Jump to content
thuganomics85

The Annual Academy Awards Topic

Recommended Posts

With the move to February 9th, will that stop studios from releasing Oscar worthy films in January? I miss the days when all the contenders were out by Christmas.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, crimsongrl said:

With the move to February 9th, will that stop studios from releasing Oscar worthy films in January? I miss the days when all the contenders were out by Christmas.

All contenders are out in a limited fashion by the end of the year.  I guess it will depend on the film's rollout strategy and if they're hoping nominations/wins will boost the box office. 

I do think studios will be more cautious when it comes to limited releases around Christmas with going wide in Jan. as movies released at the very end of the year don't always fare as well as they might have had they been released earlier.  But for the voters, they get screeners.

Edited by Irlandesa
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, ProudMary said:

As to the popular film category, I've been thinking about it for much of the day and I've decided that I truly don't like the idea.  What criteria are they using to define "popular?"  Box office only?  As someone said above, it would seem that some truly great films that also happened to be "popular" might not be properly recognized in the "Best Picture" category.  Historically, there have been some immensely popular films that have won Best Picture (Titanic, Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.)   Could films of that caliber be nominated in both categories?  
Yeah, I don't like it.

It's a horrible idea for so many reasons. To add to your list, this new award also implies that it's impossible for a film to be great and popular at the same time. What happened to the concept that a film could be so artistically worthy that it would appeal to vast numbers of people--that a film could be popular because of, not in spite of, its artistic merit? A concept, by the way, that was responsible for some of the greatest Hollywood films of all time. If we have reached the point of conceding that popular films cannot also be good films, we might as well throw in the towel.

Edited by Milburn Stone
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

The Academy Awards are not relevant to most people.  Too many award shows, overall.  I don’t think this new idea will do much for ratings.  I only watch for the fashion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

If they want a "popular movie" award, they need to find a way to call it something fancier.  Otherwise, it sounds like a participation award.  

Maybe they should split it down the middle.  Artist Oscars for films that make under a certain box office number, and Wide release oscars that are over?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

If they want a "popular movie" award, they need to find a way to call it something fancier.  Otherwise, it sounds like a participation award.  

I do think they need to think through the language. Because let's be honest, we kind of know what they want. They want to separate the prestige Oscar bait (period pieces, biopics, WWII movies, etc.) from the commercial and genre stuff (superhero movies, action movies, romantic movies, comedies, etc.). But of course it's hard to define that and if you want to be annoying you can certainly argue about it. Like, is a Scorsese movie an action movie? Is Lord of the Rings a prestige epic? Is La La Land popular because it's a romance/musical? What about Titanic? Is Gravity sci-fi? This is also how I think these prestige movies might try to game the system and go for the "popular" category and edge out the popular stuff the fanboys are clamoring for.

It's a way of trying to get around the Academy's difficulty of nominating and voting for popular movies that the general population sees. These awards used to be more reflective of the movies that did well at the box office. I'm not saying they should be nominating Transformers but surely popular movies can have artistic merit but they're not being recognized that frequently.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

A “popular movie” could be defined as any movie that made over $100 million world wide. The rest would be considered for the existing best picture award. Looking at best picture winners of the past ten years, Argo, The Kings Speech and Slumdog Millionare would have made that cut. 

Edited by Pink ranger

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Pink ranger said:

A “popular movie” could be defined as any movie that made over $100 million world wide. The rest would be considered for the existing best picture award. Looking at best picture winners of the past ten years, Argo, The Kings Speech and Slumdog Millionare would have made that cut. 

 

That could be the definition, and it's fraught with problems if so. For starters: What do you do with the movie of unquestioned artistic ambition and accomplishment which goes on to make over $100 million? Is it no longer eligible for Best Picture because now it must be put in the "Best Popular Picture" silo? As for the traditional Best Picture category, is the definition of that category going forward to be "Best Picture That Didn't Make Money"? In both cases, the honor is diminished.

