The Producers Guild has a membership of around 4,700, representing “representing television producers, film producers and New Media producers.” What it has in common with the Academy is that they use the preferential ballot to determine their winners for Best Picture. Where they differ from the Academy, other than the make up of their membership (for instance, the Academy is dominated by actors), is that they choose a solid ten for nominees rather than five. Oscar voters changed their practice two years ago to have somewhere between 5 and 10. So far, we’ve seen a maximum of 9 every year. Can there ever be a ten? No one has been able to prove it yet. But who knows.
The big shock this morning was no nomination for the Coens’ Inside Llewyn Davis. That means it didn’t sit atop many ballots in the 1 – 5 slots (I’m guessing). When you only have five slots you have to really pick and choose and rank. Where you might put Llewyn Davis at #6 on a 10 slot ballot you might pick it at #5 if you only have 5. It just depends on how you think. Some would put down the films in the same rank no matter if they had 10 or 5. Me, I would rank them very differently if I had 5.
Either way, going by their very short history we have to conclude that:
1. at least one of their movies listed will likely be left off Oscar’s list.
2. The Academy is more Coen-friendly.
Therefore, I would guess that, in a competitive year like this where there is some wiggle room, Inside Llewyn Davis makes Oscar’s list. I also think it will be among the five in the Best Director branch, even if it doesn’t make Best Picture.
Let’s look at our collection of top tens.
Going back to Oscar’s choice to expand from five to ten, then from ten to a random number between five and ten, you have to at least be nominated for all of these to win. That selects out American Hustle. Although this might be the first year that rule is broken. Either way, you can plainly see what are the top picks starting with the NBR and five out of six of the titles would likely be your Best Picture nominees. It’s surprising to see how popular both Saving Mr. Banks and Wolf of Wall Street are.
In this short history there has not been a movie that hit all of these markers for a nod and not gotten a best picture nomination.
That means the films that are very likely locked — and your Best Picture winner — barring a break in the pattern — are:
Gravity
Her
Nebraska
Saving Mr. Banks
12 Years a Slave
Wolf of Wall Street
Add to that:
American Hustle
Captain Phillips
That gives us one more slot. That slot might include:
Inside Llewyn Davis
Dallas Buyers Club
Fruitvale Station
Blue Jasmine
Philomena
2013
NBR | AFI | BFCA | SEFCA | PGA | Oscar |
Gravity | Gravity | Gravity | Gravity | Gravity | |
Her | Her | Her | Her | Her | |
Nebraska | Nebraska | Nebraska | Nebraska | Nebraska | |
Saving Mr. Banks | Saving Mr. Banks | Saving Mr. Banks | Saving Mr. Banks | Saving Mr. Banks | |
12 Years a Slave | 12 Years a Slave | 12 Years a Slave | 12 Years a Slave | 12 Years a Slave | |
Wolf of Wall Street | Wolf of Wall Street | Wolf of Wall Street | Wolf of Wall Street | Wolf of Wall Street | |
American Hustle | American Hustle | American Hustle | American Hustle | ||
Captain Phillips | Captain Phillips | Captain Phillips | Captain Phillips | ||
Inside Llewyn Davis | Inside Llewyn Davis | Inside Llewyn Davis | Inside Llewyn Davis | ||
Dallas Buyers Club | Dallas Buyers Club | Dallas Buyers Club | |||
Fruitvale Station | Fruitvale Station | Philomena | Blue Jasmine | ||
Walter Mitty | |||||
Prisoners | |||||
Lone Survivor |
2012
NBR | AFI | BFCA | SEFCA | PGA | Oscar |
Argo | Argo | Argo | Argo | Argo | Argo |
Beasts of the Southern | Beasts of the Southern Wild | Beasts of the Southern | Beasts of the Southern | Beasts of the Southern | Beasts of the Southern |
Django Unchained | Django Unchained | Django Unchained | Django Unchained | Django Unchained | Django Unchained |
