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

[Barnack]

7 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

The Oscar/Popular movie debate is not new, the separation between the two only got worse.

True, the very first Oscar had that distinction.

 

You had outstanding picture category and a best unique and artistic picture in a different category.

[TalismanRing]

26 minutes ago, Barnack said:

My guess committee without any clear line, my guess would be giving a priority to the movies that have an hard time award wise because they are sequels/movie universe type.

 

A lot into how many movies get made and distributed and how little % of movies are studio made has a lot to do with it. When studio were making a lot of movies and independant did little of them and had an hard time to show them to voters a studio movie had more chance ending up at the year end top. Now that you have 100 little movie for any big one, chance of a big one being the best is getting thinner and thinner. Now consider how logically it is harder for a sequel to succeed in award voting and how much popular they are.

 

Has for popularity it is hard to tell because of how little box office is in term of actual movies popularity, specially for the Oscar movies type, but if you look at say 1978-1981 popularity at the box office of the best picture movies), 1$ in 1978 is 3.87$ now, 2.77$ for 1981 (wow the inflation)

 

1978:

Heaven Can Wait (1978)	Paramount	$81,640,278
The Deer Hunter	Universal	$48,979,328
Midnight Express	Columbia	$35,000,000
Coming Home	United Artists	$32,653,905
An Unmarried Woman	Fox	n/a

 

 

1979

Kramer Vs. Kramer	Columbia	$106,260,000
Apocalypse Now	MGM	$78,784,010
All That Jazz	Fox	$37,823,676
Norma Rae	Fox	$22,228,000
Breaking Away	Fox	$16,424,918

 

1980

Coal Miner's Daughter	Universal	$67,182,787
Ordinary People	Paramount	$54,766,923
The Elephant Man	Paramount	$26,010,864
Raging Bull	MGM	$23,334,953
Tess	Columbia	$20,093,330

 

1981

Raiders of the Lost Ark	Paramount	$212,222,025
On Golden Pond	Universal	$119,285,432
Chariots of Fire	Columbia	$58,972,904
Reds	Paramount	$40,382,659
Atlantic City	Paramount	$12,729,675

 

-------------------

Under 100m adjusted at the box office Oscar movies were not uncommon back in the days, you had the Rain man, Kramer Vs Kramer box office giant, but many of them were not more popular than your today Dunkirk, La la land, Hidden Figures, Martian, Revenant, The Post, etc... type.

 

Avg is higher than films now (or probably for the last 15 years)  The mid tier films nominated then are closer in avg to the high end now (also looking at these lists the nominees were also of higher avg quality)

 

Domestic Total Adj. Gross

 

Raiders of the Lost Ark: $716,006,700

Kramer Vs. Kramer: $398,797,700

On Golden Pond: $376,216,700

Heaven Can Wait: $323,421,100

Apocalypse Now: $290,967,200

Coal Miner's Daughter: $231,518,400

The Deer Hunter: $194,033,500

Ordinary People: : $188,732,100

Chariots of Fire: $185,964,400

All That Jazz: $139,691,400

Midnight Express: $138,653,800

Coming Home: $129,359,700

Reds: $128,032,200 

The Elephant Man: $89,635,900

Norma Rae: $82,093,100

Raging Bull: $80,414,500

Tess: $69,243,600

Breaking Away: $60,661,000

Atlantic City: $42,447,500

[TalismanRing]

1 minute ago, Barnack said:

True, the very first Oscar had that distinction.

 

You had outstanding picture category and a best unique and artistic picture in a different category.

Funnily, the current Oscars derive from the Outstanding Picture category.  The Artistic one was the one cut.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

54 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

Funnily, the current Oscars derive from the Outstanding Picture category.  The Artistic one was the one cut.

I've seen Wings and Sunrise-the debates over spectacle vs. story,  appealing to the critics vs. the masses are as old as Oscar. Sunrise has the better reputation now but I'm sure that even back then, one person's "unique and artistic" was somebody else's pretentious. It's funny to see Oscar trying to adapt to the future by going back to their history, albeit with a twist.

[AndyK]

They nominated Boss Baby over Lego Batman.

 

Why does anybody think a popular movie category is going to make them any less stupid?

 

 

[filmlover]

lol even The Razzies, of all places, are calling bullshit on this category.

