93rd Academy Awards Discussion Thread | Nomadland, Hopkins, McDormand, Zhao, Youn, Kaluuya win

[Eric Duncan]

 

[Cap]

Too bad we don’t have a massive artistic blockbuster directed by an Oscar winner that has a massive built in fanbase to be the front runner next year, and boost ratings. 
 

Oh wait. 😈

[titanic2187]

Lower dip than GG's 63%. Too bad, even the in-person ceremony failed to soften the drop significantly  

[filmlover]

Not nearly as bad as the 62% drop for the Globes but still tough (albeit expected) nonetheless.

 

Reviews for the telecast are lackluster so we'll see how they respond next year when they'll hopefully be able to have it in the Dolby again. One thing's for sure at least: they're never taking the gamble of changing up the order of the categories based on what they think will win ever again.

[Eric Duncan]

Honestly I expected like 8 million views, so this is better than expected for me

[lorddemaxus]

16 minutes ago, Cap said:

Too bad we don’t have a massive artistic blockbuster directed by an Oscar winner that has a massive built in fanbase to be the front runner next year, and boost ratings. 
 

Oh wait. 😈

Eternals isn't even the most likely big budget blockbuster to get nominated.

[titanic2187]

23 minutes ago, Cap said:

Too bad we don’t have a massive artistic blockbuster directed by an Oscar winner that has a massive built in fanbase to be the front runner next year, and boost ratings. 
 

Oh wait. 😈

DUNE

[lorddemaxus]

I feel like if anything's gonna pull more people to watch the Oscars next year, it would probably be the two big musicals. Will likely be the biggest crowdpleasers of all the contenders. In The Heights probably has a shot at first post-pandemic $150 mil+ gross.

[Eric Duncan]

 

[filmlover]

Would anyone be surprised if someday we find out they had produced a big, super emotional "this was his life" montage for Chadwick and they had their fingers literally on the "play" button right as Joaquin was opening the envelope only for that to be scrubbed seconds later? I doubt it. They deserve all the backlash they're receiving.

[lorddemaxus]

People are blaming the producer for the mess but I think people are ignoring that maybe the network/Disney might've made the decision to move the categories around for Boseman. They very clearly had a big influence during the ceremony today (bigger than the past couple of years I feel) and have the power to do something like that and ending with Boseman would've boosted ratings for them. Will defenitely be interesting to see if more info will come out of this.

[WittyUsername]

The low ratings aren’t remotely surprising. Clearly, their little stunt of saving the Best Actor category for last didn’t work out for them in the slightest, which makes the whole thing all the more embarrassing. At the very least, I can only assume that next year will fare better in terms of the ratings. 

[filmlover]

3 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

People are blaming the producer for the mess but I think people are ignoring that maybe the network/Disney might've made the decision to move the categories around for Boseman. They very clearly had a big influence during the ceremony today (bigger than the past couple of years I feel) and have the power to do something like that and ending with Boseman would've boosted ratings for them. Will defenitely be interesting to see if more info will come out of this.

Probably not since Disney had a stake in the Best Picture frontrunner and had none in Ma Rainey. It's clear the producers built the entire ceremony around a Boseman victory. I mean:

 

 

Idk what’s worse the fact that it’s an Nft, the fact that Chadwick Boseman’s death is being commodified, or that this is in every Oscar nominees’ gift bags https://t.co/LVc5Nk04mE

— Jenn wants to be a tv writer ✨ (@jenn0wow) April 25, 2021

And the fact he was on screen the longest during the super duper duper duper quick In Memoriam montage at the end of it and they switched up the acting presenters so that The Joker would award Black Panther to trend on social media. The producers were clearly aware that because hardly anyone had seen the movies this year, the assumption that he was the Best Actor frontrunner for most of the season was their easiest way of ending the show on a big moment that people would talk about for years to come. And they will, but not for the reasons they intended, and it will be seen as even more brutal than the La La Land/Moonlight snafu (which was at least an honest-to-god mistake and not a calculated and exploitative way of grabbing headlines) and taking away from what should've been an amazing moment for Hopkins if they had allowed him to appear via Zoom.

[lorddemaxus]

10 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Probably not since Disney had a stake in the Best Picture frontrunner and had none in Ma Rainey.