Les Miserables | Les Miserables | Les Miserables | Les Miserables | Les Miserables | Les Miserables |
Lincoln | Lincoln | Lincoln | Lincoln | Lincoln | Lincoln |
Silver Linings Playbook | Silver Linings Playbook | Silver Linings Playbook | Silver Linings Playbook | Silver Linings Playbook | Silver Linings Playbook |
Zero Dark Thirty | Zero Dark Thirty | Zero Dark Thirty | Zero Dark Thirty | Zero Dark Thirty | Zero Dark Thirty |
Life of Pi | Life of Pi | Life of Pi | Life of Pi | Life of Pi | |
Moonrise Kingdom | Moonrise Kingdom | Moonrise Kingdom | Moonrise Kingdom | Amour | |
The Master | The Master | ||||
Dark Knight Rises | Dark Knight Rises | ||||
Looper | |||||
Perks of Being/Wall | |||||
Promised Land | Skyfall |
2011
NBR | AFI | BFCA | SEFCA | PGA | Oscar |
The Artist | The Artist | The Artist | The Artist | The Artist | The Artist |
War Horse | War Horse | War Horse | War Horse | War Horse | War Horse |
The Descendants | The Descendants | The Descendants | The Descendants | The Descendants | The Descendants |
Hugo | Hugo | Hugo | Hugo | Hugo | Hugo |
Moneyball | Moneyball | Moneyball | Moneyball | Moneyball | |
The Help | The Help | The Help | The Help | The Help | |
Midnight in Paris | Midnight in Paris | Midnight in Paris | Midnight in Paris | Midnight in Paris | |
Tree of Life | Tree of Life | Tree of Life | Tree of Life | ||
Extremely Loud | Extremely Loud | ||||
Drive | Drive | Drive | |||
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo | The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo | The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo | |||
The Ides of March | Win Win | The Ides of March | |||
Bridesmaids | Bridesmaids | ||||
J Edgar | J Edgar | ||||
Harry Potter |
2010
NBR | AFI | BFCA | SEFCA | PGA | Oscar |
The King’s Speech | The King’s Speech* | The King’s Speech | The King’s Speech | The King’s Speech | The King’s Speech |
The Fighter | The Fighter | The Fighter | The Fighter | The Fighter | The Fighter |
The Social Network | The Social Network | The Social Network | The Social Network | The Social Network | The Social Network |
Black Swan | Black Swan | Black Swan | Black Swan | Black Swan | Black Swan |
Inception | Inception | Inception | Inception | Inception | Inception |
Toy Story 3 | Toy Story 3 | Toy Story 3 | Toy Story 3 | Toy Story 3 | Toy Story 3 |
True Grit | True Grit | True Grit | True Grit | True Grit | True Grit |
Kids Are All Right | Kids Are All Right | Kids Are All Right | Kids Are All Right | Kids Are All Right | |
127 Hours | 127 Hours | 127 Hours | 127 Hours | 127 Hours | |
Winter’s Bone | Winter’s Bone | Winter’s Bone | |||
The Town | The Town | The Town | The Town | ||
Hereafter |
*AFI special award
2009
NBR | AFI | BFCA | PGA | Oscar |
The Hurt Locker | The Hurt Locker | The Hurt Locker | The Hurt Locker | The Hurt Locker |
Up | Up | Up | Up | Up |
Up in the Air | Up in the Air | Up in the Air | Up in the Air | Up in the Air |
Inglourious Basterds | Inglourious Basterds | Inglourious Basterds | Inglourious Basterds | |
An Education | An Education | An Education | An Education | |
Precious | Precious | Precious | Precious | |
Avatar | Avatar | Avatar | ||
District 9 | District 9 | |||
A Serious Man | A Serious Man | A Serious Man | ||
The Blind Side | ||||
Nine | ||||
Invictus | Invictus | Invictus | ||
Star Trek | Star Trek | |||
Wild Things Are… | ||||
The Messenger | The Messenger | |||
A Single Man | ||||
Sugar | ||||
Coraline | ||||
The Hangover |
Altho I do want it to take a spot at the Oscars. And Llewyn should, too.
Am I missing something? SMB did NOT get a SEFCA best picture nod, no?
When’s the last time 3 of the 5 SAG Ensemble nominees missed out on Best Picture when there were more than 5 nominees? Even if The Butler and August both miss, Dallas Buyers is looking great = SAG + PGA + BFCA + AIDS.
