The Oscars, who won what? ( And whats the big fuss about the Artists?)

The Oscars took place last night, and from the sounds of reports and various gossip sites the bit winners of the night were Hugo and The Artist, here is a list of all the Oscar Winners.

Best cinematography

Robert Richardson, Hugo

Best art direction

Hugo

Best costume design

The Artist

Best make up

The Iron Lady

Best foreign language film

A Separation

Best actress in a supporting role

Octavia Spencer, The Help

Best film editing

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Best sound editing

Hugo

Best sound mixing

Hugo

Best documentary feature

Undefeated

Best animated film

Rango

Best visual effects

Hugo

Best actor in a supporting role

Christopher Plummer, Beginners

Best original score

Ludovic Bource, The Artist

Best song

Man or Muppet, The Muppets

Best adapted screenplay

Alexander Payne, Nat Faxon, and Jim Rash, The Descendants

Best original screenplay

Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris

Best live action short

The Shore

Best documentary short

Saving Face

Best animated short

The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr Morris Lessmore

Best director

Michel Hazavanicius, The Artist

Best actor in a leading role

Jean Dujardin, The Artist

Best actress in a leading role

Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady

Best picture

The Artist

Clearly the largest winners of the night were Hugo and The Artist, two filsm I havent seen yet but with too.
And the two films that stood out the most, The Artist is a modern silent film ( apart from the music and occasional dialogue) shown in black and white and based in the era of silent films.
Hugo is set in an abstact very stylized world, in which time and clock seem to be the focus of the film.
As shown, Hugo won awards for Sounds Editing, Sound Mixing, Visual effects, Art direction and Cinematography. All are based on the film, not around the actors.
The Artist however, won, Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Director, Best Original Score and Best Costume design. Three of which are heavilg based on the actors and their abilities.
Did the much more simple plot and setting allow more focus to be placed on the actors rather than background?
Perhaps.

The Artist has been massive this year, not just award wise but also with the masses. But what is the reason for this? Is it because we are taken into the past, both through the storyline and setting of the film, and the fact that it is set out like an old-fashioned silent movie, something we are not used to and therefore hold more interest in viewing? Along with this the film also contains much less well known actors, the lead actress is, I believe the directors wife, does the fact that this is almost brand new to us? we are used to see famous actors in an array of films, you can hardly find a poopular film without A-Listers in them.
I think it is a mix of thses things, the unorthodox style of the film is instantly attractive, people may want to view what film " used to be like" and not having the film " shoved down our throats" as you often get when they are filled with A-listers, e.g - The Descendant, although popular and it did win an Oscar did not reach the heights of the Artist, and I definately saw this advertised a lot more, a lot of this aimed around George Clooney being in the film.
Will The Artist start a trend of unusual films, or will other films even copy its format and use older styles again?
We shall have to see