Oscar? Fever: The History and Politics of the Academy Awards? [Hardcover]

Emanuel Levy (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: January 30, 2001 | ISBN-10: 082641284X | ISBN-13: 978-0826412843

Oscar« Fever is both history and appreciation, filled with insider stories and little-known facts, such as who came up with the idea of the Academy Awards«; who the youngest and oldest winners are; which film garnered the most nominations; who has been nominated the most times without ever winning and more. Included are all the latest anecdotes and statistics, as well as a selection of film stills from the greatest winners, nostalgic and new, to tell the inside story of Oscar«. .The Academy Awards ceremony is the single most anticipated and widely viewed spectacle in the world. It has close to one billion viewers every year. How has this event grown, in some seventy-five years, from an intimate gathering of directors and actors to a global phenomenon that dominates magazines, newspapers, radio, TV and the internet.Oscar« Fever is a completely new and far more popular rewriting of And the Winner Is...(1987;1990). It is both history and appreciation, chockablock with inside stories and little-known facts. Included are all the latest facts and statistics, as well as film stills, nostalgic and new, to tell the inside story of Oscar and what the awards really say about our times.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

This jaunty and comprehensive look at Oscar history and lore encompasses the larger social and cultural implications of a narrow subject. Levy, a senior film reviewer for Variety, draws on an extraordinarily detailed knowledge of Hollywood history, providing intriguing factoids to supplement his assertions and analysis about subjects like gender, age and race in Hollywood, and probing such essential questions as whether the Oscars are a "popularity contest." Levy supplies all the technical details of the nomination process, the rank of the Oscars among other film industry awards and a wide array of statistics (e.g., 20% of all actresses and 5% of actors are under 25 years of age when they receive nominations for best performance). Meanwhile, his analysis of why films about race, such as Guess Who's Coming to Dinner and In the Heart of the Night, receive Oscar nominations is thoughtful and savvy. No sociological question escapes Levy's notice, and he's got an answer for everything. Do roles that emphasize suffering and victimization help women win Oscars? (Yes.) Does the use of accents help performers win? (Not singlehandedly, but they help.) Can even a single Oscar overhype a career? (Very often, yes.) While on the surface these questions seem facile, he integrates them into the larger industry and social portrait, demonstrating their wider ramifications. (Mar. 23)Forecast: Film scholars may find this book unnecessary, but Oscar fans will enjoy it. Originally scheduled for January publication, the book is now slated for publication only two days before the telecast of the 73rd Academy Awards. Any earlier delivery to bookstores will only enhance this title's chances for success.

Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

From Library Journal

This latest in the never-ending stream of books about the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' annual awards comprises 15 chapters and appendixes that describe and explore, among other topics, the voting timetable, the importance of being nominated, Best Picture by genre, the age and gender of actors, the Oscars international reputation, and the sociocultural influences affecting outcomes. Film critic Levy (Cinema of Outsiders, LJ 10/15/99) provides some revelations, including the fierce competition to be an Oscar presenter. "Political correctness is exercised, with producers trying to satisfy age, race, and sex quotas. Presenters...must be stars who can help generate good ratings...newsworthy types who have won Oscars in the past and may win again that night...celebs who are sure to make some kind of fashion statement." As a distillation and analysis, Oscar Fever has merit, although film students and longtime fans will (or should) have most of this information already in their heads. Inside Oscar, 10th Anniversary Edition (Ballantine, 1996) remains the first choice for entertainment, information, and photos taken at the big event. Recommended for larger public libraries and film collections. Kim Holston, American Inst. for Chartered Property Casualty Underwriters, Malvern, PA
Copyright 2001 Reed Business Information, Inc.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 384 pages
• Publisher: Continuum (January 30, 2001)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 082641284X
• ISBN-13: 978-0826412843
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.1 x 1.3 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.9 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.1 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (9 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,220,270 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Too Many Errors to Ignore!, June 2, 2001

By 

Pajamazon (Illinois) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: Oscar? Fever: The History and Politics of the Academy Awards? (Hardcover)