And who expected Dallas for SAG anyway? That was really telling.
Maybe Banks has been overestimated a la Invictus or Star Trek??
I can’t understand why anyone would want to fill out an awards ballot if they barely saw any films and couldn’t list ten they loved. Unless, of course, they were just voting for films that employed their friends.
I personally Loved Saving Mr Banks. Sure it prob. wont win BP. But it is my Best Picture. I was extremely disappointed with American Hustle, although the acting is fantastic, the story itself just landed a little flat. I guess I wanted more by the end of it. As for 12 Years a Slave, I thought it was a really good movie, it has no re-watchability to me as with Precious. Once is enough. I thought Brad Pitt was out of place and acting near the end of the film was atrocious. Hans Zimmer’s score is a reboot of Inception. At some points I thought they did in fact use Inception’s score. Fassbender deserves the Supporting Acting oscar though, he was brilliant. That leaves Gravity. Gravity made Box Office and pleased the audience, Gravity pleased the Critics and the oscars love Clooney and Bullock of late. Alfonso has been getting a good of amount of Best Director wins from the critics. Don’t be surprised if he follows Ang Lee’s technical achievement last year with an oscar and on top of that Best Picture as well. Who knows. Awesome year for movies.
Christophe – AD readers would have given it a chance if you had just added one letter to the end of the name – Saving Mr. Banksy.
(SPOILERS)
No, my issue was that in any non-bio, Disney’s big speech in London would have happened halfway through the film, not at the end. I mean, we *knew* he’d have to get personal, he’d have to get hands-on (instead of delegating Travers-handling to the writers), we knew how the Australia flashbacks were going…the whole thing was just too dragged out. With the material they had, this was about a 60-minute movie, stretched into 120 because, well, because.
I didn’t hate the movie, but it’s no BP. Now if you want to see some well-written hate for it, check this out: http://www.grantland.com/blog/hollywood-prospectus/post/_/id/96341/a-spoonful-of-cyanide-the-chilly-borderline-nastiness-of-saving-mr-banks
Surely by reducing the number of films that AMPAS members list on their ballot will let them off the hook?
And don’t call me Shirley.
P.S. – Hoffman
P.P.S. – the trailer for A Most Wanted Man looks dull.
Steve, I like to test your idea as well. Mandate that all voters must rank a top 2 or 3 in lieu of of optionally listing 5 films.
I wonder what behavioral economists like Dan Ariely or Richard Thaler would say about designing effective incentives that get voters to watch more films and result in more diverse/eclectic choices. I think it’s certainly possible to change/institute some rules that could go a ways in achieving both.
To me, it does look like that the Oscar top10 will be the PGA top10 with the exception of Blue Jasmine that will be probably replaced by Inside Llewyn Davis.
Having said that, I think the three films that should not be underestimated up until Nominations Morning are
Philomena (right up their alley, so if the British-vote kicks in…)
The Butler (it will be hard for the Academy to resist a Harvey/Oprah duo)
August : Osage County (it will be hard for the Academy to resist a Harvey/Clooney/Streep/Roberts quartet)
With Blue Jasmine – a film I saw three times and loved each time – , the red flag is the SAG Ensemble snub. It was exactly the kind of ensemble Actors tend to go for, they didn’t this time and that may signal lack of passionate support from the most dominant Academy branch (=actors) and that could be crucial in the BP race (most voters are actors and all voters vote for BP). Dallas Buyers Club and even The Butler AND August : Osage County had that kind of wide support. Blue Jasmine didn’t.
I wish I had proofread that last comment – jeezuz.
OT:
A MOST WANTED MAN trailer!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hePxPqVceoI
steve50,
I actually really LOVE your idea. No filler, just killer!!
Ryan, I agree with all you’re saying. No conflict at all. I’m just speaking in the context of positive, descriptive analysis whereas you’re talking using normative, perspective analysis. Describing the how and possible why of the status quo vs. how things *ought* to be.
Of course I think AMPAS voters should get off their derrieres and take their jobs a lot more seriously. And I think it really reflects very badly on the industry when we hear anecdotes of how AMPAS voters are pitifully ignorant on current events.
