Daniel Radcliffe talks 'Harry Potter' and the Oscar snobs
Warner Bros. Pictures
Radcliffe, Watson and Grint in a scene from the final "Harry Potter" movie "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2."
Although he's said he didn't expect a best picture Oscar nod, Daniel Radcliffe is nonetheless a little "miffed" that "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2" didn't make it into the major Oscar categories when nominations were announced in January. (The movie did receive nods in three technical categories.)
In an interview with Radio Times on Tuesday, Radcliffe said that the wildly lucrative "Harry Potter" franchise has been continuously ignored by the Academy.
"I don't think the Oscars like commercial films, or kids' films, unless they're directed by Martin Scorsese," Radcliffe told the Radio Times. "I was watching 'Hugo' the other day and going, 'Why is this nominated and we're not?' I was slightly miffed."
Radcliffe added: "There's a certain amount of snobbery ... It's kind of disheartening. I never thought I'd care."
This is not the first time the "Woman in Black" star has voiced his opinion on the nominations.
Just last Friday, R! adcliffe said in an interview with BBC America that Alan Rickman, who played Professor Severus Snape, should have received some Academy recognition for his performance in the finale.
"The one thing I would have loved was for Alan Rickman to get nominated ... I think what Alan does with that character, with the world watching you expecting that scene to be a certain way, was amazing," he said.
On the films, Radcliffe continued: "I don't know if it's a case of being passed over. I think it could just be that we're not one of the nine best films of the year ... Actually, we probably made the top nine in my head now that I think about it."
But in another interview with Moviefone in January, he said that not getting enough Oscar attention wasn't "something we're going to be losing sleep over."
"I didn't expect it to be nominated for best picture, and no, it doesn't faze us," Radcliffe said at the time.
Matt Kiebus of Death + Taxes magazine has supported Radcliffe's statement, saying that the Oscars have rarely been about the people's choice.
"The idea that the average viewer doesn't have a vote bothers some, but the idea that the Oscars have an agenda and play favorites is much more vexing," he said.
Kiebus goes on to say that while the "Harry Potter" series has been given technical nods, it's still not enough.
"Historical dramas, biopics, corruption, war and physical transformations all frequently do well, while comedy, action, animation and kids' films are often slighted," he said.
Yet there are some well-known exceptions. "Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" received the best picture Oscar in 2004, and according to BoxOfficeMojo.com, had a domestic gross of $377 million. In 2010, box office champ "Avatar" was nominated in the best picture category and went on to win three Oscars.
When the nominations were first announced, many "HP" fans were outraged and threatened to boycott the Oscars. But bloggers like Kevin P. Sullivan turned their pity to the ! Academy, stating that the franchise is just an example of how out of touch the Academy is and that "the snub reveals the supreme stubbornness of the Academy."
"This year's best picture contenders make up the safest and most Oscar-friendly field of nominees in recent memory," Sullivan said on MTV's Movie Blog. "A nomination for 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2' would have defied Academy stereotypes and shook up a race that is destined to leave many viewers snoring."
Copyright 2012 by CNN NewSource. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Comments