Boyhood should have been named Best Picture at the 87th Academy Awards

As my opponent has told you, this debate will about whether or not the film Boyhood should have won the Best Picture award in the 87th annual Oscars. I will debate the point Boyhood did not deserve to win Best Picture. This round will not include any rebuttals, I will simply state my points. So, without further adieu, I will begin my arguments. Opening Boyhood, a 12 year production, was a film that was very popular amongst audiences and critics. However, the popularity of this film is not because of the skill of the movie. The critics and audiences are confused between shock and skill. A good movie must, at the end of the day, have a good plot. Boyhood tries to obscure and cover this up through the 12 year gimmick and unusual writing. However, after laying down the faults of this film, without the distractions, you will see the film as nothing more than a movie trying to be clever and different, but failing, creating a terrible film in the process. Gimmicks Boyhood was filmed over the span of 12 years. Keeping the same actors and actresses throughout the movie. However, this technique isn't a testament to how good of a movie it is. It is a gimmick. This technique is how it attracts viewers to the movie as it is intriguing and unprecedented.But this doesn't make it a good film. Gimmicks have been shown in movies time and time again. The film Avatar used 3D visuals. This was shown ,at the time, as a clever way to engage audiences. However, after every movie used it, and the spotlight was on the writing,and the movie was simply passed off as cliché. Boyhood is very similar. The difficulty of filming a movie, isn’t a factor into the effectivity. This 12 year filming method should not decide how good of a movie it is. A movie is meant to entertain and engage, and since this 12 year filming method did not do so, it is a gimmick, not meant for the film, but for the marketing of the film. I implore viewers to disregard the 12 year filming as as a gimmick, and truly put a magnifying glass to the plot and writing in the film. Writing The writing in Boyhood has confused many. It is seen as very realistic to the experience of life.But in reality, that is just an excuse make sure we don't see the writing for what it is. Clumsy,awkward,cliché and cringe worthy. I will break the writing into many points as this is a large point and it has many sub-points. Clumsiness Boyhood is a clumsy and unorganized film. It cuts from one point in his life to another.He turns from an innocent boy to a drinking,smoking teenager, with only a cut as a transition. This quick and rushed jump of innocence and maturity seems out of place and clumsy. The film has little to no flow. It seems like they just cut together home video clips and called it a film. This ineptitude should not be in a Hollywood film. Clichés The entire film of Boyhood is made up of clichés. The way it shows maturity, is by using every obvious clichés in life and in Texan culture. Teenagers are often seen as constantly drinking, smoking and having sexual intercourse without any thought of repercussions. The first scene of Mason (the main character) as a teenager is literally him on top of a girl, drinking and smoking. Another cliché Boyhood uses is the connection between Texans and guns. Texans are commonly seen as a place in which everyone revolves around guns and has violence as their first option. For Mason's birthday, he gets a gun, given to him by his grandfather. This lack of originality makes it look like a copy and it detracts from the film. These are just few of the many clichés in Boyhood. Manipulation The film boyhood uses nostalgia to its extreme. To the point of manipulation. I will explain this. Nostalgia is the only emotion felt throughout this film and everyone can enjoy a bit of nostalgia. From the popularity of the Wii, to the awkward time we learned about sexual intercourse, these are moments many people went through in this generation. However, while nostalgia is a useful tool, it is not what should control a film. If nostalgia is all you can feel, then a film is taking advantage of your emotions and memories to try to replicate the feeling we had at the time. This just seems cheap and tacky. It can’t make you feel emotions through writing a good scene, so it just brings back nice memories. A very flawed method indeed. Specific Demographic As said previously, the only emotion felt in this film is nostalgia. However, this can only be felt by a certain demographic. Anyone born in the 60s had a very different upbringing, not allowing them to feel this nostalgia. This also means anyone from the future who has a different upbringing will not feel this nostalgia, ensuring the film will be dated and boring to anyone in the future. A good film can overcome this. Examples of films that are just as entertaining now as it was when it was released include Psycho,Star Wars, The Godfather, The Shining. Despite these movies being filmed at different times, the enjoyment is not lost. Boyhood will lose all nostalgia, and therefore value, over time. Progression and Anticlimaxes A movie is essentially a path. From introduction to climax, a film uses a path to progress towards something. This is not a rigid system, it is a system that allows us to clearly see the outline of a movie. Characters in a film work towards something, just like in life. The path builds up to a large and effective climax. It is like climbing a vertical wall, constantly building and climbing until we get to the summit, the climax being the summit. However, Boyhood does not do any of this. The film is anticlimactic. It is difficult to see what they are working towards. What is the function of all the abuse Mason takes. Does it make him into a stronger person? Does it destroy his morality? We don't know. We aren’t shown any sign of how Mason has psychologically changed. There is no climax or path. It is just unconnected events, turning into a boring film. These are fundamental flaws in the writing of this film, leading to a boring film. Closing Statements Boyhood is a film that had lackluster writing,a gimmicky and unoriginal story, and no flow. This, undoubtedly, results in a bad film, and a bad film should not win Best Picture. Especially against other, beautiful films. These are my initial points. I may elaborate on them with rebuttals and refutement, given by my opponent in the next round. Until then, I look forward to continuing this debate.