Edited by Milburn Stone
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

What if there are two subdivisions for best picture: Independent and studio, each has 5 eligible nominees.

At the ceremony three trophies are handed out: best independent film, best studio film and best picture, which is picked from among all 10 nominees. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Pink ranger said:

What if there are two subdivisions for best picture: Independent and studio, each has 5 eligible nominees.

At the ceremony three trophies are handed out: best independent film, best studio film and best picture, which is picked from among all 10 nominees. 

Then you probably could eliminate the Independent Spirit Awards. I thought those were created because the Oscars weren’t recognizing independent films/film performances. That’s (or it would be) kinda like when they used to have the Cable ACE awards when cable TV was still fairly new, because the Emmys wouldn’t recognize cable programs or performances in them; then those awards were discontinued after the Emmys began recognizing cable programming & performances.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/8/2018 at 11:52 PM, ProudMary said:

As to the popular film category, I've been thinking about it for much of the day and I've decided that I truly don't like the idea.  What criteria are they using to define "popular?"  Box office only?  As someone said above, it would seem that some truly great films that also happened to be "popular" might not be properly recognized in the "Best Picture" category.  Historically, there have been some immensely popular films that have won Best Picture (Titanic, Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.)   Could films of that caliber be nominated in both categories?  
Yeah, I don't like it.

I found an answer to my own question in an article from The Hollywood Reporter.                                                         https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/academy-plans-three-hour-oscars-telecast-adds-popular-film-category-1133138?facebook_2018811

Quote

If the popular film award (likely to be nicknamed "the Popcorn Oscar") is implemented in time for the 91st Oscars, then there is little doubt that ratings will improve, since blockbusters like Black Panther, Avengers: Infinity War, Deadpool 2, Mission: Impossible – Fallout, and Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again — and their fan-favorite stars — will be guaranteed a presence at the ceremony. (Black Pantheralready was expected to seriously contend for competitive nominations and awards, and the Academy confirms, "A single film is eligible for an Oscar in both categories — Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film and the Academy Award for Best Picture.")

Share this post


Link to post

The network thinks that having that new category will bring in more viewers, but I think that notion is silly. Let's be honest here, there are at least two big reasons why viewership has fallen. First, it's irrelevant to most people, and two, people don't care for super wealthy out of touch with reality celebrities lecturing them about politics.   Even if you agree with their stance, people want to watch award shows for entertainment and not politics.  We get enough politics in our everyday lives.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Those things have always been a part of the Oscars more or less.  I think a decrease in ratings is more likely due to what has decreased ratings overall in that there are so many other things people can choose from.  And for the categories people care about the most, the speeches will be up on YouTube quickly. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

What I find interesting is that the emmy awards have never considered mixing it up to give special awards to popular shows. Look at Mad Men, when it was on and with all the media coverage it was getting it still only had 1 to 2 million viewers. But it was cleaning up at the emmys, yet I don't remember anyone ever suggesting changing the award categories so NCIS could get an award.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

What I find interesting is that the emmy awards have never considered mixing it up to give special awards to popular shows. Look at Mad Men, when it was on and with all the media coverage it was getting it still only had 1 to 2 million viewers. But it was cleaning up at the emmys, yet I don't remember anyone ever suggesting changing the award categories so NCIS could get an award.

Right on. And even more than the Emmys, the Academy Awards have always been a symbol of the highest achievement. Over the years they've even worked their way into the language. Just one example: When someone we know acts out in some way in daily life, we may remark with sarcasm, "Wow, you should get an Academy Award." We don't say "You should get a Golden Globe" or "You should get a People's Choice Award." Just imagining those alternatives we can see how absurd they would be. There's a reason we choose to say Academy Award. It occupies a special place in our daily lexicon as a signifier of excellence (whether we mean it sarcastically or sincerely in a given situation).

Now, among the winners of Academy Awards over the years, there have been some real head-scratchers. We know that. But even this hasn't tarnished the position of the Oscar in our minds as the pinnacle of reward and recognition, because we understand what it aspirationally represents. AMPAS seems intent on flushing all that down the toilet.

