Oppenheimer | 2024 Academy Award Winner for Best Picture and Best Director

[keysersoze123]

19 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

I don’t see how this most likely winning Best Picture would be a sign of things to come. The subject matter is a lot more fit for the Oscars than most of the other big moneymakers nowadays. 

This could be the most viewed and talked about oscars in ages. That has to be taken into context. I dont think they are going to award any normal blockbusters any major awards, but combination of great movie/box office could continue to be a factor. Especially in this era where people questioning movies for big screen. 

Edited February 26 by keysersoze123

[MovieMan89]

8 hours ago, Valonqar said:

 

Many won before ROTK. And then the trend stopped. Titanic won in 1998. ROTK in 2003. That's 5 years between winners that grossed over 300M dom and over 1B WW (or in Oppenheiemr case over 900M WW). In between was Gladiator win in 2001. The movie made 187M dom and 465M WW which was huge for an R rated movie in pre-3D era. And then 20 years between ROTK and Oppenheimer. So Oppenheimer could open the floodgates again. Fingers crossed.

The Oscars were historically inclined to award a big box office hit BP all the way up until ROTK. That was when everything changed to the more “small movies” blueprint everyone associates them with today. Even A Beautiful Mind and Chicago right before ROTK were still huge box office hits that I think might both adjust over OPP DOM (haven’t done the math). 

[grim22]

Post by @culturecrave

View on Threads

[titanic2187]

58 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

The Oscars were historically inclined to award a big box office hit BP all the way up until ROTK. That was when everything changed to the more “small movies” blueprint everyone associates them with today. Even A Beautiful Mind and Chicago right before ROTK were still huge box office hits that I think might both adjust over OPP DOM (haven’t done the math). 

It was not Oscar incline to reward big box office hit for BP before ROTK, it is the talkie drama or historical piece that Oscar like to reward start losing its theatrical appeal to the masses in the past decade. The drama like beautiful mind, American beauty, rain man, unforgiven, driving miss daisy, ordinary people is not much different from Oppenheimer in term of their texture. Don’t forget the fact that Jaws lost to one flew over cuckoo nest, SW lost to Annie hall, ET lost to Gandhi, raiders of lost ark lost to chariots of fire. Every action-packed blockbuster here lost to a more quiet, talkie, small scale drama.

Oppenheimer wining BP isn’t going to be floodgate for action-VFX flick like TGM, avatar or dune or mad max to win best picture. Oppenheimer is indeed a blockbuster like them but at the same time it is a talkie historical drama that happened to earn a lot of money like back in old days. 

 

[lorddemaxus]

The Kings Speech made around $600 mil WW adjusted to inflation btw. @titanic2187 is right in the sense that Oppenheimer being both a big financial success and a BP winner isn't that unique in the entire history of Oscar's. It's just that films like Oppenheimer don't make much money anymore.

[WorkingonaName]

Green Book, Slumdog, Parasite and Departed were pretty big hits too.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

5 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

The Oscars were historically inclined to award a big box office hit BP all the way up until ROTK. That was when everything changed to the more “small movies” blueprint everyone associates them with today. Even A Beautiful Mind and Chicago right before ROTK were still huge box office hits that I think might both adjust over OPP DOM (haven’t done the math). 

Ran the 90s-early 2000s Best Picture winners through an inflation calculator. Not ideal but the pandemic and PLF kind of ruined the ticket price adjustment tools.

 

Adjusted Totals (Domestic)

Chicago: $292.6m – #10 of 2002

A Beautiful Mind: $292.5m – #11 of 2001

Gladiator: $336.2m – #4 of 2000

American Beauty: $240.8m – #13 of 1999

Shakespeare in Love: $189.8m – #18 of 1998

Titanic: $1.154b (original release) – #1 of 1997

The English Patient: $154.7m – #19 of 1996

Braveheart: $153m – #18 of 1995

Forrest Gump: $686.1m – #1 of 1994

Schindler's List: $205m – #9 of 1993

Unforgiven: $222.4m – #11 of 1992

The Silence of the Lambs: $296.1m – #4 of 1991

Dances with Wolves: $434.7m – #3 of 1990

 

None of the winners since RotK have finished in the Top 10 of the year and The King's Speech is the last BP winner to be in the annual (DOM) Top 20 (#18). If it happens, an Oppenheimer win would be a real throwback. Popular movies still get nominated and even win acting and craft awards but not the big one.

