OPINION: A critique of the frontrunner

The nominations for the 97th Academy Awards have settled. My personal predictions for Best Picture, the only race I care about at the nominations stage, were 80% correct. Pretty good, but the snubs from my picks were both on my personal top 10 list of last year’s films, which makes that 20% feel disappointing. I hope there’s justice for “A Real Pain” and especially “Sing Sing,” my favorite film from last year.

I don’t dislike the replacements. “Nickel Boys,” a period piece depicting a segregated reform school in Florida based on a novel I’ve recently finished, is exciting to see, especially with its experimental usage of film as form, showing the world through a first-person perspective. Other films have used the gimmick, but “Nickel Boys” is the first time it’s been this rewarded.

“I’m Still Here” is monumental for foreign film recognition by the Academy. No film has been catapulted into the American cultural conscience from a singular film culture quite like this Brazilian drama has. Using the cultural ramifications of Brazil’s military dictatorship, it also gives actress Fernanda Torres an exciting global stage for her performance, which has already been rewarded during the Golden Globes.

I have not seen either of these, which is disappointing. I’ve mentioned how I’m taking a break from moviegoing, and I would have loved to see both of these pushed harder into at least Iowa theaters before the turn of the year.

There are only two nominations I’m personally a bit grumpy about. “A Complete Unknown” is a bit of a boring pick. Nothing against Bob Dylan, I love “Simple Twist of Fate,” but it’s not exactly daring, especially considering the far more experimental and creative Dylan biopic “I’m Not There” directed by Todd Haynes never got true flowers in 2007.

But the other, and one I criticized last week, is “Emilia Pérez.” I thought I would say my piece last week and move on. But, following a historic 13 nominations, I must speak up once again.

First, my positives. “Emilia Pérez” in this spotlight is beneficial for exposure to stories about trans people. The goal of “Emilia Pérez” in depicting a trans woman as a powerful, undying force for humanistic good is a wonderful ideal, buoyed by Karla Sofía Gascón’s great performance. The choreography in most musical scenes is pretty good, even if they are limited by budget and can’t live up to the majesty of Hollywood’s extravagance.

But, “Emilia Pérez” isn’t very good. The story of a drug cartel leader who hires an attorney to secretly organize gender-affirming surgery is doomed when this trans woman tries to secretly reintegrate herself back into her family which she left behind.

Setting aside the horrific “Mrs. Doubtfire” comparison, Emilia is forced to consistently desire to live in her old skin by pretending to be a family aunt. There’s no trans power there, it plays off weak. Even worse, Emilia Pérez’s eventual fate is unceremonious and undeveloped, leading to any sort of martyrish portrayal to be cut short.

It’s ugly how this movie represents sensitive trans topics. In one scene, Emilia sits in bed with her daughter, who says Emilia “smells like my dad.” Putting aside biology of gender-affirming care, which after Emilia’s six years of hormone replacement she shouldn’t smell like any man, it’s a gross attempt at appealing to emotion (it’s meant to be played as touching, like how her daughter still remembers her).

When Emilia wakes up after surgery, her face is covered in bandages. Strangely scary, and I assume unintentional. Depicting a quiet moment like this, immediately after surgery, could have been a moment to indulge in the catharsis of transition. But, as she stares out the window at a sunrise, the bandaged face plays as horrifying.

The movie seems fascinated around the surgical aspect of transitioning, not realizing how infrequent it is among trans people. The worst musical sequence I’ve seen in years has that line which has been mocked across the internet, “man to woman, from penis to vagina.”

These tropes doom the movie. I wondered if trans people felt the same way about this depiction, and after checking GLAAD, an LGBTQ advocacy organization focused on culture, I was confirmed correct. Reading just one article, “‘Emilia Pérez’ is Not Good Trans Representation,” which collects reviews from trans film critics, was enough.

It’s bizarre to me how arrogant filmmakers can be about their own product if it’s under the guise of auteur creativity. When I was young, I found myself fascinated by the idea of a celebrity director. I’ve since grown up and thought the idea of the whole auteur director a bit baloney. Quentin Tarantino claiming writer-directors have more attachment to their projects than directors who don’t write their scripts is just wrong.

Films are not one man. So the way “Emilia Pérez” has been dazzling the awards circuit, with white Frenchie director Jacques Audiard saying how he didn’t consult with trans people or did any research on Mexico (a separate can of worms) before creating his “masterpiece,” is sickly.

I’m no different and might not have a horse in this race as a cis straight white male, but I still feel the bizarre disconnect between what’s being celebrated and reality. “Emilia Pérez” is not a good representation of trans people, and I really hope those 13 nominations are all it will get.