Beasts of No Nation: the biggest snub of the Oscars?

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]o say that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences sometimes miss the mark in their selection of Oscar nominations would be a laughable understatement. They so frequently make questionable choices that arguing over who got snubbed is as central to the Oscars as the awards themselves at this point. Having said that, every year they make one or two criminal oversights that make me vow (momentarily) that this will be my last year watching them, whether it be the omission of Jake Gyllenhaal for Nightcrawler or the lack of major nominations for Inside Llewyn Davis. The film to take the biscuit this year is easily Beasts of No Nation, Cary Fukanaga’s haunting and brutal depiction of child soldiers in Africa.

Beasts of No Nation is by no means an easy or enjoyable experience. It is a visceral nightmare of a film that constantly assaults you with scenes of such unimaginable cruelty and violence that you are left emotionally exhausted afterwards. Many attribute its lack of nominations to this unflinching look at such a dark subject matter. After all, Academy voters are notoriously conservative in their taste and are considerably less likely to nominate a film if deemed too violent or consistently bleak.

This here lies my deepest frustration with the Oscars. Whether we like it or not, the Academy Awards are and will continue to be seen as the highest marker of achievement in the film industry. However, they are picked year in and year out by a group of members that consistently refuse to acknowledge achievements deemed not accessible enough or on the other side of the spectrum, too genre focused.

2016’s Oscars has come to be defined by its worrying lack of diversity, with all four acting categories comprising all white actors for a second year in a row. 

Yes, one could point to recent best winner 12 Years A Slave, a film of similar brutality, as contradictory to this point. This was more an exception to the rule than anything however and doesn’t make up for the countless films like Beasts of No Nation that fail to reap the praise they deserve because they don’t fit in specifically enough with the tastes of those who select these awards.

As I sat there after watching Beasts of No Nation attempting to grapple with the trauma I had just experienced, one faint simmer of reconciliation was that Idris Elba would surely not only get nominated but win best supporting actor for his towering performance as the Commandant of a child army. He is simply magnetic as a warmongering troop leader and his terrifying yet oddly likeable portrayal is one of the major reasons why the film strikes such an unnerving and unique emotional note.

Image: Sky

2016’s Oscars has come to be defined by its worrying lack of diversity, with all four acting categories comprising all white actors for a second year in a row. While some are quick to argue that the Oscars are about achievement rather than filling some sort of diversity quota, the omission of Idris Elba and the equally excellent newcomer Abraham Attah is evidence enough for me that sceptics of Oscar diversity complaints are way off mark. Just like with David Oyelowa last year in a performance that I still consider to be superior to all of the best actor nominees, the Academy continues to ignore the exceptional work of non-white actors, affirming once more how out of touch they are.

One of the film’s standout moments is a pivotal battle scene where the hallucinogenic drugs Agu has taken are depicted through a digital effect that mimics infrared and transforms the colour palette of the screen. It is a disorientating effect that highlights the profoundly surreal nature of war whilst also allowing a more prominent glimpse into the mind-set of the central protagonist. It is at this moment that Beasts of No Nation transcends simply being a raw depiction of war and goes into a far greater category, one that unquestionably deserves the recognition of the Academy Awards.