Yesterday the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced that it would be widening the field of nominees for Best Picture from 5 to 10.
When I first heard the news I though, “Hmm, that’s interesting.” But the more I think about it, the more upset I become.
This isn’t the first time the Academy has nominated 10 films for Best Picture. In fact, it was par for the course when the awards show was created back in the 1930s and was a practice they continued well into the 1940s.
But the big difference these days is that there are FAR fewer studios producing movies and a much smaller number of films being released each year. Also, the Oscar’s weren’t broadcast until 1953. So what’s the real reason behind widening the field to 10?
Follow the money.
If you ask me, this is all one huge money-making scheme. 10 films get nominated and now 10 films are “must see” in the theater. If you don’t catch them in the theater, now studios can slap the “Oscar nominated” title on the DVD and claim their film is an avatar of quality. If you don’t catch it on DVD, maybe you’ll watch the Oscar broadcast because – hey – something is new and different! Nevermind all of the entertainment media that will now be forced to write about, speculate, categorize, rank and rate 10 Best Picture nominees.
Remember the Oscars last year when they didn’t have a host and instead had actors come up and give little speeches to the nominees about how great they are. Remember that Zac Efron was one of those presenters?
Yeah… this 10 nominations thing is just another gimmick, but on a much larger scale.
My question is, if they’re going to nominate 10 films for Best Picture, then why not 10 nominees for Best Director? How many films have won Best Picture without their directors winning in their categories? Why not 10 Best Actors, Best Actresses?
Some of you probably think that 10 Best Picture nominations is a good thing. Would Wall-E or The Dark Night have been nominated last year under this structure? Will this open the door to more independent movies being recognized by the Academy and a larger audience? Perhaps.
But if they’re going to widen the field this far, then the Academy needs to get ride of “ghettoized” categories like “Best Foreign Language Film,” “Best Animated Feature Film” and “Best Documentary Feature.” All of them are ridiculous categories to begin with and treats their genre’s like second class citizens. Any of the films nominated in those categories can stand shoulder-to-shoulder with films from other genres.
Well, except Bolt. Seriously, what were they thinking nominating that last year?
What the Academy fails to realize – especially when they attempt these naked gimmicks to boost their ratings – is that movie goers haven’t lost interest in because they’ve become bored with the tradition. If anything, that’s THE REASON they huddle around their television each year.
No. People have become disenfranchised from the Oscar’s because their choices reflect no sincerity, originality or taste. That, coupled with the fact that a Best Picture nomination has become a political campaign among the studios to jockey for a position at the end of the year that will increase their odds of the Academy (and their narrow memories) to nominate their films.
The Reader, for example, was sent to theaters in limited release on December 10 to meet the Oscar deadline but wasn’t released wide until January 9. By then, reviews were ancient, no one was talking about it and demand for the film was nil. It barely reached middle America except in a few art houses. How are we supposed to get excited for a film like this when there is no opportunity to see it?
If this change results in sincere diversity among the Best Picture nominees, then I will happily eat crow. If Up is nominated alongside The Hurt Locker, no one will be more pleased than me.
But I see no reason for the Academy’s decision to remotely change how Hollywood does business. The studios have a formula and they’re sticking to it. The rest of us are just along for the ride.
What is your reaction to the Academy’s announcement? Are you excited for the change of pace or do you thing the Academy has an ulterior motivation. Do 10 Best Picture nominations dilute the value of the Oscars or is the trophy bragging rights and not an indicator of true quality?
Leave your comments below! Let’s get a dialogue going!
I find the Oscar’s worthless anyway. All it is a way to get bragging rights and sell more DVD’s when it’s released. Too many people see the term “Oscar-Nomiated” on the DVD box and think “Ooh, this must be good because it was nominated for an Oscar”. If they really wanted to give value to the movies in the categories they would let the people vote. Not a bunch of stuck up old people. I say let’s put Best Picture to a vote by the people. I know that there would probably be problems with instituting a system to make it work though. Just an idea to toss out there.
As much as I think the Academy is up their own ass on the 10 nominations racket, I don’t think it’s a good idea to let America vote for the winner, either. If you do that, you have the People’s Choice Awards. Or worse… The MTV Movie Awards. Twilight over The Dark Knight? Blech.
10 nominations means… double the ad buys in the trade papers! *facepalm*
Why couldn’t they just up it to 7??? Does it have to be an even number or an increment of 5?
This is one of the worst decisions the Academy has ever made. I generally don’t let the fact that it’s nominated force me to see the movie, but all the cretins who might have seen the “retarded monkey” of the nomination pool in theaters will somehow think they’re film experts.
I’ve never been much for following American pop culture and frankly all the award ceremonies confuse me. There are the Grammy’s, the Oscars, the Academy awards, the Golden Globe awards, and all sorts of international award ceremonies. It’s hard to take any of them seriously at this point
I realize that this is probably just a big money gimmick, but to me it just feels like the Academy is trying to appease all the people who felt that The Dark Knight or WALL-E should have been nominated for Best Picture. I don’t see this as the Academy expanding their horizons, it’s just them trying to avoid criticism. Just because they are expanding the nominations does not mean that the voters will alter their perceptions of certain films. Even this past year, they could have included The Dark Knight and WALL-E, but I sincerely doubt the results would have been any different. The term Oscar Bait exists for a reason.
Yea, I guess I didn’t think about that with the people voting. And now that I am running it through my head, I can’t think of a good way to do it at all with people voting.
I don’t watch the awards shows ever, and can’t get into them. It seems too full of politics versus actual merit that some things get awarded while others are stuck being nominated or getting skipped over completely.
I’d think that if anything, the actors and actresses categories could be broadened as it always feels like they cut out a lot of good things. I like the idea of 7 or so instead of an increment of 5 (despite my ocd). 5 seems slightly small but 10 makes me think they’d be nominating shit just to fill up all of the nominations.
i usually avoid long blog entries like swine flu. but this was an interesting topic and a great read.
i really have nothing to contribute cuz you pretty much summed up everything already.
it is a big scheme but im still curious to see if there will be a solid list of movies or just a bunch more movies no one has heard/seen.
Yep yep yep totally agree. There is still going to be one winner, five extra nominations is just a big waste of time, money and space.
I actually like the Oscars. I mean, I mainly tune in when some film I’ve liked has a shot at winning something but I don’t see any harm in it. I’m known as “the movie critic” in my circle of friends so i guess it just comes with the territory that I watch awards shows and the like. I’m not jaded like the rest of you. 😛
Hey, I like the Oscars, too. That’s the reason for the rant! I think they’ve gone too far.
I realize that the producers of the Oscars have a challenge when it comes to ratings, but innovation at the sake of tradition is not the answer.
I agree certain categories need to go. And there are a number of money driven reasons for this switch up ( described here in detail http://www.newsy.com/videos/oscars_and_then_there_were_ten). Then again if a movie like last year’s grossly underrated In Bruges can get the kind of audience it deserves then I am all about the change. I think a bigger category will increase the likelihood of us seeing sincere movie choices that reflect genuine taste.