In just a few hours, the telecast of the Oscars (or, as we refer to them, the “Weirdcademy Awards for squares”) will begin. We’re happy to steal the Academy’s Thunder by announcing cinema’s weirdest winners of 2013.

In the category of “Weirdest Short Film,” the Weirdcademy Award goes to  for “Fortunes.”

(This short contains profanity)

In the category of “Weirdest Scene,” the Weirdcademy Award goes to Spring Breakers for the scene where Alien and his female henchmen sing Britney Spears’ “Everytime” on a grand piano on the beach at dawn.

(This clip contains profanity and violence)

In the category of “Weirdest Actress,” the award goes to Claudia Black for her voiceover performance as saxophonist Parker, searching for her lost love among the moons of Jupiter, in Strange Frame: Love & Sax.

In the category of “Weirdest Actor,” the Award goes to James Franco for his performance as Alien, the white rapper who runs a crime empire on the side and hires college girls on spring break as his muscle.James Franco Spring Breakers Weirdest Actor

And the award for Weirdest Movie of 2013 goes to Strange Frame: Love & Sax, the world’s first animated lesbian science fiction musical.

Thanks to all members of the Weirdcademy, and see you again next year!


  1. As much as I appreciate and adore this site, this is why certain aspects of WEIRD movies as a category that constantly pushes to be as separate and dignified as any other are not taken seriously enough within any community worth mentioning. While I understand and appreciate the freedom given to subscribers and admirers, empowering their votes for a specific winner in each subsequently weird category, the very fact that Spring Breakers and other movies over the past WEIRDCADAMYAWARDS that have absolutely no real value other than shock and annoyance, can win an award for ANY category is the reality that solidifies my point. I love weirdness and the off kilter strangeness in film as much you all, which is the yearning for my hand to write what it has, for it is I feel such terrible movies as the one I have mentioned and others in the recent past, them receiving accolade when there is none to be truthfully awarded, are the very reason why a category such as WEIRD is not rightfully taken serious on a platform of its own, and of which draws many gut curdling chuckles because of this sites constant attack on the Academy Awards, however completely ridiculous both are. I feel Alfred Eaker is, as of now, the only clear thinking and completely intelligent critic and observer currently contributing. I hope, for the sake of the medium we so adore that is the strange and artistically deviant, that this site which I love like a rotten child may soon take its responsibility as current ambassador to such a worthy medium more serious than it has.

    1. Thanks for the comment, kj. As you note, the Weirdcademy Awards aren’t entirely a serious phenomenon. They are a chance for readers to interact with the site as well as a gentle parody of the Oscars. I don’t consider them an “attack” on the Academy Awards as much as gentle needling. The Academy Awards are a backscratching exercise conducted by Hollywood insiders and motivated as much by politics (internal and external) as by recognition of excellence. No one who takes movies seriously takes the Oscars all that seriously. On the other hand, the Weirdcademy Awards are a pure popularity contest, and don’t pretend to be anything else. I modeled them as much on Joe Bob Briggs’ old “Hubbie” awards for drive-in movies as anything. They are meant to be fun, to give people a chance to have their vote heard, and to give us feedback on which types of films our readers are interested in.

      Your personal opinions on who should and shouldn’t win particular awards aside (I cast my personal vote for weirdest actor for James Franco, too), I do find your challenge that the site should take “responsibility as current ambassador” for weird movies intriguing. Obviously, there is nobody else giving out awards for weird films. By their very nature—“weird movies” being ones that are largely indifferent to or outside of traditional moviemaking methods—maybe they are resistant to any hierarchy of that sort. Still, it might be a worthwhile experiment to split the voting next year: to have an “audience award” vote, and to empower a separate small jury of experts to make a more “official” recognition. It’s an idea that’s worth considering, so I thank you for the challenge.

  2. I do in retrospect regret what seems more now, as I re-read what I have written, an attack of sorts and absolutely understand your reply. I will admit that my leading proposal be that, more than anything, this site, for the very reason that it is the only true intellectually complete insight in the way of the “weird” medium of which you yourself have admitted in one way or another, take it upon yourselves to lead the way in more serious and consistent coverage of the field. While the site succeeds in its goals 3/4 of the time, the left over trash shines just as much, the same as how the death of an actor seems to match his/her resume of successes. I will mention again how much this site means to me, and is the reason why I feel such need to slide it under the weight of the microscope, so that we can finally move this wonderful category of film making into more minds and discussions where it rightfully belongs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *