It is still surprising to me that so many see the ten best picture nominees change as a negative. In any given year, there are at least twenty “best pictures.” Ten of them is better than five. Five never does justice to a year and, in fact, rewards the best campaigns and the “Oscar” movies, now becoming more and more marginalized and obscure. The only way I see the change as a negative is in terms of the way Oscar predictions work. In that way, chances are, it’s going to be all over the map. But who really cares about that? In the final analysis, we look at the films chosen in any given year and most of the time conclude that, in fact, the Academy has chosen not the best five in any way, shape or form. This change makes it possible to recognize a wider range, and a much more interesting range, of films.
I disagree strongly with the notion that a wider net means that it is only in place to boost ratings (they obviously don’t care about that) and I disagree that it will amount to mainstream, less worthy (but more audience-friendly) fare. When it comes down to it they are still choosing the ten best. Best means best, whether it is in the Oscar genre or not. This is a way for the Academy to mature and evolve, and thank god they have the good sense to do that. The other option is digging their heels in to prove they’ve been right all along (it’s the pictures that got small). A new world of media means a new Academy; a new audience could mean that we are not honoring “Oscar movies,” but great films, plain and simply.
David Carr in the NY Times:
Let’s be honest: Some Americans have tuned out the Oscars not because “The Dark Knight” didn’t get a nomination, but because the telecast is jammed with obscure awards that they have no say over — this isn’t “American Idol” — and no rooting interest in. What the Oscars need is fewer awards, not more nominees. As long as we are doing the math, does the academy really need three awards for short films and two separate awards for sound?
If the academy is serious about making a broadcast that will thrive for years to come, Oscar needs a haircut.
And so at the end of the day, I think the case is plainly made that a 10-nominee structure for the Best Picture category waters down not only the meaning of the award, but the thrill of hunting it and, perhaps most unfortunately, the payoff of being in the mix.
52 Responses for "Oscar’s Ten Best Picture Nominees Has Many Naysayers"
Is David Carr an idiot ? Eliminating the short categories as well as the sound ones would diminish the importance of the awards. It would be like eliminating foreign film.
The world sees the Oscars as a United States ceremony. Mr Ganis said they want to be global. Eliminating categories would only make the show lose even more fans and viewers
The Academy Awards is unique in that they award excellence (as well as they can) in every category. I’ve beensaying for years that a few more categories should be added… though a valid argument against that idea has been made (aka – turning the Oscars into the MTV movie awards… *shudder*).
It is the only time in the entire fucking year that I ask to be left alone so I can watch television. It is my Super Bowl. All you naysayers leave it the fuck alone. I’m now cool with the 10 Best Picture nominees. It’ll be like the AFI Top Ten List (which I respect… most of the time). I honestly think we’re spending too much time on this topic.
Dammit James Cameron!!
I am vehemently against eliminating the “lesser” awards. It’s always fun to recognize, yeah, this movie did have really good costumes, or that movie had awesome special effects. If there is one thing this year’s ceremony got right (and there wasn’t just one thing), it was making these awards relevant and exciting again. I liked the whole concept of going through the process of the making of a film, from script to post-production. Sure, there are 5 awards that all include films that less than 5% of the viewing audience has probably seen (animated short, live short, docu short, docu, and foreign film), but if anything these awards are making an effort to educate Americans on maybe expanding their horizons ever in the slightest.
I can’t for the life of me understand all the negative attention this 10 nominees thing is getting. I try to see as many movies as I can in a given year, but some movies I would probably overlook without the best picture nominee. Once it gets nominated, it’s on my must see list, so I’m excited about the possibility of this bringing my attention to more films. I really liked 4/5 of the nominees last year (unlike most people, it seems), and although I disliked The Reader quite a lot, it still had it’s moments of brilliance. I’m hoping this will just bring more great films to more people, as well as honoring films that would be snubbed in the past (I still think it’s ridiculous that The Wrestler didn’t get a nomination).
I also think this will make it more fun to guess, or at least to decide for myself what I think should be the winner. I had a lot of fun last year weighing what I loved about each film and deciding “my winner”, even though we all knew Slumdog had it in the bag fairly early on.
I think nominating 10 movies is a good idea. I originally thought moving the lifetime achievement etc awards to another ceremony was a bad idea…. but if they end up airing that ceremony as well, I think it would be good television.
But Carr is right, the short categories need to go. Im a big old movie lover and I still don’t care about the short categories. No one watches them, no one cares. If anything they can still give Oscars to those folks, but some other time. Best Song should be eliminated as well. One of the sound categories and now that we have 10 Best Picture nom’s we don’t need Best Animated Film anymore
Another bit of nonsense from Kris Tapley (yes, you made me go and read his damn thoughts.)
