Awards night controversies

Controversies are like ugly shadows that often trail awards presentations. An awards season, you see, is usually not complete without scandals and talks about lobbying, leakage and other unsavory issues that often accompany an awards night.

So far (and so good), there are no major complaints about the results of the three major award-giving bodies (Star, FAP and FAMAS) that have given out their awards. The industry is just waiting for the members of the Manunuri ng Pelikulang Pilipino to officially wrap up this year’s awards season on May 11, when they stage the 25th Gawad Urian. (I hope the controversies do not erupt here.)

Although I can honestly say that the Urian has had the least controversies among the major award-giving bodies, this group, composed of local film critics, also has its share of criticisms emanating from other sectors of the movie industry.

The FAMAS, on the other hand, is the one that has endured the most controversies – starting in the late ’50s when a film studio – out of delicadeza – returned all the trophies the studio received after talks of wheeling and dealing swept through the industry shortly after the awards night. I have to say though that no major controversy has hounded the FAMAS in the past few years. Its 50th anniversary show last Saturday (all of six hours!) may have come out like it was even longer than its history, but I certainly have no complaints about its winners.

But no one can tell exactly when the next controversy will strike the FAMAS or any of the other award-giving bodies. Usually the controversies and complaints against an award-giving body are the same: peddling of awards, lobbying, prejudices, leakage of results and sloppy awards presentations.

The mode of the awards presentation, actually, has no bearing on the credibility and integrity of the award-giving body. It’s really just a show with entertainment numbers that are there so that the evening doesn’t end up looking like some school’s commencement exercises.

Also, it’s not the people behind the award-giving body who mount the awards presentation, but the producers who buy the rights to air the awards night on television and in turn earn money by selling advertising spots to sponsors.

In the Star Awards, Nora Calderon, Archie de Calma, Ricky Calderon and other PMPC officers often sit down with the producer (Tessie Celestino) and the director (Al Quinn) during production meetings. In the Gawad Urian, I personally go through production details with the creative staff (it’s Antonio Tuviera who is producing Urian this year). But with the Film Academy and the FAMAS, I think the organizers just leave everything to the producers.

In my opinion, these awards ceremonies are just icing on the cake. What matters in the end is the roster of winners – from Best Picture down the line – and how acceptable they are to the general public. Movie observers, however, now also expect lavish awards shows from award-giving bodies – no thanks to the influence of the Oscar Awards. When the first Academy Awards banquet was held in Hollywood on May 16, 1929, the actual handing out of trophies was over in 20 minutes. But soon – especially with the advent of television – the Oscar shows became bigger and bigger every year. And now, most local awards shows are patterned after the Oscars and that has become an accepted tradition in Philippine entertainment.

These shows, of course, generate income for the awards bodies. But let me point out that whatever money these organizers get from TV producers isn’t exactly big. In the case of the Manunuri, the income from the TV rights it gets from its producer is really just enough to pay for the trophies, certificates, rental of screening rooms, printing of invitation cards, meals during meetings and the souvenir programs which really cost so much to churn out. The Manunuri members, sadly, are not good salesmen and cannot be counted on to sell ads in souvenir programs. (The PMPC members, at least, have the initiative to sell ads for their souvenir programs and look for sponsors for their trophies.)

But inspite of the Manunuri members’ relatively conservative stance in putting up their awards presentation (it doesn’t choose a Star of the Night), it has received criticisms for mounting big production numbers in its award shows. The Manunuri – so they say – has gone "commercial."

During the first Gawad Urian in 1977 (for awards year 1976), the awards night at the CCP Little Theater wasn’t even televised. The TV coverage (aired one week after the event) came only in 1980, when Armida Siguion-Reyna (practically the only TV producer who did not cheat on the Manunuri with regard to payments during Urian’s early years) offered the group to televise the show for them.

This coming May 11, it’s going to be the Araneta Coliseum for the Manunuri and I’m already expecting a big howl from the group’s detractors. (Hey, guys, it’s the silver anniversary so it’s got to be different from the presentation of previous years!)

From the beginning I really had no quarrel about award-giving bodies putting up big awards presentations. Televising the affair to me is extremely necessary because that is the most effective way of honoring the year’s winners – by telling the world that their outstanding achievements in films they’ve slaved out for are being heralded as the best. For what is the point of giving out awards if nobody knows about it?

Of course, I admit some awards presentations really go overboard by giving out a long list of special awards that have nothing to do with films.

But generally, I see nothing wrong about awards bodies selling the TV rights to producers or selling ads in souvenir programs. The bottom line is, for as long as they don’t sell the awards to the winners and the integrity of the award-giving body is not compromised, then that’s fine by me.

(Next: The other controversies – peddling of awards, switching, leakage, etc. – that hound local award-giving bodies.)