Although Levy's critiques of movies themselves are insightful and his take on the politics that go into the Oscar race enlightening, this book contains far too many major factual errors and inconsistencies to be ignored. It is statistically heavy, with a thorough list of the winners in the five major categories from 1927 to 2000. It contains many charts and breakouts of how many movies of each genre won Best Picture, the cultural importance of the movies nominated, the relative ages of male and female to when they first won, etc. But it also states that Peter Fonda's sister is Lynn Redgrave, Mel Gibson made a movie about "Walter" Wallace, and doesn't include Dame Maggie Smith in the list of royally noted people who've been nominated. For inconsistencies, Levy notes on page 46 that the youngest Best Actress nominee is Kate Winslet for "Titanic," at age 22. Further down the page, he states, "The youngest nominee among the Best Actresses is French Isabelle Adjani, for the title role in "The Story of Adele H." at the age of twenty-one." What? Then, Levy asserts that "Cimarron" was the only western ever to win Best Picture, but later correctly states that both "Dances With Wolves" and "Unforgiven," both westerns, also won Best Picture. This kind of mistake over and over again indicates that book was very poorly edited, or edited by an intern, or rushed out. Such an exhaustively detailed book should be more accurate.

If you can ignore the factual errors, this is an interesting book for those who love everything Hollywood. It is almost obsessively focused on its subject, and gives substantive, thoughtful attention to subjects like the lack of winners among blacks and the disturbing tendency for many of the roles of female nominees to be for emotionally or physically tormented people (Jessica Lange in "Frances," for example).

I found the errors negatively impacted the whole book, so I'm giving it only three stars. Read it, but be prepared to muddle through a lot of misinformation.

6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Fact Checker Wanted!, July 1, 2001

By A Customer

This review is from: Oscar? Fever: The History and Politics of the Academy Awards? (Hardcover)

I'm a longtime fan of the Oscars, so I was eager to read this book. I liked the fact that it was arranged by topic, and not chronologically, but I was just stunned by the high number of errors, omissions, and contradictions in these pages.

On page 48, we're told that Art Carney was the third oldest Best Actor nominee (for "Harry and Tonto") at age 57, but on page 235 we read that at least three actors (including John Wayne, Peter Finch, and Henry Fonda) won at older ages and that Carney was 54, not 57, when he won. On a related note, Henry Fonda's age when he won for "On Golden Pond" is given as 77 on page 105 and as 76 on page 235.

On page 61, there are a number of errors in the "pyramid" of actors who have been nominated 6 or more times. The author claims that there are only 18 who have reached this distinction, but he left out Ingrid Bergman, Robert De Niro, Greer Garson, and Jessica Lange. (He can be forgiven for not including Ellen Burstyn, who was nominated for the 6th time after the book was written.)

On page 113, there is a list of performers who were nominated a number of times before winning, but Susan Sarandon, who won for her 5th nomination, is not included in that group.

On page 115, Dustin Hoffman is omitted from the group of performers who won two Oscars in the same category (he won two Best Actor Oscars).

There are a number of other errors in the book, including those pointed out by other reviewers. If the facts matter to you, you'd be better off with another book on the Oscars.

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars It's Good, but Not Perfect, for the Film and Oscar Buff, March 15, 2001

By A Customer

This review is from: Oscar? Fever: The History and Politics of the Academy Awards? (Hardcover)

Levy has done a thorough job of examining the history of the Academy Awards, although there was not as much material on the politics of the awards process. He does deal slightly with the recent controversies involving Miramax's campaign blitzes for nominations and awards. As a film buff and historian, I was suprised at the number of errors contained within the book, i.e. Joan Fontaine won her Best Actress Oscar for "Rebecca", Hilary Swank appeared in a TV show called "Beverly Hills, 90212", plot descriptions that were inaccurate. There was at least one glaring error in each chapter, with the same facts stated correctly in other chapters. Where was the editor? Levy should have caught these things himself. Overall, I would say that the book met most of its purposes and is interesting reading if one is not too picky over facts.