Academy Awards adding a "Best Popular Film" category. Good or bad idea? Academy walks it back, won't be presented this year

[MovieMan89]

I really hope whoever presents the awards for popular and BP make some kind of snarky joke in the vein of "here are the movies you actually saw/here are the ones no one saw" etc. And whoever accepts for popular should just recite lyrics from Popular from Wicked as their acceptance speech. 

Edited August 9, 2018 by MovieMan89

[filmscholar]

 

Honestly, The problem isn't the blockbusters, the problem is the uppity voters.  Just as there are some terrible popcorn fluff blockbusters that don't deserve any props, there have equally been some terrible Indie films that nobody really cares for that the Oscars always try and elevate.  I'm all for highlighting lower budged films at the same time if a Big Budget film knocks it out the park ala "The Dark Knight"  then they should get that recognition.  Take a film like "Logan".  It was well acted and very well made film.  But just because it's a comic book movie, it wouldn't get any consideration outside of maybe Tech Awards..   All they had to do is change their outdated views on what "High/Low" Art is and they wouldn't even need to do this category.   The writing has been on the wall since they did "Dark Knight" Dirty 10 years ago.  This new award is almost like they are admitting they were wrong to be bias against Blockbusters and Popular Entertainment for Decades.  

[filmlover]

One thing they really should do is cut the Best Original Song nominee performances completely. If you want to hear the nominees, they're easily available on iTunes or YouTube. Especially when airtime is dictated by who (or if the song) is famous enough to get airtime. Remember three years ago when they had Lady Gaga, Sam Smith, and The Weeknd perform and the other two performers (one of which was from a transperson!) weren't even invited to perform? Shameful. Either give all the performers equal treatment or just don't bother at all.

 

Though the fact they didn't retire the entire category after "Writings On the Wall" won, a strong contender for the worst Oscar win of all time, is impressive.

Edited August 9, 2018 by filmlover

[MovieMan89]

2 minutes ago, filmscholar said:

 

Honestly, The problem isn't the blockbusters, the problem is the uppity voters.  Just as there are some terrible popcorn fluff blockbusters that don't deserve any props, there have equally been some terrible Indie films that nobody really cares for that the Oscars always try and elevate.  I'm all for highlighting lower budged films at the same time if a Big Budget film knocks it out the park ala "The Dark Knight"  then they should get that recognition.  Take a film like "Logan".  It was well acted and very well made film.  But just because it's a comic book movie, it wouldn't get any consideration outside of maybe Tech Awards..   All they had to do is change their outdated views on what "High/Low" Art is and they wouldn't even need to do this category.   The writing has been on the wall since they did "Dark Knight" Dirty 10 years ago.  This new award is almost like they are admitting they were wrong to be bias against Blockbusters and Popular Entertainment for Decades.  

This is the exact opposite of them admitting they're wrong. Just as there has been some progress in getting different genres that were popular in the category recently, now they're pulling this 180 and relegating them to a pity award. BP will be treated as the prestige award, and now this is their excuse to fill that category exclusively with indies/oscar bait. 

[CoolioD1]

3 minutes ago, filmlover said:

One thing they really should do is cut the Best Original Song nominee performances completely. If you want to hear the nominees, they're easily available on iTunes or YouTube. Especially when airtime is dictated by who (or if the song) is famous enough to get airtime. Remember three years ago when they had Lady Gaga, Sam Smith, and The Weeknd perform and the other two performers (one of which was from a transperson!) weren't even invited to perform? Shameful. Either give all the performers equal treatment or just don't bother at all.

 

Though the fact they didn't retire the entire category after "Writings On the Wall" won, a strong contender for the worst Oscar win of all time, is impressive.

They won't do it this year since it could potentially be people like Kendrick and lady gaga performing. As long as they can get popular acts in the show they'll keep doing it.

[MovieMan89]

I like the performances aspect. Nice break from all the presenting, acceptance speeches, and monologues. 

[75Live]

47 minutes ago, filmlover said:

One thing they really should do is cut the Best Original Song nominee performances completely.

 

I totally agree and have been saying that for years.  When I used to watch the show, I would almost always change the channel when the performances came on.  If they really cared about cutting time, this would be an easy way to do it.

[Morieris]

1 hour ago, filmlover said:

Though the fact they didn't retire the entire category after "Writings On the Wall" won, a strong contender for the worst Oscar win of all time, is impressive.

 

That is still the funniest performance I've ever seen on the Oscars stage.

 

But yeah, cut performances. Most of the people just don't work live.

[filmlover]

4 minutes ago, Morieris said:

 

That is still the funniest performance I've ever seen on the Oscars stage.

 

But yeah, cut performances. Most of the people just don't work live.