Just to play devil’s advocate here, I’d be interested to see the results if Academy members could only list TWO films for BP, then take the top 5 as the nomiated slate.
That would separate the show the true colours of each voter without being able to pad with films they feel they should nominate to cushion the results. It would be an uncompromising way to see which way what the average voter thought.
The current system is like processing food – the results are too bland to eat.
I hear the Blue is the Warmest Color screener comes with a fleshlight, so that should help!?
It would be nice if the Short Term 12 and Fruitvale Sation Screeners were spring-loaded with a boxing glove.
Take that you old fart!
I haven’t seen Saving Mr. Banks, but I feel quite confident in saying it will NOT win Best Picture. It’s just not going to happen. Right now it’s fighting to get nominated in BP.
So don’t worry your pretty O’Toole-ish head, steve50. Will SMB get nominated? Possibly. Will it win? Not a chance.
While watching Saving Mr Banks, I was constantly thinking it could have been so much more, considering the story they had to work with.
Philomena, although a better film, walks the same path.
If either of these films win, they will do so without a director nomination.
Having said that, all these groups have nominated SMB so obviously I’m in the minority.
@steve50
Saving Mr. Banks would be “an outstanding winner”!
Watched it three times already and it’s a fascinating film, I discover new things at every viewing. I’m afraid as usual when it comes to what they perceive as sentimental “Oscar-bait”, AD readers were prejudiced against it from the get-go and won’t even try to give it a chance 🙁
I certainly agree with what you’re saying, Ryan. That could very well be the case. But there’s the other side of the prism too – too many blank lines to fill in may induce decision paralysis for voters once they get their top faves listed on the ballot. They might be exhausted trying to think of what else they’ve seen that’s in contention, much less attempt to rank them, past a certain point. Which may lead them to blindly listing films just to get it over and done with or leaving those slots blank altogether.
Yes, this is a pretty dim, cynical depiction of the average AMPAS voter. But I think the fact that they aren’t required *at all* to list films beyond their #1 choice and the fact that they switched from requiring 10 films being ranked to 5 films could be indications of this. Again, this is just speculation. But I do know that plenty of eruidite critics/bloggers who probably see 5-10 times as many films as the typical AMPAS member have a hard time making Top 10 lists themselves, and they either just give a alphabetical list or state their #1 and then list their other choices unranked.
too many blank lines to fill in may induce decision paralysis for voters once they get their top faves listed on the ballot. They might be exhausted trying to think of what else they’ve seen
No offense, but anyone who gets exhausted from decision paralysis after trying to think of 5 movies they like shouldn’t have an Oscar ballot. Or a drivers license. Or scissors with pointy tips. Did I say “no offense”? I didn’t mean that. I’m offended by them and I don’t care if they’re offended by me.
Yes, I fully understand that one of the reasons they scaled back to five scratch-off tickets is because of all the mental stress it was causing to a few Academy voters who can’t even remember if they took their lunchtime Xanax or not, much less be expected to remember 5 movies they’ve seen. But that’s a pathetic situation.
On a less ranty note, here’s another problem caused by scaling the choices back to 5 — Every Academy voter KNOWS they need to watch 12 Years a Slave, American Hustle, Gravity. So they get that chore out of the way. Then they’ll watch Blue Jasmine or Saving Mr Banks. They’re happy with all those movies. They love those movies. So now they’re DONE.
They’re Done. They stop digging though the pile of screeners. They might know Fruitvale Station got booed or cheered or something, but hey, it didn’t make any money so they can skip it. Frances Who? And that movie where Jonah Hill pulls his penis out? No thank you! Mud? – a movie about Wet Dirt? Not appealing.
As soon as they’ve seen 5 movies they know are great, then they stop looking. They all see the 5 or 6 movies that are spoon-fed to them — and whew, now they’re finished, now it’s time to vote!
I’m not saying all members think that way, or even most of them. But we know for a fact that some Academy members complained that they couldn’t think of 10 movies they liked. So all that represents to me is a confession that they didn’t bother to see many movies.
Because who among us at AD has any trouble naming 20 or 25 movies we enjoyed this year? (hush, Antoinette, this isn’t about you) 🙂
Should we encourage such laziness? Make it EASY for the voters to take the simplest more boring way out? Apparently the Board of Governors thinks so. I’m just saying I think that’s a pitiful reflection on the film industry if their own venerable filmmakers “have a hard time making Top 10 lists.”