Is Kris saying we’re we all so unable to adapt that we’ll hit a roadblock at 7 or 8 titles this year? Sit around dumbfounded with a bad case of guesser’s block, stuck at 8 favorites?
Or by some miracle of human evolution will we suddenly start narrowing the race down to 12 or 15 titles (and still miss predicting at least 2).
I’ll be studying real hard all year, so I hope to know more than 8 movies I like by the time we have to take the test in December.
“…the excitement of the Best Picture race as we knew it could be gone forever.”
*sniff* yes, just like the excitement of dialing a rotary phone is gone forever. Times change. Learn to have fun with your friggen iPhone.
The 10 BP nominees will be more like NBR’s Top 10 then say AFI’s, meaning its likely will see smaller niche films versus commercial fare (especially if the current voting system isn’t changed).
So instead of just one The Reader or Capote per year, we’ll get four or five. I guess its a fair trade for one WALL-E or TDK.
Yippee!
As usual, Ryan Adams can’t mask an odd distaste for me and my work and simply offer a level-headed rebuttal. Petty.
(By the way, who said anything about liking the films that are in the race? My comment has nothing to do with that.)
Kinda diminishes what makes getting a Best Pic nom special. Rarely have I seen a year where 10 films deserved a nom for Best Pic. Some crap will surely slip through. If not this year, then the next or the one after that.
I thought both David’s and Kris’ articles were well thought out – I guess I disagree, though, that it’s a negative. For me, it’s a huge positive.
“In any given year, there are at least twenty “best pictures.” Ten of them is better than five. Five never does justice to a year and, in fact, rewards the best campaigns and the “Oscar” movies, now becoming more and more marginalized and obscure.”
agree entirely.
5, 10, 20…. It’s the same. The winner will hardly be a surprise. Foreign language and animated features may get a nomination but they will never win best picture.
I think too, the negative reaction is because it seems it’s being done for ratings and therefore money. That’s not the reason to open it up. I think it’s OK to make it 10 if it’s because the Academy was so distraught over the exclusion of deserving films year after year, but that wasn’t the case. The reason for the expansion was because they were losing viewers and this would conceivably bring more “favorites” into the mix. Do these films have any legitimate shot at winning?
I think it’s still going to be as any year: a few, maybe three, will have a real shot at winning Best Picture. The rest — now 7 or 8 films — will just be happy to be nominated and unfortunately, may take votes away. Each year, there’s talk of a how the votes will eventually stack up and if certain nods will cancel each other out, allowing a less deserving winner in the process. Now, with 10, that’s even more of a possibility.
And think about it. If it is for ratings, does that mean the Academy will feel pressure to include a blockbuster, a comedy, an action movie, an animated movie, a musical, etc.?
I just wonder how this will all shake out. Of course, we hope that it turns out the 10 nominated films will more closely resemble “our” personal Top 10 now, but will it? I’m not convinced. Especially since the motivating factor seems to be dwindling ratings and popular relevance.
This said, I do hope it will be the case. Right now, I just want “Up” to be nominated. That film must be! If it’s not, with 10 now, I will be really, really disappointed. And also, we were talking about this: If an animated movie gets a Best Picture nomination, doesn’t that mean that the Best Animated Film is a done deal? How can the Best Picture nominee not be the best animated? Imagine!
Jen1:
“If an animated movie gets a Best Picture nomination, doesn’t that mean that the Best Animated Film is a done deal? How can the Best Picture nominee not be the best animated?”
It has always been that way when a foreign language film is nominated for best picture.
So maybe if Up gets into the top 10 then maybe it’s not going to be nominated for animated film so it could end empty handed.
This is all subjective.
It’s not an “odd distaste” for you or your work, Kris. But that’s a good example of your odd way of phrasing flimsy ideas.
“the excitement of the Best Picture race as we knew it could be gone forever.”
Yikes. I mean, if that’s how you really feel, maybe I should feel sorry for you instead of poking fun at the histrionics.
I’m selling pedestals for dirt cheap on EBAY. Anyone else need one? So much drama I can almost taste it.
And Ryan – you make my heart smile. But hey, don’t knock the rotary phone. I take offence to that!
I think Kris was making a valid point. It’s true that each year there seem to be about seven or eight films in the running, and by nominating ten, some of the excitement of wondering what’s gonna show up on Oscar morning could be diminished. Obviously, this year could turn out to be a whole different beast than years past, but going on what information we have that’s a perfectly reasonable worry.
