This is the first draft of an op-ed I’m writing for one of my classes. I have no idea about the quality of the writing yet. I’d love feedback.

I’m sure I was not the only film buff hopelessly disappointed with Sunday’s Oscar telecast. Let us leave aside the efforts of Anne “I’m Trying So Hard” Hathaway and James “Squinty McTiredHost” Franco. Meant to attract a younger demographic, they will unfortunately go down in history as two of the worst hosts in the awards ceremony’s history. Where is Ricky Gervais when you need him?

But this isn’t about the show. This is about the awards. This year, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) - the presumed experts on all things great in film - awarded its top prize to The King’s Speech. For many weeks leading up to the ceremony, the film was considered a frontrunner for Best Picture. It’s what people in the biz call “momentum.” How odd, though. The Social Network won the top prize from most other voting bodies - Golden Globes, National Board of Review, and the majority of the critics’ societies.

So what happened? Why would a film as lauded as The Social Network lose out to a film that somehow gained “momentum?” How in the world can the king of all awards in show business disagree with so many others?

Well, the 5,700 voters of AMPAS seem to have unique views on what constitutes a Best Picture. Over the 83-year history of the Oscars, certain trends have developed.

Last year, after an outcry that the hugely popular The Dark Knight did not receive a nomination, the Academy decided to raise the number of nominees from five to ten. The change theoretically made space for more populist movies in a race that is overcrowded with dark dramas, obscure indies, and films that many industry insiders deem “Oscar bait.”

Films like this are typically heavy-handed dramas. They often feature characters with disabilities, be they mental or physical. They provide a fictional glimpse into royalty and the crown. And looking back, each year there seems to be a requisite World War II-era film nominated. Last year, it was Inglourious Basterds. The year before that, it was The Reader. Before that, Atonement. And before that, Letters from Iwo Jima. All great films, for sure. None of them won, but it sure is “an honor just to be nominated.” How many times have you heard that in interviews?

The King’s Speech exemplifies “Oscar bait,” which is why its victory is so infuriating. In a year that not only had a greater number of nominations, but also contained a dynamic set of nominees that is unprecedented for the Oscars, the majority of the Academy’s voters went with… a film set in World War II with a character who must overcome a disability and who ultimately triumphs in his quest to become His Majesty, King George VI. Whew! Sounds like a winner to me.

Never mind recognizing The Social Network, a film that defines a generation and deftly sums up the American way of life for the last decade. Forget Inception, a film that dares to get creative and mind-bendingly reinterpret a genre. None of this Black Swan nonsense, with its lead character who doesn’t manage to overcome adversity. And certainly not Toy Story 3. The best film of the year? Animated? Puh-lease. Any one of these unconventional elements is enough to scare off voters.

Perhaps if AMPAS wanted to give more films a chance by raising the number of nominees, its members should recognize the diverse nature of cinema. A paint-by-numbers, feel-good British period piece does not a Best Picture make. 

The King’s Speech is inarguably one of the best films this year. I thought it was quite lovely. But I can admit when a plot is predictable, and I can feel when a movie is contrived. I didn’t feel that with The Social Network. I didn’t feel it with Black Swan. Even True Grit - an Old West -set remake with a similarly heartfelt plot - felt timely and groundbreaking.

As long as the Oscars award films that we’ve all seen a million times, they will lose credibility. Until studios stop manufacturing “Oscar Bait,” a Best Picture award will feel undeserved and cliché. If AMPAS does not move forward and begin recognizing the changing landscape of film, their top prizes will be meaningless. And we, their audience, will be offered even more The King’s Speech’s.

Congratulations, Academy. You got it wrong again. And your irreverence to filmgoers is really starting to show.