Hollywood made the Oscar voters millionaires. And these people can’t think of 10 decent movies Hollywood made all year? What does that say about what they think of their industry? What does it say about what they think about moviegoers who go to the movies they don’t see and can’t remember when they do?
Well, this is certainly making me re-think putting Wolf of Wall Street in 10th slot. This piece along with Marshall’s statsgasm piece (what with its likely passionate support an high number 1s). Can we please have 10 nominees this year?
I guess the question is, if we still get at least 5 BP nominees regardless, then don’t we still get at least the 5 best Best Picture films of the year?
And the other nominees (6-10) are just confetti?
IDK, maybe I’m talking out my ass with that one.
Best post of the year* so far, Ryan!
Here is what I believe the Academy has been trying to implement these past few years of tweaking the rules: they’re trying to create a reliable system of cultural gerrymandering — with no chance for any surprises that would upset the Academy traditionalists.
This^ right here is what pisses me off the most! Ugh I swear! And they’ve succeeded. Last year their worst nightmare would have been the countless eye-rolls from their ol’ pals at a nomination for let’s say MOONRISE KINGDOM.
*me trying to be cute from a nonmathematical point of view
Here comes that dark cloud again: Hollywood loves stories about Hollywood.
Will Saving Mr Banks make it three years in a row? It doesn’t appear to have the gas of The Artist or Argo, but exactly how strong the current narcissistic bent of the Academy?
Damn..just when I thought it would be smooth sailing to an outstanding winner.
Looks like there are 9 solid titles:
12 Years A Slave
Gravity
American Hustle
Captain Phillips
The Wolf of Wall Street
Saving Mr. Banks
Her
Nebraska
Inside Llewyn Davis
And Dallas, Fruitvale, Jasmine or Philomena could either round out the top 10 or bump out one of the last 3 films mentioned above (Nebraska and Llewyn Davis have the same indie, brooding feel… so I guess one of them could be left out by the Academy like PGA did). But beyond those 13 films I agree there’s next to no chance for smth else to get a bp nom unless August or The Butler manage a late rally for TWC.
Also, in 2005, Walk the Line was nominated for the Producers Guild Award and not nominated for the Oscar’s Best Picture. That year, Brokeback Mountain really got screwed out of BP.
2005:
Best Picture – 2005
Academy Awards (Oscars)
*Crash
Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Good Night, and Good Luck.
Munich
American Film Institute Movies of the Year
A History of Violence
Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Crash
Good Night, and Good Luck.
King Kong
Munich
Syriana
The 40-Year-Old Virgin
The Squid and the Whale
BAFTA Awards
*Brokeback Mountain
Capote
The Constant Gardener
Crash
Good Night, and Good Luck.
Critics’ Choice Awards
*Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Cinderella Man
The Constant Gardener
Crash
Good Night, and Good Luck.
King Kong
Memoirs of a Geisha
Munich
Walk the Line
Directors Guild Awards
*Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Crash
Good Night, and Good Luck.
Munich
Film Independent Spirit Awards
*Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Good Night, and Good Luck.
The Squid and the Whale
The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada
Golden Globe Awards
Drama
*Brokeback Mountain
The Constant Gardener
Good Night, and Good Luck.
A History of Violence
Match Point
—
Comedy or Musical
*Walk the Line
Mrs. Henderson Presents
Pride & Prejudice
The Producers
The Squid and the Whale
Los Angeles Film Critics Association Awards
*Brokeback Mountain
A History of Violence
National Board of Review
*Good Night, and Good Luck.
Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Crash
A History of Violence
Match Point
Memoirs of a Geisha
Munich
Syriana
Walk the Line
National Society of Film Critics
*Capote
2046
A History of Violence
New York Film Critics Circle Awards
*Brokeback Mountain
Producers Guild Awards
*Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Crash
Good Night, and Good Luck.
Walk the Line
Screen Actors Guild Awards
*Crash
Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Good Night, and Good Luck.