(By the way, I’m not opposed to adding ten nominees, and I think both sides have a point).
Carr is an idiot. How you can compare short animations, short documentaries and short live action movies in one category? And if we need just one category for short movies – we might also have one for longer ones. Let’s cut such categories as foreign language film, animated feature film and documentary (feature). We don’t need them because we have best picture!!!
Every year, no matter what year, I see movies that I’d give 10/10. And I see a lot that I’d give 8 or 9 out of 10.
How can anyone say that on any given year there may not be “10″ movies around WORTHY of being a Top 10 nominee?
Or is this argument/commentary based solely on what WILL be nominated, not what SHOULD/COULD be nominated?
It may not last long. It’s a test. The Oscars are ONE night year. Let’s all just enjoy it. That’s the whole reason were here 365 days per year, right?
No, Ryan, maybe you should realize how tired your shtick is, grow up and try to have a conversation…for once.
Ryan got owned.
I think it is all about the ratings and, as Carr points out, not losing that ad revenue. We may be in for more aggressive campaigns because studios know they have a better shot at getting a nomination and in the end that might marginalize some amazing foreign language films and true indys.
But, I do sincerely hope this works out well and we get a wide variety of nominees.
Thing is, Kris, when I visit In Contention and try to play nice, kid around, be friendly, you crawl right up my ass.
How am I supposed to consider your correspondence at IC “playing nice” when stuff like this is your modus operandi? You’ve always come across as someone with a personal disregard, not a playful disposition.
In a nutshell, if I’ve hurt your feelings by mistakenly considering you unnecessarily coarse in our interactions elsewhere, I apologize. And I sincerely hope that’s good enough for you.
Well, the thing is that there are 7 or 8 films that we can narrow it down to when there are 5 nominees…now they may all get in but what about those other 3 films? Are we not suppose to predict them? Does it really make it less fun because we have a couple more “locks” each year?
Kris, Ryan, all right you two, you’re both nice boys and I’m old enough to be your momma, so listen to me when I tell you to play nice.
Sasha, best column I’ve read about ‘the 10′. I love movies and every year I get upset because 2 or 3 or more ‘best’ movies get left off.
This says it all for me:
“A new world of media means a new Academy; a new audience could mean that we are not honoring “Oscar movies,” but great films, plain and simply.”
I don’t understand your tone any better than you understand mine, Kris. I’d rather see this as a recurring friendly misunderstanding, since neither one of us is likely to change how we write to please the other one.
I’ll offer my apologies, too.
YAY! Now back to the race.
Unfortunately, when it comes to Best Picture, Oscar has not been kind to comedies. A few musicals have snuck in the mix here and there. Hopefully the ten will give some cred to comedies and maybe studios will start making better comedies.
Although I would love it if foreign language films could be nominated for best picture, the fact that there is a foreign language category means that in effect 15 best films will be nominated.
Finally, I don’t have a problem with the 10 for best picture, but don’t all the arguments for this change also hold true for best actor/actress/director etc. I would have liked a floating number say 5 – 7 for some of the other major awards. Wouldn’t it have been great if there had been 6 best actress noms last year including Kristen Scott Thomas? I’m sure Thomas was a hairline away from actress with the fifth highest votes.
The good thing is that the Academy recognizes some change is needed. Next they need to clean up the mess they’ve made in the foreign language category.
I actually agree. Move the shorts (live and animated) / both sound awards to another event, and then announced aka the tech awards; Sincerely, I never gave a crap about these. Not very much into song either. Leave that for the grammy’s. Also… Is there really a need for SO MANY MUSICAL ACTS…. even last year’s telecast, which I enjoyed even considering the overall winner, was one of the best of the decade (if not the best).. but did we need the music number to honor the musicals….?
I agree 100% about the idiocy of the 10 Picture nominees. The Academy is growing desperate in these times of user-content; Quite franky, and for at least 3 years, I have been following the telecast live and refreshing AwardsDaily.com (aaah… remember OscarWatch? good times) every 4 minutes. I much prefer the comments here, than the ones made by the awful portuguese media during the commercial breaks.
Booooooooo for the 10 Picture decision. Booooooooooo
But to be honest.. not caring anymore, at least, not that much.
T.
Yes, I said this before.
It’s highly possible that Kristin Scott Thomas and Sally Hawkins were 6th & 7th.
And since the caliber was so great among those 7 women. Why not have 7?
Hypothetically, let’s say that last year only gave us a quality consisting of Kate, Meryl, Melissa Leo, & Anne Hathaway (as far as votes goes) … why couldn’t there have been only 4 nominees? Why have more than 3 or 4 if the vote totals weren’t close for 5th?
