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

[dudalb]

3 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

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. 

The funny thingk is the knock on Oscars until the early 2000's is that they ignored smaller films and always gave it to the big studio blockbusters.

Real problem is audience patters have changed, and for a serous drama to make really big bucks is almost impossible. The days when a film like "Saving Private Ryan" could be among the year's biggest monemakers is long past . I think this is a terrible thing. but you can't change the clock bac,k. Serious dramas have ceased to be blockbusters.I think that is behind Academy Voting Patterns.

The Oscars were created..as least officially...to honor artistic achievement, not to reward a film for making a lot of money.

IThe Oscars would be a bigger joke it they just echoed the box office top ten in giving out their awards.

About the only useful the Oscars serve nowdays, IMHO< Is to give some publicity for films which otherwise get  forgotten in the rush of blockbusters.

If this makes me an "elitest"so be it. When it comes to their taste in movies, The Masses Often Are Asses. Scrrw the Lowest Common Denomitor. It's wrecking society...as having an LCD POTUS should show.

Edited August 9, 2018 by dudalb

[filmlover]

Quote

 

OKAY, then. I guess the Academy has some explaining to do, even though it wasn’t making newly re-elected President John Bailey available yesterday. At a recent private screening event we both attended, Bailey told me that he was running again, and if elected, he planned to try and “radically” change the Oscar show, with the hope of making it feel less like the Independent Spirit Awards. There has been an uncanny match between the Best Picture choices of both organizations, with the notable exception of 2017. The Shape Of Water took the Best Picture Oscar, but was shut out at the Spirits, even though it was eligible.

 

The more severe critics of yesterday’s move called it a simple ratings grab, that the Academy, which used to be devoted to a mission of excellence in film, had succumbed to ABC’s desire for bigger ratings which only come when there is a blockbuster in contention like Titanic or The Lord Of The Rings. In my conversations with Bailey, he seemed genuinely concerned that the Oscar show was headed in the wrong direction. This was even when I first met him a few years ago and he told me of his concern about the Neil Patrick Harris-hosted show that had aired three days earlier.

 

I am persuaded these moves weren’t borne of sudden desperation. Various Academy committees have been meeting in recent months on this issue. A few months ago I heard of a ludicrous proposal being floated in which there would be a requirement to have three audience-favored movies guaranteed Best Picture slots. I completely dismissed it, believing this was not the conservative Academy I knew. The rough idea, as I understood it, would involve having two ballots with one listing only the “popular” movies. Three top vote getters from that ballot would then be integrated into the other ballot in which all films were eligible, thus creating your Best Picture nominees. It seems the new “Popular” category might have evolved from something like that, as unlikely as this idea sounded at the time. It is pretty much in theory how the nine foreign language finalists are chosen by a committee, not the entire membership.

 

https://deadline.com/2018/08/oscar-changes-controversy-pete-hammond-1202442958/

 

 

Big ass lmao. It's becoming clear as day that these changes were made not so that blockbuster films could get recognized or improve the ratings but to appease Disney investors. Watch Mission: Impossible be the only non-Disney nominee in an attempt to not look suspicious.

[Barnack]

8 minutes ago, dudalb said:

About the only useful the Oscars serve nowdays, IMHO< Is to give some publicity for films which otherwise get  forgotten in the rush of blockbusters.

 

People talk about not being relevant, etc....

 

But the only for an award show to be relevant is for it to create movies (or at least give a different budget, make it easier to see it in more theater) that would not exist otherwise.

 

Being watched by 65m people to promote movies that would have existed and wide released anyway, how would they be relevant under that model ?

 

They are arguably more relevant when an industry exist because of the weeks between nomination and the show.

[KeepItU25071906]

38 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Both optics being not good for the show.

 

true. This fake category offensive not only for blockbusters but also for movies like the Moonlight or Three Billboards.

[dudalb]

SO we are pretty much agreed it's a shitty idea?

IMHO times..and the film business...have pretty much passed the Oscars back.

IMHO I HATE that the technical awards have been reduced to next to nothing. ..when the film techicians are often as responsible for how good a movie is as the stars you see up on the screen.

[Jake Gittes]

The Oscars don't have to become obsolete y'know. Ditch the montages and bits, find a few minutes to emphasize the craft behind the technical nominations in an engaging way, just straight up fucking come to terms with the fact that a) small movies will often comprise the majority of nominees and b) it's not the '80s anymore and the ratings aren't gonna keep rising, but if you put on an engaging, well-paced show that celebrates all kinds of movies and the people behind them, at some point you'll hit on a stable, consistent audience. (Also, don't add like a thousand people every year, and make voters actually watch a variety of movies including the under-the-radar ones that can't afford campaigning, and don't accept votes for winners from people who haven't seen 100% or at least 80% of nominees... but I digress.) Corporate pandering is the opposite of what this whole thing should be about. But if they actually have a president who thinks that all the wrong changes need to be made, welp. 