 

Quote

 

The Razzies published an open letter to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences on Sunday (Aug. 12). The organization, which awards the worst movies and performances of the year the day before the Academy Awards, addressed the Oscars' new category honoring the best popular film.

 

"The Razzies don’t always get it right. We get called on it. We usually ignore it because well — who takes the Razzies seriously?" began the letter. "But seriously we’re not the Oscars. The Oscars are not the low-brow $4.97 statuette that reminds otherwise good talent they done bad or the talent-free they done made too much money."

 

"The Oscars lowering themselves to 'honor' popular fare just to get more eyeballs is not conducive to their brand. Everyone depends on Oscar to point out the good stuff that might not otherwise be seen," the letter said.

 

The note added that the new category may overshadow the Razzies organization's work. "We sift through bottom-of-the-barrel mindless popular and sometimes unpopular entertainment. The Razzies invite the 'dis-honored' to humble themselves and 'own their bad.' That’s our job,'" the letter read.

 

"So a tip to our older more distinguished bald brother: You are our inspiration – don’t fail us now," concluded the note. "The Razzies are co-dependent on Oscar. If you are devalued — so are we."

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/razzies-criticize-popular-film-oscar-open-letter-1134243

[TalismanRing]

Everyone depends on Oscar to point out the good stuff that might not otherwise be seen

 

Uh, that's not the point of the Oscars at all (it's supposedly to reward excellence in film) and it only points those films out if their studio/distributor is willing to spend tens of millions campaigning for the awards. 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 13, 2018 by TalismanRing

[Barnack]

5 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

Everyone depends on Oscar to point out the good stuff that might not otherwise be seen

 

Uh, that's not the point of the Oscars at all (it's supposedly to reward excellence in film) and it only points those films out if their studio/distributor is willing to spend tens of millions campaigning for the awards. 

From the sony leak, many movie with a 4-5m or less phase 1 budget get in the Oscar. 6m is even getting high for the studios one.

 

Apparently the point of the creator was:

Mayer commented on the creation of the awards "I found that the best way to handle [filmmakers] was to hang medals all over them ... If I got them cups and awards, they'd kill them to produce what I wanted. That's why the Academy Award was created

 

And I think it is still the unofficial point of the thing (outside the fun & publicity), create an incentive to control what get made and efforts dedicated to it.

 

At least from an movie going audience point of view, all that matter is if it push people at doing movie that would not exist otherwise, the rest is quite irrelevant and has no point to us.

[MrGlass2]

47 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

Everyone depends on Oscar to point out the good stuff that might not otherwise be seen

 

Uh, that's not the point of the Oscars at all (it's supposedly to reward excellence in film) and it only points those films out if their studio/distributor is willing to spend tens of millions campaigning for the awards.  

Forget the "tens of millions" part. But studios already spend enough cash promoting almost all "popular" films,  and they often get nominations or even win technical categories. Campaign money isn't the reason most of them don't get near the most prestigious prizes.

[TalismanRing]

28 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

Forget the "tens of millions" part. But studios already spend enough cash promoting almost all "popular" films,  and they often get nominations or even win technical categories. Campaign money isn't the reason most of them don't get near the most prestigious prizes.

I'm not talking about big movies not getting money I'm talking about many great small movies which are never in the Oscar conversation because they don't have the $ for an Awards run.

 

It's discussed all the time when we're breaking down potential and likely nominees.  Which studios/distributors can pay for it,  and if they have to decide which film to push - not just because of competition but because of limited financial resources.   

 

It's why a film like Call Me By Your Name gets an awards push but God's Own Country gets zip.

[The Futurist]

6 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

I'm not talking about big movies not getting money I'm talking about many great small movies which are never in the Oscar conversation because they don't have the $ for an Awards run.

 

It's discussed all the time when we're breaking down potential and likely nominees.  Which studios/distributors can pay for it,  and if they have to decide which film to push - not just because of competition but because of limited financial resources.   

 

It's why a film like Call Me By Your Name gets an awards push but God's Own Country gets zip.

Greatness should speak for itself.

I don't need the critics propaganda to shout at me Oscars movies are the BEST of the YEAR EVER !!!!!!

That s the James Cameron motto , make a great movie and People will discuss about it and wom will naturally spread without the annoying "elites" interference.

Edited August 13, 2018 by The Futurist

[Barnack]

23 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

Greatness should speak for itself.