And vice-versa, if the totals were tight for 6,7, or 8 women, why cut it off?
I think it should be that way for most, if not all categries.
We’ve seen this in many critics awards, as well as the Globes and SAGs. Heck, song last year only had 3. Some years only 4 noms made it in particular categories. And I could see arguments for 6,7 or 8 noms, etc.
Kris: But I have the Ruby Slippers
Ryan: But I have the magic wand
Kris: But I HAVE the Ruby Slippers
Ryan: But I HAVE the magic wand
Kris: But I HAVE THE RUBY SLIPPERS DAMN IT!
Ryan: But I HAVE THE F-ING MAGIC WAND
Kris: That wand is just a Harry Potter replica.
Ryan: Those rubies are just CZ’s.
Rob, haha!
& Kris wasn’t even looking at my most magic wand of all.
I looked at changing the best picture nominees to 10 was to increase ticket sales and tv ratings.
However, I am excited about it because it opens the door for some small independent films, comedies, musicals, foreign, and racial driven fare.
It may make money for these films and entice studios to make more.
And who knows once the race is wide open which film might come out the winner.
Hey, it worked in the 30’s and 40’s so give it a shot.
Another thing, about the technical categories, maybe they should move that to the same night that they give the humanitarian awards, though they can’t do that this year since they’ve already set the date which is prior to nominations. But definitely those categories should be kept. Those artists worked just as hard as anyone else.
I first wasn’t so thrilled with the change to 10 – but when I wrote my post about what the “likely other 5 nominees” was, I realized that all of the following directors would have gotten Best Picture nominations who never did:
Akira Kurosawa
Frederico Fellini
Luis Bunuel
Francois Truffaut
And that’s just the start. So, if expanding it finally gets some love to people who deserve it, especially foreign directors, I’m all for it.
“Another thing, about the technical categories, maybe they should move that to the same night that they give the humanitarian awards,”
Have everything on the same night, and have the technical/humanitarian awards on PBS, like the Tonys split the broadcast a few times. Or have the humanitarian awards broadcast on PPV. (heh-heh, that’s a little joke.)
Ryan,
Splitting the broadcasts is done with the BAFTAs, between BBC4 and BBC1 (if I remember my BBCs).
“Best” is a construct, not a guarantee. Choosing five more films does not guarantee that the 10 best films will be selected; rather, the 10 films chosen by an organization with members of multiple agendas will be the likely contenders.
Ok, I have a question. How do we know that 10 nominations will go to the right movies (5 that wouldn`t have been there under the old policy)? Like, assumption is that 10 nominations would`ve put TDK and ________(insert other worthy snubee) in the race, but how do we know something like Defiance wouldn`t have got in instead? It`s, after all, the same demographics that votes every year and these guys vote the way they vote (Crash, The Reader, you know the drill). They promise change in that there will be 10 nominees but will their mindset change accordingly so that 10 nominees have deserving movies from genres that AMPAS usually dismisses(comedy, sci fi, superhero, fantasy,horror)?
We`ll have to wait and see which is kinda exciting,no? Hoping that 10 noms means open-minded choices.
I just hope 10 noms means Precious is in.
Though I’d like to think 10 slots will allow more good films to get nominated, who’s to say the Academy will nominate at least 6 out of 10 lousy movies instead of 3 out of 5? It’s not as if the taste of the members is going to improve overnight.
Hey, kinda unrelated, but Ebert just gave “Public Enemies” 3.5 stars. He also gave the new “Ice Age” film the same score.
We obviously have to wait until the next award show to see if they really branch out with the 10 or just add 5 more oscar bait films.
^ Yeah Ebert has been throwing around a lot of ***1/2 ratings lately :/
Mr. Carr simply shows NO RESPECT FOR FILMMAKERS and we should show no respect for his opinion.
The SHORT AWARDS are a crucial part of filmmaking. Many filmmakers start there and it’s a form that should be respected, mostly because filmmakers try to tell interesting, original, engaging and COMPLEX stories in such a short time. It’s something that often is ignored, but it’s a hard thing to achieve.
And there is a difference between sound mixing and sound editing.
I’M TIRED OF ALL THE LACK OF RESPECT THESE PEOPLE ARE SHOWING.
OK, Academy, if you don’t want to present an Oscar in the original song category if there isn’t one song that surpasses the barrier, then why not showing this disrespect in other categories??????? FOR EXAMPLE BEST ACTRESS! Just take a look at the 2005 nominees! None of these would surpass 5 points, if you ask me! They are all terribly mediocre performances, but of course, stars are stars. And you wouldn’t do it.
