Oscar's Massive Spoiler

On February 28th (28/2/16) the Academy Awards (Oscars) take place in Hollywood, California, US.

As an outsider I think a large part of the Oscar's enduring success is that it has never lost sight of its true purpose. That is of as an industry awards. Of course it helps that the industry in question is an extremely glamorous one that most everybody secretly wishes they could be a part of.

If you are one of those people who stays in their seat until the credits have ended you will know that the movie industry can be very cliquey. Directors tend to work with the same group of screenwriters, photographers, actors etc. For example if Joss Whedon is directing a project it's a fair bet that the actress Amy Acker will appear at some point.

However this goes beyond simply finding jobs for your less talented friends. On set things run more smoothly if everybody sees the world in the same way - the grand artistic vision. As such the controversies and discussions that surround the Oscars serve an important purpose within the industry. It allows newcomers to be tested out to see whether they'd fit in on a future project and keep the Cara Delevingne's of this world to minimum.

Therefore while it would probably boost my readership dramatically if I shared all the secrets prior to the ceremony I think in the long run it would just spoil it for everyone.

However this year's big movie is so big and of such global significance I've decided that it constitutes Force Majeure.

The movie I'm talking about is of course Alejandro G Inarritu's spellcheck baiting "The Revenant." This is largely seen as a star vehicle intended to allow Leonardo DiCaprio to finally win the best actor Oscar he's missed out on in various other movies such as "The Departed."

Throughout his 25 year career DiCaprio has tried use his wealth and star power to make the World a better place. Unfortunately though I think his efforts to highlight Africa's vicious mineral wars in 2006's "Blood Diamond" were rather drowned out by his absolutely appalling South African accent.

In recent years DiCaprio has concentrated heavily on the issue of climate change even being appointed as an official Ambassador for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). 

DiCaprio's commitment to this role goes far beyond simply turning up to the occasional function or recording the occasional video message. His "Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation" has actually funded a lot of credible research into renewable energy. Therefore within climate change circles DiCaprio is taken seriously. For a celebrity.

As such The Revenant is supposed to reflect DiCaprio's efforts to combat change and in particular the draft agreement that was reached at the 21st Conference of Parties (COP21) in Paris at the end of 2015.

For example much of the movie features DiCaprio's character - Hugh Glass - trekking alone through the frozen wilderness of the American northwest. This showcases the insignificance and vulnerability of man in the face of the awesome power of nature.

The narrative of a man being left for dead before battling back to rejoin civilisation is a metaphor for the journey towards COP21. Efforts to combat climate change of course failed at COP15 in Copenhagen back in 2009. The entire process was intended to have been killed off at COP18 in Doha in 2012. COP21 was supposed to mark a triumphant return.

The title of the film is not so much inspired by as directly stolen from a French TV Series "Les Revenants" (The Returned.)

Essentially this is a Zombie drama. However it doesn't feature your typical lumbering, brain eating, decaying Zombies. Instead these Zombies seem to be perfectly normal and just like everybody else. Many of them don't even realise that they're dead.

Les Revenants is one of those shows that rather than telling the audience a story per se it instead asks questions of that audience.

For example some of the central characters are a traditional family with twin daughters. One of the daughters is killed in a bus accident whilst on a school trip while the other daughter who missed the trip through illness survives. So when the Zombie twin returns she is still a pubescent girl of around 12 or 13. In her absence though the living twin has continued to grow up and is now at the age of around 16 or 17 where she's starting to go out partying and staying out all night with boys.

This contrast of course poses all sorts of questions about growing up including that old favourite of the Olympics and the Eurovision Song Contest - the age of sexual consent. After all legally both twins are the same age so why isn't acceptable for the Zombie twin to also be sexually active? It of course also raises issues of parental grief and that old assertion that in the eyes of their parents children never really grow up.

If there is a central character in what is an ensemble piece it is this woman "Julie." In her recent past Julie has experienced some sort of traumatic event and since that event entered into what we assume was her first lesbian relationship with a local policewoman. That relationship has ended but the policewoman is obviously keen to see it re-kindled.

One day Julie is sort of adopted by this Zombie boy of around 10 or 11. This triggers the re-kindling of the relationship and Julie and the policewoman effectively become the boy's lesbian parents raising all sorts of questions about homosexuality and gay parenting.

As the first season draws to a close and throughout the second season the Zombies begin to emerge as a separate group from the living. This raises all sorts of questions about tribalism and the concept of otherness that are at the heart of all racist and sectarian conflicts. At the time I think I made specific reference to the Nazi Holocaust.

I have to say though that I found the second season to be extremely hard work. This was primarily because it was broadcast some four years after the first season. 