Hustle & Flow
Best Picture
*Brokeback Mountain – 12 n / 8 w
*Crash – 8 n / 2 w
*Capote – 10 n / 1 w
*Good Night, and Good Luck. – 10 n / 1 w
Walk the Line – 4 n / 1 w
A History of Violence – 5 n / 0 w
*Munich – 5 n / 0 w
The Constant Gardener – 3 n / 0 w
The Squid and the Whale – 3 n / 0 w
King Kong – 2 n / 0 w
Match Point – 2 n / 0 w
Memoirs of a Geisha – 2 n / 0 w
Syriana – 2 n / 0 w
2046 – 1 n / 0 w
Cinderella Man – 1 n / 0 w
Hustle & Flow – 1 n / 0 w
Mrs. Henderson Presents – 1 n / 0 w
Pride & Prejudice – 1 n / 0 w
The 40-Year-Old Virgin – 1 n / 0 w
The Producers – 1 n / 0 w
The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada – 1 n / 0 w
I was looking at the SAG nominations for ensemble and noticed that, let’s just call him Bobby, isn’t part of the ensemble for AH. I can guess why but that’s a bit of a shame. I’ve never seen him jump up in the air and shoot someone in the face before.
Also, it seems Amout and The Blind Side have something in common. Hmm
Robert A.
Yeah, Dreamgirls is correct.
I did a breakdown of 2006:
Best Picture – 2006
Academy Awards (Oscars)
*The Departed
Babel
Letters from Iwo Jima
Little Miss Sunshine
The Queen
American Film Institute Movies of the Year
Babel
Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
Dreamgirls
Half Nelson
Happy Feet
Inside Man
Letters from Iwo Jima
Little Miss Sunshine
The Devil Wears Prada
United 93
BAFTA Awards
*The Queen
Babel
The Departed
The Last King of Scotland
Little Miss Sunshine
Critics’ Choice Awards
*The Departed
Babel
Blood Diamond
Dreamgirls
Letters from Iwo Jima
Little Children
Little Miss Sunshine
Notes on a Scandal
The Queen
United 93
Directors Guild Awards
*The Departed
Babel
Dreamgirls
Little Miss Sunshine
The Queen
Film Independent Spirit Awards
*Little Miss Sunshine
American Gun
The Dead Girl
Half Nelson
Pan’s Labyrinth
Golden Globe Awards
Drama
*Babel
Bobby
The Departed
Little Children
The Queen
—
Comedy or Musical
*Dreamgirls
Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
The Devil Wears Prada
Little Miss Sunshine
Thank You for Smoking
Los Angeles Film Critics Association Awards
*Letters from Iwo Jima
The Queen
National Board of Review
*Letters from Iwo Jima
Babel
Blood Diamond
The Departed
The Devil Wears Prada
Flags of Our Fathers
The History Boys
Little Miss Sunshine
Notes on a Scandal
The Painted Veil
National Society of Film Critics
*Pan’s Labyrinth
The Death of Mr. Lazarescu
Letters from Iwo Jima
New York Film Critics Circle Awards
*United 93
Producers Guild Awards
*Little Miss Sunshine
Babel
The Departed
Dreamgirls
The Queen
Screen Actors Guild Awards
*Little Miss Sunshine
Babel
Bobby
The Departed
Dreamgirls
Best Picture
*Little Miss Sunshine – 10 n / 3 w
*The Departed – 8 n / 3 w
*Letters from Iwo Jima – 6 n / 2 w
*Babel – 9 n / 1 w
*The Queen – 7 n / 1 w
Dreamgirls – 6 n / 1 w
United 93 – 3 n / 1 w
Pan’s Labyrinth – 2 n / 1 w
The Devil Wears Prada – 3 n / 0 w
Blood Diamond – 2 n / 0 w
Bobby – 2 n / 0 w
Borat – 2 n / 0 w
Half Nelson – 2 n / 0 w
Little Children – 2 n / 0 w
Notes on a Scandal – 2 n / 0 w
American Gun – 1 n / 0 w
Flags of Our Fathers – 1 n / 0 w
Happy Feet – 1 n / 0 w
Inside Man – 1 n / 0 w
Thank You for Smoking – 1 n / 0 w
The Dead Girl – 1 n / 0 w
The Death of Mr. Lazarescu – 1 n / 0 w
The History Boys – 1 n / 0 w
The Last King of Scotland – 1 n / 0 w
The Painted Veil – 1 n / 0 w
Has any film missed out on a Best Picture nomination after getting PGA and SAG Ensemble?