 

Edited February 27 by BoxOfficeFangrl

[filmlover]

Too bad SAG beat them to the punch on the Return of the King reunion idea (Elijah Wood and Sean Astin presented Supporting Actress at that ceremony over the weekend) because it would've been a fun idea for this year's Oscars. 

[cannastop]

20 hours ago, redfirebird2008 said:

I think it’s way too long. They should try to have the Oscars finished by January 31st. 

I think more like february. If the Oscars are done by January, everything else will be bunched up.

[titanic2187]

7 hours ago, lorddemaxus said:

The Kings Speech made around $600 mil WW adjusted to inflation btw. @titanic2187 is right in the sense that Oppenheimer being both a big financial success and a BP winner isn't that unique in the entire history of Oscar's. It's just that films like Oppenheimer don't make much money anymore.

I think many also forgot that a lot of Best Picture winner gross this much after they got their Oscar moment.

 

Like American Beauty was just 74m but Oscar made it gross another 56m to 130m. A beautiful mind was 113m up to Oscar nomination morning and gross all the way to 170m. Rain Man was 96m but Oscar double its gross to 173m. Term of Endearments was 72m but rise to 108m after Oscar and list go on and on.....

 

So instead of saying Oscar pick big hit as BP winner in the past, it is more like they made some of these movie a big hit. 

[keysersoze123]

It would be more interesting to look at Oscar winners that was not released in Q4 of the year and still made money/won major awards. There wont be too many of them for sure.

[redfirebird2008]

12 hours ago, titanic2187 said:

It was not Oscar incline to reward big box office hit for BP before ROTK, it is the talkie drama or historical piece that Oscar like to reward start losing its theatrical appeal to the masses in the past decade. The drama like beautiful mind, American beauty, rain man, unforgiven, driving miss daisy, ordinary people is not much different from Oppenheimer in term of their texture. Don’t forget the fact that Jaws lost to one flew over cuckoo nest, SW lost to Annie hall, ET lost to Gandhi, raiders of lost ark lost to chariots of fire. Every action-packed blockbuster here lost to a more quiet, talkie, small scale drama.

Oppenheimer wining BP isn’t going to be floodgate for action-VFX flick like TGM, avatar or dune or mad max to win best picture. Oppenheimer is indeed a blockbuster like them but at the same time it is a talkie historical drama that happened to earn a lot of money like back in old days. 

 

You’re right about all of that. I do think Cameron will eventually get some major awards with the Avatar franchise, maybe for the final movie like we saw with LOTR3 & Peter Jackson. 
 

I am curious to see what happens with Dune Part 2 in the major categories. They already gave Dune Part 1 a total of 6 Oscars in technical categories. That’s really impressive. 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

2 hours ago, titanic2187 said:

I think many also forgot that a lot of Best Picture winner gross this much after they got their Oscar moment.

 

Like American Beauty was just 74m but Oscar made it gross another 56m to 130m. A beautiful mind was 113m up to Oscar nomination morning and gross all the way to 170m. Rain Man was 96m but Oscar double its gross to 173m. Term of Endearments was 72m but rise to 108m after Oscar and list go on and on.....

 

So instead of saying Oscar pick big hit as BP winner in the past, it is more like they made some of these movie a big hit. 

BOM used to have an awards section with charts showing how much the Best Picture nominees made before the nominations, between nominations and Oscar night, then after the ceremony. It also charted the box office of the acting nominees. Awards season used to be a big box office boost for weeks/months. There was no rush to get it over with in January. Now the theatrical window is shorter and moviegoing habits have changed and even a good modern Best Picture boost isn't what it used to be. And some nominees are streaming exclusives, with no official box office.

 

Even Oppenheimer is on a streaming service now, though it's still in some theaters. If it wins, it will get a boost in VOD rentals from people who don't have Peacock, and Blu-ray sales. That's still revenue to Universal.

Edited February 27 by BoxOfficeFangrl

[Barnack]

15 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

That was when everything changed to the more “small movies” blueprint everyone associates them with today.

