Good Oscar Night for Horror, No?

Del Toro's  Frankenstein scored a bunch of recognition at awards night this year! Vampires in the form of Sinners did so to an even greater extent. That film also grabbed the public consciousness and I am so glad it did.

I will add my voice to the angry crowd. I can sort of buy Sinners not winning the Best Picture Oscar based on a "the whole can be different than the sum of the parts" argument. 

Again... sort of. Meaning I can buy that argument being used, not it being accurate.

What I don't understand is how what was acknowledged as: 

the best screenplay (written by the director) 

the best lead actor (a dual role conceived of and guided by the director) 

the best music (created in deep conjunction with the director) 

and the best cinematography (envisioned by the director) 

didn't also win the Oscar for best director.

What Sinners did win, however was the hearts, minds and funds of movie goers, and this is great news. 

This film was a truly well done period drama. Every component was amazingly executed: the acting, the visuals, the dialogue (both content and execution), the sets, the soundtrack, the locations, the historical accuracy, the love stories, the music (including a lesson in the history of the blues) the character arcs, and the costumes. 

It was all spectacular. The film grabbed the emotions and attention of the audience and held them fast throughout the entire run time. 

Heck, I tried to put the "Magic of Music" into words for years, and this film showed it perfectly in a single scene. 

But also...

VAMPIRES! WOO!!

There is no way that this film needed those vampires. The story would have worked just as well as a straight dramatic tale. The role the undead played could have been taken (with a few adjustments, obviously) by the Irish or Italian mob coming down from Chicago in search of the Smokestack twins. It would have been exactly as high quality of a film as it was. (It would have been less awesome, however.)

I am very grateful that this was not what was done, however.

This is because of my weird theory about "good" movies and "bad" movies. 

Due to the presence of vampires, this was an excellently made, Oscar winning "bad" movie.

If it was a straight period drama, it would have been an excellently made, Oscar winning "good" movie.

With that kind of quality and success, there will be no stopping a great many imitators, no matter which form it took. 

If Sinners was a "good" movie, most of the imitators would be poorly executed and miss the point about what made the period drama draw crowds, capture imaginations and engage intellects. More importantly, they would all be boring as dirt.

However, Sinners had those vampires and was therefore a "bad" movie. Now when most of the imitators are poorly executed and miss the point about what made the period drama WITH VAMPIRES draw crowds, capture imaginations and engage intellects, they will all be wildly hilarious, and at least somewhat awesome. 

In the mean time I can enjoy how outstandingly well done and emotionally engaging Sinners is over and over again, because even though I know what is going to happen...

VAMPIRES!!!! WOO!!

Final Thought- 

Never forget the moral of Sinners:

ALWAYS LISTEN TO THE WITCHY WOMAN WHO LIVES IN A SHACK IN THE FOREST!!!

 Click here for Universal Monsters Index