In the streets of New York, her dreams of money and status crumbling onto grey pavement, Anora is on a hunt for her runaway husband. With her are three men hired by her husband Vanya’s family, demanding to annul their marriage. This is the second act of the Oscar-winning film “Anora.” The movie was advertised as another feel-good Cinderella story — a sex worker living in a low-income neighborhood meets a rich Russian oligarch on vacation — but after the first 45 minutes of the film, Anora’s life completely derails from its road to paradise.
After the name “Anora!” was shouted from the Oscars stage five times on the night of March 2, many people took their confusion and disappointment online. The backlash summed up to one large concern: how did a film with so many sex scenes, seemingly unproductive ones at that, win over other films with seemingly more apparent meaning? One popular consensus spread across the internet — Mikey Madison winning Best Actress over Demi Moore proves the plot of “The Substance.”
“The Substance,” a nominee for Best Picture starring Demi Moore, comments on ageism in the entertainment industry — how a youthful, sexy woman is often favored over an experienced celebrity who has slipped from the public eye. Many people used this message to explain why Mikey Madison, 25 year-old actress in her first lead role as Anora (or Ani), won over the experienced but under-recognized Demi Moore.
However, the narrative of the Madison-Moore rivalry written by the public, is hypocritical. Using this excuse only discredits Madison’s award as something not earned from her effort and performance, but from her age and the eroticism demanded by her role. In “The Substance,” a younger woman rose to fame through her sexual appeal without artistry or talent. This is not analogous to Madison, who added a new layer of depth to both Ani’s character and the film — instead of using sexual scenes to appeal to the audience, Madison uses it as a device that shapes and gives insight into her character. This imposed rivalry exhibits the very objectification people protest against by assuming a young, conventionally attractive woman only reached success because of her body. The Oscars has historically awarded older actresses for Best Actress. Recognizing Madison at merely 25 years old, when the winning actresses from the past five years were 50.4 years old on average, actually breaks the norm rather than conforms to it.
The impression of “Anora” reducing it to simply “disguised p*rn” and “made by a man, for men” bled into criticism of the movie itself. People labeled it as a film used to exploit the female body for the purpose of attracting older, male audiences through “tasteless vulgarity.” Rather than criticize “Anora” while being artistically respectful, most comments dismissed the film for its overuse of sex and profanity, which many believed to be telling signs of bad cinematography and scriptwriting.
There is an important difference between creating something for the pleasure of men and creating something that utilizes themes of male pleasure to portray a deeper message. Writer and director Sean Baker does not paint Ani as a pitiful sex worker who sells her body out of obligation nor as a tool for men. He redefines the sex worker-client relationship from predatory to mutual, empowering her as a woman who uses her clients just as much as they use her. At the same time, Baker does not shy away from showing its grim realities. He highlights the disrespect directed towards sex workers, especially from those associated with a higher socioeconomic status. Many criticisms actually feed into this stigma: dismissing sex and language as objectifying and childish only shows critics’ privilege and detachment from the reality of sex work. The majority of Ani’s clients being older men is not “obeying the male gaze” — it is the uncomfortable reality.
Sex should not be considered disgraceful or sinful, but acknowledged as another way to portray human relationships and their nuance. I believe “Anora” uses sex quite tastefully. Ani’s body is seen as an object of desire that clients pay to experience, which leads her to adopt the belief that even people outside of work see her as such. We begin to realize that it is not only society that sees sex workers as mere tools — Ani herself cannot imagine someone who does not use her for her body.
Many people expect the Academy to give awards based purely on merit; after all, that is what “award show” implies. With this expectation comes the assumption that merit is objective. In reality, award shows, especially those as prestigious as the Oscars, are inherently political due to their responsibility to recognize merit while impacting the industry on a large scale. Art can only be so objective: beyond that, what counts as “good” and “bad” differs for every person. Therefore, the optimal decision the Academy can make is to choose based on what statement they would like to make on the industry. “Anora,” an independent film with a mere budget of six million, brought a new perspective into sex work, and its bittersweet, open ending avoided clichés while leaving the audience with new questions.
The lack of effort to understand “Anora” as a film concerns me. Of course, people should feel free to enjoy or dislike movies without being forced to analyze them. However, personal opinions on a film are not proper arguments for or against the objective artistry and quality of the film itself. It is more productive to use your personal response as a starting point for a supported argument — for example, saying “this element made me uncomfortable and broke the flow of the plot, which made it difficult for me to fully engage with the movie” — rather than stating your opinion as if it were a fact, like “the movie is bad because this element contributed nothing to the plot at all.” Onwards, we should approach all art with an open mind and a critical eye. Assume intentionality. Respect creative liberties. Do not deny art of its identity; celebrate it.
Ava Shu is a Lower from Oradell, NJ. Contact the author at ashu27@andover.edu