Yeah, but the Nomadland being the last thing of the night wouldn't have been nearly as talked about as Boseman winning being the last thing of the night. Nomadland would've won regardless of whether it was the first thing to win or the last, so I don't see why Disney would care about having Nomadland last.

 

Not really the first time the network has tried to influence what goes where in the Oscars either.

Edited April 26, 2021 by lorddemaxus

[filmlover]

4 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

Not really the first time the network has tried to influence what goes where in the Oscars either.

The Popular Oscar, we (thankfully) never knew you.

 

Next season will be interesting since the world will be returning to normal (and thus people will have seen the nominees). The Oscars will be looking to redeem themselves from this gross bit of exploitation that ended up biting them in the ass while the Golden Globes...let's just say the HFPA will be busy trying to fix the many problems they have.

[WittyUsername]

Reactionary YouTube channels sure are having a field day with these bad ratings. 

[Barnack]

I learned just one hours ago that the Oscar were last night, this is very telling about how little it reached pop culture outside the US (if it did there)

[Barnack]

9 hours ago, Joel M said:

And it's a nice reminder that the oscars aren't the globes. The people that produce them don't have any inside info about who is winning. It feels that way because most races get settled after months and months of other awards etc. but they really don't know. Everytime there's an obvious set up to compliment an obvious winner's narrative I always wondered what would feel like if something goes sideways. What if Spielberg, Lucas and Copolla got up on stage and someone other than Scorsese ended up winning? What if Barbra Streisand who was brought to award the first woman Best Director just ended up giving another oscar to James Cameron? I guess now we know and the answer is pretty weird.

It did occur in the past at some level, one example Harrison Ford was about to give the best picture oscar to Steven Spielberg here, Shakespeare in love was a surprise winner:

 

 

Some journalist already had wrote their article after Spielberg won best director (with Saving Private Ryan winning BP in them) before the announcement.

Edited April 27, 2021 by Barnack

[Barnack]

12 hours ago, filmlover said:

Reinforces the notion that Titanic/Return of the King-esque clean sweeps, like Legacy Oscars, are officially a thing of the past.

 

Like the poster just below I would wait for that next type and level of movie to come up and fail to do that type of dominating run to occur to say that it is officially a thing of the past, maybe contained non franchise epic of the sort are a thing of the past (seeing how much Nolan is getting for is movie I do not thing that it is the case), Avatar was a BP win away, your example of Slumdog MIllionaire is a good one I think it was a small budget movie quite far from Titanic in term of technical and most category and still won 8. The 10 or more happened only 4 time in history after all, so 18 year,s since the last time is not a specially long time, there was 26 year,s between West side story and Titanic.

 

  

6 hours ago, lorddemaxus said:

They very clearly had a big influence during the ceremony today (bigger than the past couple of years I feel)

Did not saw it, but one year Jimmy Kimmel was the host and they visited a movie theater that was playing A Wrinkle in time, that was already a lot, most year you can detect a lot of influence, but this year they relaxed the rules even more so maybe your feeling are quite funded.

 

 

 

 

[filmlover]

1 hour ago, Barnack said:

 

Like the poster just below I would wait for that next type and level of movie to come up and fail to do that type of dominating run to occur to say that it is officially a thing of the past, maybe contained non franchise epic of the sort are a thing of the past (seeing how much Nolan is getting for is movie I do not thing that it is the case), Avatar was a BP win away, your example of Slumdog MIllionaire is a good one I think it was a small budget movie quite far from Titanic in term of technical and most category and still won 8. The 10 or more happened only 4 time in history after all, so 18 year,s since the last time is not a specially long time, there was 26 year,s between West side story and Titanic.

 

 

La La Land became the most nominated movie since Titanic (and tied with that and All About Eve for the most nominated movie ever) not even five years ago and didn't come anywhere close to a sweep (nor did that translate to a Best Picture win). In retrospect, Avatar losing the top two prizes to a movie from the summer that made less than $20M despite being arguably as big of a cultural phenomenon as anything from the last 20 years was a sign that the Oscars were moving away from one movie dominating. The fact the number of nominees in the category has grown by nearly twice the amount ever since Slumdog has meant double the amount of movies to recognize, making the desire to spread the wealth even stronger.