The delay was the result of some production problem such as getting the season commissioned or getting actors to commit. The second season did make a series of in-jokes about this production problem but having it filtered through the problem of getting the UK distributor to pick it up these largely went over my head.

My main problem was that over the course of those four years I'd largely forgotten how season one had ended. I remain convinced that it ended with Julie, the policewoman and the Zombie boy trying escape the town by driving over a dam but being prevented from doing so by some supernatural force.

The second season began with the town being flooded by some unspecified cause and taken over by the French military. Many of the original cast including the policewoman were simply missing with no explanation.

With Inarritu being something of Mexico's golden boy there was a lot of gossip about Les Revenants across South America throughout 2015.

For example a big theme in season one was concerns that a dam would burst flooding the town as had happened some 35 years before. Then of course in the second season the town had been flooded.

So for example in October 2015 the receding waters of a reservoir in Mexico exposed the 400 year old Temple of Santiago Church that had been submerged when the dam was built and the reservoir was created. Photographs of the scene were essentially the opening shot of the title credits of Les Revenants.

Then on November 5th (5/11/15) a dam burst in Bento Rodrigues, Mariana, Brazil flooding a near-by town with toxic water killing 17 residents.

Not being aware of the DiCaprio link at the time and struggling with season two myself I didn't think that it was worth my time addressing Les Reveants directly as opposed to, say, working on the negotiating text itself.

However looking back it is clear that a large part of the reason why COP21 failed was because the US and Brazil got bogged down in the detail of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) - the so-called "Sheen Clause" - at the expense of all other aspects.

As a result I can't escape this nasty feeling that maybe I made the wrong decision by failing to address Les Revenants directly.

This of course brings me onto the wider question of whether I think DiCaprio deserves an Oscar in reflection of his work on climate change?

It is obvious that DiCaprio is a man whose long wanted to walk in my shoes. Therefore a victory for him would mean an awful lot of reflected glory for me.

However the fact of the matter is that COP21 was not a triumphant return. Instead it saw efforts to combat climate change die face down in the dirt. Its bloated, rotting corpse is now starting to present a health hazard all of its own.

That means DiCaprio failed. It means UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres failed. It means that COP21 President Laurent Fabius failed. It means I failed. It means we all failed.

Handing out awards for failure has never sat well with me.

Although I held my tongue at the time DiCaprio's appearance at COP21 on Saturday December 5th (5/12/15) actually struck me as part of the problem.

DiCaprio's primary role as UNFCCC Ambassador is to raise the profile of the organisation amongst people who enjoy his movies but don't necessarily watch that news or understand terms like "Binary Differentiation." 

However DiCaprio is either not famous enough or not the right type of famous that the press and the paparazzi would go through the arduous process of getting accredited for a COP Summit on the off chance that he might appear. As such I'm not sure how much extra publicity DiCaprio actually brought to COP21.

The arrival of DiCaprio's Hollywood glamour did have a huge effect on the - frankly - nerds who were attending COP21 already. These people don't need any reminding of the importance of taking action on climate change and already find the topic exciting. So rather than trying to excite them further the challenge is often to keep them calm and thinking rationally in what is an extremely high pressure environment.

DiCaprio's appearance occurred at a crucial point in negotiations. The relevant working group had just finalised the draft to be sent to the high level segment for final negotiation. This left delegates facing the crucial decision of whether to accept that draft or send it back for further work.

Therefore I think that rather then getting excited over DiCaprio it would've be better for delegates to have spent that Saturday sleeping, having a nice meal, taking a walk in the park, visiting one of Paris' famous art galleries or doing whatever it is they do to relax and clear their heads.

The problem was actually highlighted in the closing plenary the following Saturday. If you watch it again you'll notice that in the front-row there are two young, blonde female delegates in hysterical floods of tears apparently in full Beatlemania mode. Looking at that you can't help but ask whether the decisions being made at that point were good decisions.

Then of course there is DiCaprio's unfortunate liaison with Rihanna in Paris last Tuesday (19/1/16). Although I think at worst DiCaprio was simply playing along with a tabloid rumour I had two primary objectives in dedicating 2013 to Rihanna's Diamonds World Tour. The first was to protect the UNFCCC process while the second was to protect Rihanna and her career. With it now looking like I've failed on both fronts that is a bit of a sore point.

As such the whole thing struck me as rather unnecessary and posed some serious questions about DiCaprio's judgement and whether he has the skill set to be a positive influence on Rihanna.

Fortunately for DiCaprio though the criteria for membership of the Academy has not yet slipped to the point that it includes blogs.

Hopefully though the "Oscars So White" protesters will come to realise why Academy members are sitting there going;

"Micheal B Jordan was in a rocky movie. That's cute(!)"

After all their continuing stupidity is really starting to bum people out.

17:10 on 26/1/16 (UK date).