack of surprise, the lack of magic, the lack of Oscar charm.

It's a big disappointment.

As an authoritative professional media in Hollywood, looking at the sharp remarks of the "Hollywood Reporter", you can get a glimpse of the trend of public opinion among professionals, Tom Hopper is just a scapegoat under their gun, and what is really alluding to is the deep entanglement behind the industry.

Not only that, but senior professional media such as "Variety", "The New York Times", "Village Voice", and "The New Yorker" have also expressed similar views and severely criticized the college. The awards ceremony is over, but the hustle and bustle has just begun.

Year after year, day after day, the Oscars, like the Golden Globes and the Grammys, are facing more and more challenges at major award ceremonies, with authority, attention, and popularity gradually declining, and this year it has reached a new high.

"Social Network", a work focusing on the Internet era, failed completely, and at the same time led to a sharp decline in ratings and viewership, coupled with sharp criticism from the media, the Oscars, who had gone through an eighty-three year journey, began to falter.

The debate over Best Picture won't go away for a long time to come, just as "Brokeback Mountain" and "Crash", "Shakespeare's Love History" and "Saving Private Ryan" will tell if the academy made the right choice this time.

Of course, as an annual film event, the focus gathered on the Oscars is naturally not only that, there is criticism, there is naturally praise, controversy, and naturally there is popularity, in addition to the controversy of best picture and best director, another big focus is Natalie Portman.

This actress, who was born as a child star and became famous at a young age, successfully got rid of the crisis of the "stand-in door", and when she was about to turn 30 years old, she successfully won the Oscar, becoming the first actor of Generation Y to win the little golden man, and deservedly became the leader of the new generation of actors. The limelight is on the rise, even surpassing Colin Firth and Tom Hopper, for a while.

Shrouded in Natalie's dazzling light, the haze of the stand-in door vanished, and Lan Li-Hall became a thing of the past, and all the hustle and bustle began to settle down. Not surprisingly.