Edited by Milburn Stone

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not convinced that the Best Picture categories and Best Popular Film categories will be completely separate.

Right now a film can be nominated for Best Animated Film and Best Picture. (Same goes for Best Foreign Language Film and Best Picture.) I can't imagine why they'd handle the Best Popular Film any differently.

A film like Black Panther has a good chance of getting nominated in both categories. I can't imagine why they'd want to limit it to one.

Edited by Blakeston
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/9/2018 at 12:20 PM, WarnerCL45 said:

The Academy Awards are not relevant to most people.  Too many award shows, overall.  I don’t think this new idea will do much for ratings.  I only watch for the fashion.

I just read this article from THR's Pret-A-Reporter and thought you might find this interesting.  The change in date of the Academy Awards to the early part of February may have effects on the fashion world.
What the New Oscars Date Could Mean for Fashion

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/12/2018 at 8:38 PM, ProudMary said:

I just read this article from THR's Pret-A-Reporter and thought you might find this interesting.  The change in date of the Academy Awards to the early part of February may have effects on the fashion world.
What the New Oscars Date Could Mean for Fashion

If they're going to change the date anyway, why would they schedule the awards during NYFW? They must know about the problems since its been during the European Shows, it makes no sense to continue the problems hee. Schedule the stupid thing the next week instead.

Share this post


Link to post

I am...not a fan of Hart as the host.  His brand of humor does not resonate with me.

Good for him and obvs I’ll still watch, because I can’t dismiss him out of hand.  He might be good, who knows?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, cpcathy said:

I'm disappointed, but what do I know? I hated NPH as host and LOVED Ellen's last hosting gig.

Is that unpopular, at least the NPH part. I thought everyone hated him as host. 

Share this post


Link to post

I’m really surprised with the choice of Kevin Hart in the wake of the #MeToo movement given his very public cheating and blackmail scandal. I think they could make a better choice. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, cpcathy said:

I saw a listing of hosts somewhere (can't remember where now), but they placed him second best.

Weird.  As  a host of the Tonys,  he's been excellent.  But for whatever reason, that did not translate to the Oscars.

But Oscar host is a tough gig.  It's long.  People seem more up tight/nervous in the audience.  There's pressure to perform in a way that plays well with the audience in person and the audience at home. But things that die in person affect how the home audience perceives them.  It's also the one ceremony with so much celebrating of its history. So much.  When the Tonys or the Grammys do it, there's usually fun musical performances but with the Oscars, it's just random clips.

Finally, performances need to age. I'm not sure Letterman's gig was ever truly loved but Uma/Oprah has had a surprising amount of staying power.

@Angeleyes, I don't know a whole lot about the cheating scandal and blackmail but cheating is not really a #metoo issue.  It seems like he and the woman had consensual relations. Cheating on its own is unlikely to put a dent in his career.

Edited by Irlandesa
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I’m a little fuzzy on some of the details, but Kevin was caught cheating by paparazzi in the back of a limo. His wife was pregnant at the time. I think Kevin’s ex and maybe an ex employee or something were blackmailing him with a sex tape of him in a threesome during this same time period. I would just think after all the backlash the show has received for various reasons that they would try to choose someone who didn’t have such a recent scandal. 

Share this post


Link to post

I'm really hoping that they fire Kevin from the gig. His comments about being gay are not funny & are quite scary. I think he is going to cost them viewers(which they cannot afford). Also I feel like celebrities will be hesitant to take part in the night or be open to playing along with whatever he has planned for that night. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

No interest in Kevin Hart.  Guess I'll be using the Ffwd button even more than usual this year. I don't know how anyone watches this monstrosity of a program in real time.  :-)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Are there no female comedians available? My vote is for Wanda Sykes. Maybe they could switch things up and have a group of people hosting or the no host format. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/7/2018 at 8:14 AM, Angeleyes said:

Are there no female comedians available? My vote is for Wanda Sykes. Maybe they could switch things up and have a group of people hosting or the no host format. 

