What makes a screenplay award worthy?

So I've finished all five scripts nominated for Best Original...

Initial thoughts:

Each were amazing stories, of course. They all did an outstanding job of pulling me in. Definitely, a great learning experience reading these.

I noticed that of the five, three were self-directed. As an aspiring screenwriter, I find this particularly interesting because it concerns me that great scripts may be overlooked unless they are attached to great directors. I've heard all the stories of studios being reluctant to take chances on screenplays without talent attached. Zero Dark Thirty also falls into this category as Mark Boal practically is the talent behind this, stemming from his Hurt Locker success.

That being said, Flight, by John Gatins, is most intriguing because it follows a more traditional development of script being written then sold. However, Gatins has said he benefited from working with Dreamworks on Dreamer, in which he wrote and directed.

So, as a writer, I'm rooting for Flight.

But putting all of that aside, from a general story perspective, Moonrise Kingdom and Django were probably the most compelling and imaginative. MK brought me to a place I've never known and reminded me of a Stand By Me type of film which perfectly captures a time of innocence and wonder that has long since passed. There were some clunky moments and I'm sure one could critique that its saturated with sentimentality, but it's a heart-warming story with unique characters. Not having seen the film, the story does a wonderful job of painting this world for me. I can see every image in my mind and I find myself smiling through most of it. There's no ah-ha moments here and the ending is as you first suspect. But it has colorful descriptions and is extremely easy to read. I've left satisfied and touched when I put it down.

Django, while very creative, had great dialog and interesting scenes, but its characters felt foreign to me. For me, it felt like these characters could never exist and while I was invested in the story, I never found a universal hitch within the characters to hang my hat on. This could be because of the setting, but I've connected with period pieced before, instead, I believe it was the detached reality from which Tarantino thrives. Interesting structure, but 160+ pages long. Only a self-directed writer could get away with this, right? Well, Flight was about 140+ pages as well, so who knows!!!

Amour felt like a stage play. Very limited amount of sets, I believe no more than three. Dialog-heavy. Powerful story, but honestly, I didn't feel like there was anything groundbreaking here. This must be a case in which the performance elevates the story and the script. This further confuses me about the nomination process. Clearly, a script cannot be nominated without being produced, but how much does final produced product factor in to the evaluation of the screenplay???

Zero Dark Thirty is extremely well written. Another great lesson in "how-to", with a lot of jargon like ECU, SUPERIMPOSE, etc. As opposed to Django which felt more prose-like or perhaps a stream of Tarantino's consciousness. Of course ZDT's story was compelling, and as I believe with most important historical pieces, will likely be a front-runner. Just like Lincoln, Milk, etc. I tend to think the Academy favors these type of stories. I can't find any fault with ZDT and I think it followed the three act structure quite closely.

Which brings us to Flight. I wasn't impressed with the story. It was trite - an amoral character survives an extraordinary event that cannot change his ways but somehow finds clarity and redemption through love. I enjoyed the story for what it was. This again must have been one of those films in which the performances really transformed the words. On paper, the characters didn't pop. It was hard to get on Whip's side, but only barely. Gatin really sticks to the formula here. You can clearly see the plot points and there some really aggressive maguffins thrown in, for instance, how Whip meets Nicole. But as filmmakers and writers, we allow for a certain amount of conveniences to take place. I just didn't see "Oscar" written on this script, yet, because of how it was developed, I'm somehow rooting for it. Bias I suppose.

This was the first time I've done this, read all nominated scripts prior to the show. Also, I've not seen any of these films at all. I wanted to learn and focus on the writing and see if I could somehow understand what sets them apart.

I have been extremely inspired to work on my own projects because of this. A take away I have is that most of these stories are not extraordinarily unique. I've seen the basic stories of Flight, Amour, Moonrise Kingdom and Django told before. Again, ZDT benefits from a unique historical event, but the story has been told before. We've all heard the theory that every story has been told and the finite archetypes of story. This definitely reinforces that theory. It comes down to passion and perspective. I'm excited about telling my stories and seeing what may come.