[filmlover]

1 minute ago, Jake Gittes said:

The Oscars don't have to become obsolete y'know. Ditch the montages and bits, find a few minutes to emphasize the craft behind the technical nominations in an engaging way, just straight up fucking come to terms with the fact that a) small movies will often comprise the majority of nominees and b) it's not the '80s anymore and the ratings aren't gonna keep rising, but if you put on an engaging, well-paced show that celebrates all kinds of movies and the people behind them, at some point you'll hit on a stable, consistent audience. (Also, don't add like a thousand people every year, and make voters actually watch a variety of movies including the under-the-radar ones that can't afford campaigning, and don't accept votes for winners from people who haven't seen 100% or at least 80% of nominees... but I digress.) Corporate pandering is the opposite of what this whole thing should be about. But if they actually have a president who thinks that all the wrong changes need to be made, welp. 

He certainly does sound like someone who works for Disney, that's for sure.

[CoolioD1]

radical idea that will improve the ratings this year: no jimmy kimmel doing the bits he does on his talk show every goddamn night. i can't believe both years he did "the common plebs get to interact with celebrities" bits that are about as tone deaf as the oscars have ever gotten. honestly i feel like he'll be back because ABC seems to have more of a say ever since they renegotiated in 2016 and they'll just want their own late night guy hosting again.

[Jake Gittes]

3 minutes ago, filmlover said:

He certainly does sound like someone who works for Disney, that's for sure.

No good presidents of anything these days, it looks like. 

 

I would've said relocate the show somewhere else but then I read about the 2028 ABC contract thing. Well, let's see how much damage they can do to themselves in a decade.

[TomCruiseTop]

Disney just bought its own Oscar category. 

[CoolioD1]

1 minute ago, Jake Gittes said:

No good presidents of anything these days, it looks like. 

 

I would've said relocate the show somewhere else but then I read about the 2028 ABC contract thing. Well, let's see how much damage they can do to themselves in a decade.

they'll move the oscars to netflix or amazon in 2028 and then they'll have to add a "best streaming picture" oscar.

[filmlover]

Just now, Jake Gittes said:

No good presidents of anything these days, it looks like. 

 

I would've said relocate the show somewhere else but then I read about the 2028 ABC contract thing. Well, let's see how much damage they can do to themselves in a decade.

It'll likely never happen but I can't help but wonder what would happen if everybody in the industry just decided to boycott the Oscar ceremony out of protest (or agree to have the award mailed to them if they're nominated and win). Can't have a show if nobody wants to attend, especially when one of the biggest selling points of these things is the red carpet and what they're wearing and seeing so many famous faces in one room.

[Rebeccas]

13 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

The Oscars don't have to become obsolete y'know. Ditch the montages and bits, find a few minutes to emphasize the craft behind the technical nominations in an engaging way, just straight up fucking come to terms with the fact that a) small movies will often comprise the majority of nominees and b) it's not the '80s anymore and the ratings aren't gonna keep rising, but if you put on an engaging, well-paced show that celebrates all kinds of movies and the people behind them, at some point you'll hit on a stable, consistent audience. (Also, don't add like a thousand people every year, and make voters actually watch a variety of movies including the under-the-radar ones that can't afford campaigning, and don't accept votes for winners from people who haven't seen 100% or at least 80% of nominees... but I digress.) Corporate pandering is the opposite of what this whole thing should be about. But if they actually have a president who thinks that all the wrong changes need to be made, welp. 

The new members are the only thing keeping the awards interesting. Otherwise you'd have Best Picture winner Darkest Hour.

[CoolioD1]

Just now, filmlover said:

It'll likely never happen but I can't help but wonder what would happen if everybody in the industry just decided to boycott the Oscar ceremony out of protest (or agree to have the award mailed to them if they're nominated and win). Can't have a show if nobody wants to attend, especially when one of the biggest selling points of these things is the red carpet and what they're wearing and seeing so many famous faces in one room.

none of the celebrities are actually gonna care about this.... except rob lowe.

[The Futurist]

If you think only serious dramas are art, you are part of the problem.

People rank the subject matters of movies first, quality second.

 

Infinty War and Saving Private Ryan are very similar yet people still think they are different.

Infinity War is actually the movie with nuance and subtlety.