I don’t disagree completely with the shift from 5 to 10 best picture nominees but I have to say it could be tricky, more than we are realizing now.
-wide the selection will result surely in a less powerful push at the box office for the nominees.
-Previous awards are still there, all the Guilds Awards, Golden globes, etc…, they will give much more the tone of the season. If 5 pictures are on the lists of most of those awards, at the Oscars nomination announcement the other 5 that will come up, will seam just runners up… it is true it will be a recognition for more excellent moviemaking, but nonetheless an award is due to give a statement on what is that season best, even getting it wrong sometimes.
- 10 pics could be a statement that gets it wrong less easily, just because it says nothing in particular. I don’t think that having Wall-E in a 10 movies list would give us a statement from the Academy as meaningful as Wall-E not being there last year. The question from this season on will always be: would a great animation movie find its place in a five pics run? We don’t know, we are going to get a weaker pulse on the Academy wrist. Everybody happy is not what an important Award, the most important in the movie business, should set as standard of its choices.
-Do you think that members, in a month, will watch 10 movies?
We have to realize that with a 10 pics list the margin of votes to win the Prize becomes shorter: the votes are spread on a bigger cake. Expect to see a two pictures win in the next couple of years. Is that better to have Pulp fiction and Forrest Gump both winning the race? What does it tell us?
I’m not sure, will see, but I’m not that all happy to have an Academy more sympathetic but less meaningful.
“wide the selection will result surely in a less powerful push at the box office for the nominees.”
Why?
” If 5 pictures are on the lists of most of those awards, at the Oscars nomination announcement the other 5 that will come up, will seam just runners up… it is true it will be a recognition for more excellent moviemaking, but nonetheless an award is due to give a statement on what is that season best, even getting it wrong sometimes.”
Not all 5 BP noms are recognized at all awards. Remember THE WRESTLER winning at Venice? Or TDK several of those People’s Choice-type programs?
“The question from this season on will always be: would a great animation movie find its place in a five pics run? We don’t know, we are going to get a weaker pulse on the Academy wrist.”
Well why should the AMPAS do so? There’s that ghetto animation Oscar. With the old 5 rule after the Animation Oscar got installed, how many got nominated? Oh that’s right, NONE. Only BEAUTY & THE BEAST ever broke through….but that was before the cartoon Oscar.
“Everybody happy is not what an important Award, the most important in the movie business, should set as standard of its choices.”
Yes because ORDINARY PEOPLE, DANCES WITH WOLVES, and CRASH are so much more better movies than RAGING BULL, GOODFELLAS, and BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN. yes I’m being sarcastic.
“Do you think that members, in a month, will watch 10 movies?”
They don’t watch the 5 as it is.
EDIT – And for the record, I remember 2001 when A.I. came out and was dismissed. A few, like me, quite liked it…and while the Oscars basically ignoring it like the Swine Flu was expected, I was pleased when the short-lived AFI Awards television program nominated it. I knew it wouldn’t win, but that it was invited to the dance with FOTR and A BEAUTIFUL MIND…that was cool.
I like that Carpetbagger guy, but I completely and passionately disagree with his notion that what the Oscars really need is less awards. One of the things I love so much about the Oscars is that actually give out awards for stuff other than directing, writing and acting. I love that the effects work is recognized and that makeup gets some attention and that cinematography is showcased along with editing.
That’s awesome and there’s absolutely no reason that should be changed because Joe Shmoe doesn’t know what the hell Art Direction is. If anyone actually gives a shit, they can Google the damn thing. If they don’t, then I think it’s silly to tailor the Oscar telecast to their desires.
I’m all for this 10 Best Pic nominees plan and I have no doubt at all that we will have many movies to choose from when it comes to making our predictions.
One thing this announcement has already succeeded in achieving is jump-starting the Oscar chatter months earlier than we normally see. It also gives bloggers a chance to make all kinds of controversial proclamations, churning up page hits like chum thrown in the water for the hungrier sharks among us (myself included).
Suggesting that the Academy slash and burn categories that have deep roots dug in for decades is about as viable as requiring AMPAS members prove they’ve seen all the movies they’re voting for.
“Suggesting that the Academy slash and burn categories that have deep roots dug in for decades is about as viable as requiring AMPAS members prove they’ve seen all the movies they’re voting for.”
You mean like the deep roots that five nominees for best picture was?
Not what I mean at all, head_wizard. There’s a difference between yanking something up by the roots to throw it in the compost heap, and re-potting a root-bound root-rot category in a roomier container so those roots can tap into new energy.
Leave a reply