 I don't need the critics propaganda to shout at me Oscars movies are the BEST of the YEAR EVER !!!!!!

 

https://www.imdb.com/search/title?title_type=feature&release_date=2017-01-01,2017-12-31&runtime=65,300

 

Over 7,000 feature film last year.

 

How does WOM even start for 97% of them without an elite curator intervening at some moment to make them get out of lot and seen by anyone ?

 

Cameron have hundreds of millions to make is movie and a studio having hundreds of millions spent shouting at us propaganda about being the best of the year's and obviously does not require anything more than those hundreds of millions to get seen and get WOM started.

 

Without an elite gatekeeper/curator how does a small movie WOM start ? Who see it to start with if it is not seen at a festival or pick-up by a distributor ?

 

At some point peoples that see a lot of movies not one has seen will pick and choose their favorite/best potential and recommend it to others, to get things going for them (once it happen it will get pick up for a festival, seen by distributor and so on).

Edited August 13, 2018 by Barnack

[CoolioD1]

honestly today i think past Oscar season breakouts like slumdog millionaire or Juno would probably tap out at like 50-60mil.

[dxmatrixdt]

13 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

honestly today i think past Oscar season breakouts like slumdog millionaire or Juno would probably tap out at like 50-60mil.

meh, Greatest Showman went to 175 and would have got a nomination in the populae category

[CoolioD1]

Just now, dmatrixfilmdx said:

meh, Greatest Showman went to 175 and would have got a nomination in the populae category

greatest showman has more in common with mamma mia than the films i'm talking about. also no.

 

[Barnack]

25 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

honestly today i think past Oscar season breakouts like slumdog millionaire or Juno would probably tap out at like 50-60mil.

 

With how little happened from Love, Simon A+ cinemascore, maybe those would have had little miss sunshine 60m type run today.

 

Blind Side run can be a bit similar to a Hidden Figure.

 

For the Miss Sunshine / Juno level of success is a bit more hard to find a direct comparable, Wonder maybe ?

Or Silver Lining Playbook the most recent somewhat similar ?

 

That said who would have predicted Oscar season breakout like a American Sniper could happen in 2014/15.

Edited August 13, 2018 by Barnack

[LonePirate]

20 minutes ago, Barnack said:

That said who would have predicted Oscar season breakout like a American Sniper could happen in 2014/15.

The Oscars had almost nothing to do with the success of American Sniper. The film would have performed exactly the same in April, July or October, for instance.

 

Nowadays, many smaller films are held until the end of the year in hopes that they will receive strong reviews and early awards season buzz in order to become modest hits. For instance, the Shape of Water probably would not have grossed more $25M-$30M if it had been released in the summer. It’s this dependence on awards-fueled grosses which generates all of the nominations for these “independent” films like TSOW which do not deserve being nominated for, let alone winning, Best Picture. The studios and people connected to these films nominate them regardless of their merit in order to cash in at the box office.

[Barnack]

26 minutes ago, LonePirate said:

The studios and people connected to these films nominate them regardless of their merit in order to cash in at the box office.

Of the 7,000 voters not so many are connected to these films, same has for a voter being a specific studio employee (unlike the studio era, when the conversation was if 2 movie of the same studio is in BP they cannot win because of the vote split, a saying that was kept has a tradition until the late 70s at least)

Edited August 13, 2018 by Barnack

[The Futurist]

So you are saying that people are enough sheeps to go see a film because an award body said it was excellent ?

Always knew cinephiles moved in herds.

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, The Futurist said:

So you are saying that people are enough sheeps to go see a film because an award body said it was excellent ?

Always knew cinephiles moved in herds.

People are extremely sheepish yes, that why you see a virtuous circle around movie that are presented as winner and the other way around for movie that look like looser to people, I know people that mention how much a movie made at the box office while talking about going to watch it or not.

 

I kid you not I went to see Jurassic World after the record breaking box office result to see what the buzz was about, I even did try to watch Transformer 4 and 5, didn't succeed but tried.

 

Has someone that seem to watch all the Oscar/acclaimed movies just to be able to be fully equip to complain about them, you should understand that very well.

 

Is it more sheeps to listen to critics or festival award body for an opinion, than friends that have seen it, to listen to the marketing of studios and watching only movie that paid a fortune and only if a large group of people also go to watch them.

 

The most herds/tribe phenomenon is probably the movie franchise one, tapping in those animals instinct we have.