To be clear: I did not hate this film. In fact, I thought it was delightful. Many people want "La La Land" to win Best Picture at the Oscars this year. Unfortunately, there is a fundamental flaw with this film that prevented me from relating to it, and I believe it ultimately outweighs its many strengths.

Let me begin by saying that I am the perfect candidate to love this film. For one, "Singin' in the Rain" is one of my favorite movies. I, myself performed in musicals all throughout high school and have an entire playlist on my Spotify dedicated to my favorite tunes which were sung on stage or the silver screen. Not to mention, I enjoyed the haunting thrill of Damien Chazelle's last film, "Whiplash."

Have Your Voice Heard:Become an Odyssey Creator

My less-than-stellar impression of "La La Land" could be chopped up to too-high expectations. And I will admit, the Oscar buzz around this gave me incredibly high hopes. But this happened five years ago with a similar movie that tried to bring back the golden age of film, and my high expectations then were surpassed. I fell in love with the 2011 silent film (and Best Picture winner) "The Artist."

I should have loved "La La Land," but I didn't.

***Spoilers Ahead***

The flaw, I have found, is within the star-crossed lovers. Or, rather: the writing of the lovers. This film centers around two starving-artists living in Los Angeles, hoping to fulfill their dreams. Emma Stone portrays Mia, a clichéd actress who works as a barista to pay the bills. The film opens on her, and we see her flit back and forth between auditions, a rough night out trying to network, and her painfully mundane job serving coffee to stars who are shinier than her. She represents all the doubts people have about their dreams.

But it becomes clear who the film favors. Mia may have the opening shot, but the film fades out on her counterpart, whose bold attitude is a stark, not-as-clichéd contrast. Ryan Gosling plays Sebastian, a stubborn pianist who is convinced he is the one to bring traditional jazz back into mainstream America, nay, the whole world. He exudes enough confidence for the both of them, and though he comes across as prickly, he wins Mia over with the fleeting excitement of finding another dream-chaser just like her.

It's a noble effort to make a film about the existential fear of pursuing your dreams and what it means to sell out, all the while paying tribute to the show-stopping movie-musicals of yesteryear. The problem is: Mia's character is the antithesis of the uplifting message "follow your dreams." Being the antithesis makes Mia's character inherently wrong/faulty, according to the film. And when she's in the wrong, Gosling's character has an excuse to talk down to her, especially during the tense dinner-fight scene.

Not only that, but Mia's character is incredibly one-dimensional compared to Sebastian. The script hinges around the triumphs and pitfalls of Gosling's character, all the way molding Stone's character into whatever best serves his purposes. The film follows Sebastian as he goes on tour with his old jazz partner, John Legend, who has Sebastian on a synthesizer. The film, however, does not follow Mia as she puts on a one-woman production. We don't see a single second of her performance.

Mia is ready to give up on her dreams until Sebastian chases after her and refuses to heed her wishes that perhaps she really is too tired, and maybe she actually doesn't want to be in a relationship with him. While this looks like the dream-chaser encouraging the down-and-out to give it another go, to me it just comes across as Prince Charming telling Cinderella he knows what's best for her. Mia does not have a plot unless Sebastian creates it for her.

The only time Mia shines on her own, is during her audition scene near the end of the film. This turns into a musical number and is by far my favorite part of the film. This is largely due to Emma Stone's powerful acting, fitting a gallon of emotion into a teaspoon of a character arc. What starts out as a singsong-whisper becomes a full belt (and not a bad one at that). "Audition (The Fools Who Dream)" is the core of this film's message, and one that is a good reminder to have once in a while.

However uplifting this message may be, this is not the first film to tackle it. And the way "La La Land" is executed does not lend itself to soaring above its flaws. I found myself unable to relate to the characters because the script was so thin. Much of what Gosling's character said to Stone rubbed me the wrong way. I only related to the concepts these characters mused (or fought) over.

Another layer of concern is that Sebastian has a bit of the "white man's burden" complex when he explains to Mia where jazz was born in New Orleans, but still insists it's dying. It doesn't help that Legend plays his old partner ushering in the new age of jazz that Sebastian believes is less-than. This could've been the turning point for Sebastian to get his head out of his rear and think forward, because he does join the band. But the film makes it clear that Sebastian is right again when the film fades out on him as the owner of his traditional jazz club.

"La La Land" has an abundance of technical skills to delight audiences. Every shot is a painting, and the cinematic nods to the golden age of film are magical. Gosling and Stone do not have Broadway voices, but their chemistry is believable and their performances are raw. However, in an Oscar season where there are films tackling just as heart-trending topics with much more diversity, "La La Land" is not the film to win best picture. It is not the film I relate to when I think of my aching heart and foolish dreams.

What I hope this film does is pave the way for new artists to see this film and think: "I can do better," the same way Chazelle must have felt when he saw clips of "Singin' in the Rain" or "Casablanca."