No host seems like the easiest. Just have an announcer introduce the presenters.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

No host seems like the easiest. Just have an announcer introduce the presenters.

The Golden Globes used to be like this. They have more awards to give out and they always managed to come in on time.

Plus, the host of the Oscars seems to disappear in the middle and an announcer introduces the presenters anyway.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/7/2018 at 2:30 AM, Silver Raven said:

All he had to do was apologize.

There's a move on Twitter to get Patton Oswalt as the host.

At least part of the reason Kevin Hart lost the Oscar Host gig was because The Academy asked him to apologize for what he said, although the comments were 10 years old & he (says he) already apologized for them in the past. This is from Deadline about the whole “lost the job because he won’t apologize as The Academy asked him to” thing.

Share this post


Link to post

Entertainment Weekly came out with their Best of the Year issue today, and they had two different people picking the Best Movie of the year, and both of them picked the same top two best:

1-The Favourite

2-Roma.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

It sounds like the Academy is planning to move forward with no host. I’ve seen other awards shows use this format and it was fine. Honestly, if it can move the show along faster I’m all for it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

It seems best not to have a host, and maybe the Oscars will clock in under 3 1/2 hours for once :) I recall the days when a presenter would get in trouble for putting their political views in while presenting the nominees... now it's almost expected for the presenters to put in their two cents. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/9/2018 at 1:17 AM, crimsongrl said:

With the move to February 9th, will that stop studios from releasing Oscar worthy films in January? I miss the days when all the contenders were out by Christmas.

They still are. They just aren't in WIDE release until January. Only us lucky New Yorkers and Los Angelites get them in December.

How long before we get the usual dissection of the snubs? I don't usually care, but I'm very surprised at John David Washington (Ron Stallworth in Black Kkklansman) not getting a Best Actor nod.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, chitowngirl said:

Wouldn’t it be a hoot if Roma won Best Foreign Language Picture and Best Picture!!

Not entirely out of the realm of possibility. It would be a first of course, even though there have been many Best Foreign Film winners that were in the Best Picture category. 

Looking quickly at the list, I'd say the biggest surprises/snubs were Timothee Chalamet not getting a Supporting Actor nod and Bradley Cooper not being nominated for Best Director. I still want to know what the deal was with Ethan Hawke and First Reformed. 

I cannot, off the top of my head, remember an Awards season where a performance was SO lauded by the critics and yet the major Guilds/mainstream awards just ignored it completely. Dude swept almost every Critics Circle awards and yet didn't get a Globe, SAG, BAFTA and now Oscar nomination. Weird. 

Meanwhile I continue to be deeply amused at the critics' continued bafflement over the success of Bohemian Rhapsody, since they were so lukewarm and downright dismissive about it. They all agreed that Rami was amazing, so I don't think people are surprised by his success and nominations but they all dismissed the film as average, mediocre and yet it became a commercial smash and now has a Best Picture nomination. 

 

Quote

I don't usually care, but I'm very surprised at John David Washington (Ron Stallworth in Black Kkklansman) not getting a Best Actor nod.

Based on buzz and the precursor awards, he was always a question mark. The fifth spot for the Best Actor nod was always a toss up between him, Willem Dafoe and even maybe Ethan, despite, as I said, his being ignored by all the other major Award Shows. The locks for the category were Bradley Cooper, Rami Malek, Viggo Mortensen and Christian Bale. I do wish he'd gotten it but I am happy at all the other love the film got, especially the Best Director nod for Spike Lee.

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Camille said:

They still are. They just aren't in WIDE release until January. Only us lucky New Yorkers and Los Angelites get them in December.

And that's why viewership of the Oscars has been down for years.  Most of the country has never heard of these movies, let alone seen them, by the time they've been nominated.  People aren't going to watch a boring telecast honoring movies that they had no idea even existed until now.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×