Especially if they're gonna come at the expense of having some categories that have long been presented during the show and are now getting pushed to commercial break. Like imagine not getting the chance to see this on live TV lmao:

 

 

[Barnack]

Cutting performance and you loose:

 

Glory and many others were quite nice moments.

 

5 of them is too much and the quality for a tv spectacle moment is too unpredictable to make it systematic all of them too and maybe too much of an issue to not have all of them if you are to have some, so I get the idea.

 

But I would cut the categories that became a pure Oscar machine with a ridiculous process for who get in / win over time, like most the shorts one, put it in the pre-show 2 weeks before with winners and still release a compilation of them in theater.

 

Listening to Lexi Alexander explaining how she got to win thoses Live short live action Oscar made it sound like a joke.

 

A small bunch site in a theater and watch all the candidate in row (so if you are playing after 6 hours good luck), people that want to skip a short because it look boring flash a flash light to the ceiling, if there is 3 flash they push the skip button and it goes on to the next. To play in those, you pay an award specialist that make sure you are in or if you have a stars attach to the project in some way a la Kobe Brian it will do.

Edited August 9, 2018 by Barnack

[KeepItU25071906]

my boy:

 

 

Isn't this the award for Popular Movie? https://t.co/rM8qyzaGLs

— edgarwright (@edgarwright) 9 серпня 2018 р.

[KeepItU25071906]

If Academy doesn't have balls to get main statutes to the great movie with an enormous budget (read: blockbuster) like Dark Knight, Mad Max, etc., ok, the audience can live with it.  We already know that you're snob and cowards, so it's not big news for us.

 

But we don't need this charity.

 

 

[Barnack]

6 minutes ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

If Academy doesn't have balls to get main statutes to the great movie with an enormous budget (read: blockbuster) like Dark Knight, Mad Max, etc., ok, the audience can live with it.  We already know that you're snob and cowards, so it's not big news for us.

 

But we don't need this charity.

 

 

We !?! who we in that paragraph are you an investor in enormous budget movie and speaking for them ?

[KeepItU25071906]

34 minutes ago, Barnack said:

We !?!

Audience. 

 

 

And I don't think this "award" can help box-office, especially for summer movies, especially when studios spent big money on AA promotions. 

 

Is fake award for just investor's ego satisfying? Hm, ooookaaaay....

 

Edited August 9, 2018 by KeepItU25071906

[Barnack]

I am not sure what would the concept of audience needing charity from an award organisation (that they themselves finance via giving money to Disney) would even mean ? They certainly does not need any of this at all.

 

58 minutes ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

And I don't think this "award" can help box-office, especially for summer movies, especially when studios spent big money on AA promotions. 

 

Is fake award for just investor's ego satisfying? Hm, ooookaaaay...

I really do not think either for pre-fall movies, but box office is just a portion of the pie. And yes for some award like the Academy award for best actor win what come back in revenues versus what is paid for the phase 2 campaign does not make it worth it and is for the ego of the people involved I think, once you become seen has good in making people win it is easier to attract A-lister in your future project and so on.

Edited August 9, 2018 by Barnack

[KeepItU25071906]

10 minutes ago, Barnack said:

I am not what would the concept of audience needing charity from an award organisation (that they themselves finance via giving money to Disney) would even mean ? They certainly does not need any of this at all.

 

4

It looks like: "hmm, all your big budget flicks aren't  real movies, so take your fake award and be happy".

 

p.s. If gossip about Disney pressure is true- it's even more pathetic.

[babz06]

This is a crock of shit that is clearly being pushed by ABC and it only benefits disney films  anyways. 

[Barnack]

1 hour ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

It looks like: "hmm, all your big budget flicks aren't  real movies, so take your fake award and be happy".

 

p.s. If gossip about Disney pressure is true- it's even more pathetic.

Mixed with a Moonlight and Shape of Water are not worthy winner, we need to create a category for the real movies from us the studios that matter, to find a way to make them win.

 

Both optics being not good for the show.

Edited August 9, 2018 by Barnack

[dudalb]

I think it has less to do with Disney wanting to win Oscars, and more to do with  Disney wanting to improve the ratings for a show ABC has invested a lot of money in.

 

But IMHO the Oscars are beyond saving. The times have simply passed them by.

 

The only award show I make a point of watching is the AFI Lifetime Achevement Award,which has always been a class act.

[Barnack]

6 minutes ago, dudalb said:

I think it has less to do with Disney wanting to win Oscars, and more to do with  Disney wanting to improve the ratings for a show ABC has invested a lot of money in.

 

I also feel it is more ABC than the movie division, contract is until 2028 and a 75m a year one, the show make over 100m a year in revenues, that is big enough by itself to not need any big movie person being piss at the Oscar intervening.