Inside Andrea Risenborough's Oscar Campaign

This is something you should care about.

The Academy had a controversy on their hands recently, again, and they handled it somewhat questionably. 

For context: 

Andrea Risenborough was nominated for an Oscar for Best Actress for her performance in To Leslie. That film is tiny, on a tiny budget, and made little money at the box office. Momentum Pictures distributes, but they are a somewhat small company (not really: just comparatively to the Majors) and do not have the millions and millions usually necessary for an Oscar campaign. 

So what happened was very interesting and deeply concerning. Andrea Riseborough scored her nomination after To Leslie’s director’s wife (and others) organized an aggressive grassroots lobbying campaign. What this means: Mary McCormack (the director’s wife) (and others) emailed and called many members of the Academy asking them to see the film, promote it, and vote for it within the Academy in order to secure a nomination. Which successfully happened. 

On paper: this is just asking for help from family and friends. But. My personal issue with the Academy, and the way award shows in general are structured, is that they are never, and have never, been about what the best film is really. The nominees are backed by studios and production companies, which spend tens of millions on marketing campaigns to promote the films and the actors/creators behind them in order to secure said nominations or awards. I don’t like this – it takes away from the authenticity of things, it’s never really about the best film – but I do understand it. The only way for members of the Academy to see and watch these films is if they know about these films, so these campaigns are necessary. The downside is that small films like To Leslie certainly get overlooked – they don’t get voted for not because they are not as good, but simply because the members of the Academy either haven’t seen them or simply don’t know of their existence. 

Thanks to a certain sleazy producer named Harvey Weinstein, the Academy actually does have strict rules about what film campaigns can be, though. Rule 10 concerns ‘Lobbying’: 

Contracting Academy members directly and in a manner outside of the scope of these rules to promote a film or achievement for Academy Award consideration is expressly forbidden. 

Which is exactly what members of the To Leslie campaign did. 

So here’s where my personal conundrum comes. As I’ve said – I don’t like that there’s such heavy marketing for Academy Awards and that in some ways, one (not me: but I understand the point) could argue that such achievements are bought. So the fact that the To Leslie team managed to secure a nomination through similar tactics, but with no money, is actually quite impressive. A team of probably 4-5 people managed to get as many Academy members to see and vote for their work as a full studio marketing team of 100+ would have. If anything, they beat them out. And this is actually pretty cool for small indies – it proves there is a chance for them, it is the work that matters, and money and campaigns aren’t everything. If I had these friends in the Academy and was fighting for an Oscar, I probably would have done the same, if it wasn’t illegal. 

But. Unfortunately, there is a but, and it’s a big one.

The Academy announced that they would look into the grassroots campaign and considered possibly revoking Andrea Risenborough’s nomination. They didn’t, they just announced that it was being handled with the parties involved directly. 

Which is a big issue. As I mentioned, To Leslie’s lobbying campaign was illegal, but it proves that indies can make it, which is awesome. However, the fact that the Academy did nothing is concerning. Because while To Leslie’s director’s wife may have some connections in the Academy she can reach out to directly, think about how many connections a studio has. If the To Leslie team is allowed to do this, what stops a studio from doing the same next year? What stops someone with all the connections reaching out to all of them directly and getting nominations secured simply because they know a lot of people and a lot of people owe them a lot of favors – which is exactly what Weinstein did in the first place, which enforced the anti-lobbying rule in the first place. 

Unfortunately, the Academy should have revoked Andrea Risenborough’s nomination. Because if she’s allowed it, then next year, or realistically in a few years, the studios can begin to do this too. And that’s scary. That solidifies the idea that it’s not about which film is the best – it’s not even about which film has the best campaign anymore – but it’s about connections and power. And that’s definitely not what award shows should be about.