It is hard to tell how much it is the awards voters (for example people voting for their own studios movies type of talk went away, reaching voter with your movie got cheaper in some ways they did not needed to having seen it in theater like before) that changed or the movies.

 

Make a movie like Titanic in 2018 instead of 1998 (or a gone with the wind, gladiator, etc...), probably still win it all. And the bigger they hit at the box office the better for their change to win I would still imagine, it was not the star wars empire strike back that won best picture back in the days either, in 1972 the giant box office hit was Godfather.

 

Giant movie that happen to among the best well mad movies that the average 60 years old voters like, just got quite rare and an explosion of small movies that can reach them.

 

Maybe in some voters it installed over time, this is to make people discover movies type of institution and like to vote for less seen affair, but it would get counterbalanced by the success being in 100% of the voters  mind and industry people inherent respect for success in that very hard world for the type of movies that get oscar attention.

Edited February 27 by Barnack

[MovieMan89]

18 hours ago, titanic2187 said:

It was not Oscar incline to reward big box office hit for BP before ROTK, it is the talkie drama or historical piece that Oscar like to reward start losing its theatrical appeal to the masses in the past decade. The drama like beautiful mind, American beauty, rain man, unforgiven, driving miss daisy, ordinary people is not much different from Oppenheimer in term of their texture. Don’t forget the fact that Jaws lost to one flew over cuckoo nest, SW lost to Annie hall, ET lost to Gandhi, raiders of lost ark lost to chariots of fire. Every action-packed blockbuster here lost to a more quiet, talkie, small scale drama.

Oppenheimer wining BP isn’t going to be floodgate for action-VFX flick like TGM, avatar or dune or mad max to win best picture. Oppenheimer is indeed a blockbuster like them but at the same time it is a talkie historical drama that happened to earn a lot of money like back in old days. 

 

This isn’t really the point though. While it’s true that the Oscar bait movies of old have fallen in less favor with the GA in the last 20 years, they still tended to be the kinds of movies that had a certain amount of inherent mainstream appeal.
 

As opposed to what the Academy of the last 20 years loves to reward with the top prizes, the Crash, No Country, Spotlight, Birdman, Coda etc etc etc of the movie world that never stood a chance for major mainstream success under any time or place circumstances. The only BP winners since ROTK to really evoke the Academy of old’s tastes of dramas with notable mainstream appeal have been The Departed, Slumdog, The King’s Speech, and now Opp. 

Edited February 28 by MovieMan89

[CoolioD1]

I was talking to my brother today about The Matrix, he just rewatched it, and it did occur to me that if The Matrix came out today I think it probably gets like 10 nominations. It's something the Academy seems more receptive to now. Maybe it doesn't win, but last year's best picture is certainly indebted to it.

[Eric the Ape]

 

[Barnack]

2 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

The only BP winners since ROTK to really evoke the Academy of old’s tastes of dramas with notable mainstream appeal have been The Departed, Slumdog, The King’s Speech, and now Opp. 

 

Green Book felt quite classic for a winner as well, your A+ cinemascore movie that audience just love. Argo not too far either.

[titanic2187]

7 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

This isn’t really the point though. While it’s true that the Oscar bait movies of old have fallen in less favor with the GA in the last 20 years, they still tended to be the kinds of movies that had a certain amount of inherent mainstream appeal.
 

As opposed to what the Academy of the last 20 years loves to reward with the top prizes, the Crash, No Country, Spotlight, Birdman, Coda etc etc etc of the movie world that never stood a chance for major mainstream success under any time or place circumstances. The only BP winners since ROTK to really evoke the Academy of old’s tastes of dramas with notable mainstream appeal have been The Departed, Slumdog, The King’s Speech, and now Opp. 

 

CODA, green book and Argo are definitely part of the old-fashioned movie that will not just get Oscar attention but bigger mainstream success. The only movie I would say it would have little chance to actually wining had they released in 80s or 90s, are Moonlight, parasite and EEAO. The rest of the winner look pretty standard and “normal” Oscar winner including spotlight and birdman. Nothing unusual or revolutionary in their victory.

[eeetooki]

On another note, if Brokeback Mountain was released in recently years, it wouldn't have been snubbed. Still bitter about it.