Waking Ned Divine, Being John Malkovich, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Adaptation, Dreamgirls, and Bridesmaids all missed BP after hitting that duo of Guild nods. Bridesmaids is the only one of those that missed during the expanded lineup era, though.
“Has any film missed out on a Best Picture nomination after getting PGA and SAG Ensemble?”
Dreamgirls comes immediately to mind.
Practically speaking, when it comes to tabulating votes, it doesn’t really matter if you can rank 5 or 10 films on the ballot – the outcomes don’t really change if there are surplus votes to be distributed or when the ballots for films that are no longer in the running are reallocated.
The two times I’ve run a BP voting simulation using critics/bloggers top 10s, I’ve run both using the AMPAS rules of 5 ranked films and allowing the full top 10 (in the case of Statsgasm, I report the results using the AMPAS rules). Very, very few reallocated votes went to #5 films, much less films ranked beyond #5. I’d say 95% of votes that were transferred for whatever reason went to the #2-3 ranked films on the ballot.
That being said, even if there’s no practical difference between being able to rank 5 or 10 films when it comes to counting the votes, I do agree that voters may behave differently when being presented with the option to list more films. However, we should keep in mind that AMPAS voters are *not required* to list films beyond their #1 choice. That fact, coupled with the likelihood that the average AMPAS voter doesn’t watch the vast majority of films in contention, probably means voters don’t rack their brains when attempting to rank films beyond their top choices. I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the reasons they switched from ranking 10 films to ranking 5 films in 2012 was because a high percentage of voters weren’t even ranking more than 5 films.
I do agree that voters may behave differently when being presented with the option to list more films.
I’m glad you said that, so it won’t look like I’m arguing with you.
It’s a question of human nature. 5 slots is a constricted box that forces many voters to make selections from a pool of “respectable” choices already culled down to a more narrow mental groove of “pre-certified” or Obligatory Choices.
10 openings gave voters room to breathe and include lots of lovely creative Impulse Choices.
And here’s the crucial factor: the voters with a broader range of taste would not have put all of those impulse choices into slots 6-10. As long as they could put “Obligatory Respectable Choice X” someplace, they were free to place quirkier choices in slots 1-5.
I’m also afraid scaling back to 5 choices will cause the number of BP nominees to be in the 5-8 range instead of the 7-10 range. Because if everybody mostly agrees on, say, 4 titles, that only leaves one available slot for voters to express any individuality, and thus it will be harder for those quirkier choices to accumulate enough ballot clout to break past these frustrating accounting thresholds, right?
I don’t have the math to back up this gut feeling. But I do think I understand a little bit about the sheeplike mentality of American voters. If you don’t give them any reason or encouragement to THINK outside the box, then a lot of them are fine just doing only “what they’re supposed to do.”
Here is what I believe the Academy has been trying to implement these past few years of tweaking the rules: they’re trying to create a reliable system of cultural gerrymandering — with no chance for any surprises that would upset the Academy traditionalists.
The “New Academy” pretends to want to be inclusive but whenever that inclusiveness threatens to upset the more traditional old-guard membership, they figure out new rules to smother anything that doesn’t look like an Oscar movie to those members with creepy attachments to the status quo.
If we only get 8 Best Picture nominees or fewer in a year as strong as 2013, then it will expose this new system as a failure.
Wow I hadn’t realized what a strong position Saving Mr. Banks is in. It would be pretty terrible if Dallas Buyers Club (ok-good movie) got in over Inside Llewyn Davis (great movie). Yeah that would suck.
Great work, Sasha (as always).
I mean, we might get over this obscenity now and not raise hope AMPAS will rectify. Re: DALLAS BUYERS CLUB
Has any film missed out on a Best Picture nomination after getting PGA and SAG Ensemble? Is there’s still a chance?
Dallas Buyers Club should get in. Speaking of McConahay (misspelled).
Where is Mud?