Edited August 9, 2018 by The Futurist

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, The Futurist said:

If you think only serious dramas are art, you are part of the problem.

People rank the subject matters of movies first, quality second.

Have you seen many people agreeing with the idea in this thread ?

[The Futurist]

1 minute ago, Barnack said:

Have you seen many people agreeing with the idea in this thread ?

It s unconscious so they couldn't even if they tried.

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, The Futurist said:

It s unconscious so they couldn't even if they tried.

At least this time everyone on this message board do seem to fully agree that they are all art and should all compete in the same category.

 

The Baby Driver, David Lynch stuff and Doctor Strangelove are not artistic creation crowd does not manifest itself too much here.

[Nova]

Been pretty busy with school and stuff so haven't posted all that much lately. But saw this thread and wanted to share my thoughts on these new changes. Before I get into how I feel about this, I just wanna make it clear that all of these changes are stupid, ridiculous and embarrassing. So if you like the changes do not continue reading. 

 

Lets start off with shortening the show. The problem with the Oscars isn't that they're too long. The problem with The Oscars is that they're BORING. Taking something that was boring and just shortening it doesn't make it any less boring. You would think folks who work in the field of entertainment for a living would understand this but alas I guess they don't. Now that they've shortened the awards show, all they've done is kicked off the people who work behind the scenes. Limiting the show comes at the expense of people who are not usually celebrated. Every second of a famous actor’s life is a celebration. And now with social media being so prominent, directors are also more celebrated than ever before. You know who isn’t celebrated? Someone like Gary Rydstrom. He made the iconic dinosaur roars in Jurassic Park. And the majority of folks wouldn't even know his name or if they saw him out on the street would have no fucking clue who he was. The Oscars is an opportunity to award people like Gary Rydstrom. Yes actors and actresses should be celebrated too but when their whole life is one fucking circle jerk of how great they are, it would be nice to not have the folks behind the scenes see the short end of the stick...again. The sound design people, the cinematographers, the people who do costume and make-up as well as production design...all these people deserve to be recognized and not in a off the air type of way. 

 

The Oscars are literally one night out of the whole year. Instead of shortening the damn show, actually make it entertaining and an extravaganza. The Super Bowl is like 8 hours long every year and no one complains because the NFL somehow made it into a spectacle. The Oscars should be striving to do that. Not striving to cut off the folks who work tirelessly behind the scenes to make these movies come to life. 

 

Onto the second change that has pissed me off. A popular film category? Stop. Just stop. This is when it turned into a straight up dumpster fire. People's issues with The Oscars has nothing to do with wanting popular films to just be nominated. The majority of people's issues with The Oscars is that they want The Academy to recognize that a well made blockbuster/super hero movie should be recognized as a best picture nominee. A superhero movie is not different from an arthouse period drama. They are both live action, they both require the same departments to put them together, they both have the same workflow and editing process. There is no material difference between them except budget and audience size. There is literally no reason to separate popular movies except for the inherent snobbery of the Academy. So instead of creating a participation trophy to acknowledge that people like going to see big spectacle movies, tell the members to get over themselves and just start nominating popular movies. 

 

Ten years ago, when The Dark Knight was fucking robbed, the field was expanded to ten nominees and it was supposed to fix the problem. All it did was get The Academy to go further down on the indie arthouse list and select movies from there but now it’s time to force members to vote for popular movies. This is a problem with the Academy, not the public, who has no trouble recognizing when a blockbuster is also a well-made film. Don’t make it our problem by creating bullshit categories no one gives a fuck about. Fix the snobbery thats running rampant within The Academy. Value the craft workers who make the films possible and accept that popular movies can also be great. 

[4815162342]

3 minutes ago, Nova said:

 

Ten years ago, when The Dark Knight was fucking robbed, the field was expanded to ten nominees and it was supposed to fix the problem. All it did was get The Academy to go further down on the indie arthouse list and select movies from there 

 

They did fix the problem. Look at 2009 and 2010

 

2009:

Avatar

The Blind Side

The Hurt Locker

District 9

An Education

Inglourious Basterds

Precious

A Serious Man

Up

Up in the Air

 

 

2010

127 Hours

Black Swan

The Fighter

Inception

The Kids Are All Right

The King's Speech

The Social Network

Toy Story 3

True Grit

Winter's Bone

 

 

 

That's a good mix of blockbusters, audience hits, mid-tier dramas, and indies. A guaranteed 10 films under the 2009/2010 rules worked well.

 

 

And then they changed it to the current format for nomination scoring which incentivizes nominations going to smaller films that have deep support instead of wide support.