Academy members are suffering silently. The Ankler published an anonymous account of one such member. Most of us who have been doing this a while understand that there is something wrong with the mechanism that decides the Oscars. It was already leaning towards kind of bad before COVID, but the pandemic really did mess with the industry, the public and the Oscars in ways that seem to indicate that if something isn’t done this might be the end.
It does seem like we’ve woken up in 2022 with hardly anyone having any interest whatsoever not only in the Oscars themselves but in the movies earmarked for the Oscars. Here is what our favorite doom and gloom columnists Richard Rushfield has to say today:
3. AWARDS SHOWS COLLAPSE
This year, the Emmys fell to the five-million viewer range. A similar decline next year would put them at three and change.
We’ll see what happens in Oscar season. The Globes are returning, but after the absence, will the audience still care? The Academy’s new CEO Bill Kramer made a shrewd move, putting a TV producer in charge of its TV show, but this decline is not about any one show, not even the biggest one. So if this is a year where the needle can’t start to inch back up, we’re in real trouble.
The trend line here pretty much looks like our media stocks these days — downward. The future looks much more like a trade association dinner than a string of giant international live spectacles. The question is how soon do we get there?
The awards sector has been such a part of the firmament for so long. It’s how we organize ourselves; it’s the excuse for doing the things we believe in — not to mention it’s what keeps the trade press afloat. If it goes, does the already over-indexed prestige category — in TV and film — have any reason to exist without a big public awards parade?
The Oscars won’t end if they have one really bad ratings year. They could theoretically head to streaming and that will be that. But those who wish for that to be the fate of the Oscars must also understand that the Globes and the Oscars are useful to people trying to make a name for themselves because the public sees them. If the public knows them, they can theoretically get better jobs.
If they head to streaming it will be like asking if a bear shat in the woods and no one was around to see him or hear him, did he, indeed, shat in the woods? That’s the sound of one hand clapping.
The Oscars do have a choice, and the industry writ large has a choice: save the Oscars or kill them.
Killing them is easy. They simply announce that times have changed and there is no more use for an awards show that is based on merit. Those who run Hollywood can’t afford to tell the truth about who actually deserves to win because then they will be targeted as racists or sexists or whatever the moral panic of the moment is. They can’t afford it so why not fold up shop and leave the Academy museum as one big apology that says — sorry about the last 90 years. We meant well.
Oscar twitter will be mad, and, as Rushfield points out, an entire ecosystem that keeps the entire Penske media empire afloat, will collapse. Is that the worst thing, though?
When I first started covering the Oscars, the trades looked askance at people like me. This hilariously out-of-date Variety story talks to other early Oscar adopters in 2002 and me. But the benefit of being an independent voice was being able to, theoretically, cover the Oscars in a way the trades didn’t. Other than their film reviews, they mostly had to provide advertorial-like content or puff pieces. Hey, not pointing fingers. We all do it.
But I, for instance, could write a little more honestly. We were rogue voices out there in the ether. The publicists knew they had to control us one way or another because, unlike the trades, we weren’t yet making our living on the Oscar race. Eventually, that would change. But it wouldn’t change until we were seen as influential. It wasn’t enough to criticize the Oscars – everyone did that in nearly every outlet that covers entertainment. It was more about the war between who SHOULD win and who WILL win. This is Oscarwatch old school, but it continues to this day.
The only difference now is that there isn’t an audience anymore. The public has not only been completely shut out, we’re literally in “let them eat Marvel” territory, with even Film Twitter happy to jettison the Proles. Who cares about their populist tastes? Well, unfortunately, that is what has driven the Oscars these many years. Movies are made for people, not for critics, not for Oscar voters.
Except that we can’t really say that anymore, can we. Movies are made now for Oscar voters full stop. They don’t seem to exist for any other reason. This is why people have mostly tuned them out, have no idea what gets nominated in a given year, and don’t care. The Oscars are now the Tonys. COVID really did make that fear a reality.
I am just stubborn enough, though, to not let go of the hand, like Steven in Poltergeist. “Steven! Don’t let go!” “Never!”
I don’t want to watch the Oscars die, much less have had any hand in their destruction. And I have. We all have. We didn’t intend to, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. So now we have to ask the question, can the Oscars be saved? The answer: I think so.
It’s a soft conviction but a conviction all the same. Here are my five suggestions. We’ve tried Quint on his Orca. That didn’t kill the shark; it wrecked the Orca. We tried Hooper and his shark cage. Hooper goes into the cage. Cage goes in the water. Shark in the water. OUR SHARK.
Farewell and adieu to you, fair Spanish ladies…
Now we’re at the Brody phase. Brody, a guy afraid of the water, must get in the water with a shotgun and kill the shark. Okay, so it’s not a perfect metaphor. The point is simplicity…
Here are five ways to save the damn Oscars.
1. Men are not the Enemy
When I was just starting out and believed, wrongly, that I had what it took to be a filmmaker or a writer, I never imagined the industry would part the Red Sea to allow me to make movies and win awards BECAUSE I was female. Or that I would not be judged on merit. I always assumed I would have to be as good as men.
It will dim the entire industry if you dim the lights on your best and your brightest. If they’re the best, let them loose to make great movies. True, there have been many barriers put in the way of under-represented groups. But we can’t go so far in the direction of equity that we lose the best filmmakers and the best stories.
I mean, I guess we CAN if Hollywood believes its role now is to make change rather than to entertain.
But where the Oscars are concerned, the goal that I used to complain about should still be the goal: If they made the best movies, give them the awards. If it is important to turn awards into activism, perhaps there can be another category, like the Toronto Film Festival did with their “Amplifying Voices” award. Can they make more opportunities without sacrificing what they know how to do – tell stories, make movies, win awards, damn the torpedoes?
I am not sure they can. I hope they can. I hope there is room for both things. Advocacy and merit. Or both.
The Oscars are supposed to represent the best, full stop. Yes, it partly comes down to baked-in bias, but mostly it doesn’t. Most people recognize what is great and what isn’t. The market decides that, but also — we can trust the nearly 10,000 Academy members that they more or less know what they’re doing.
The one thing they should not be doing is blacklisting men or white men. Don’t do that. If Top Gun and Elvis have taught us anything, it’s that if you’re going to serve the hamburger, don’t forget the meat. Men are uniquely built to be great directors because they are more visual/spatial than women. This is an evolved trait over millions of years because men have built-in predatory eyes, both in hunting and in terms of sexuality/mating. That doesn’t make them predators; it just means they’re great at the visual stuff, which is why they make great movies.
The truth: men are necessary for every area of American life, yes, even white men, yes even hetero-normative men. They make great movies, and they make great movie stars.
2. Bring Back Collaborations as Opposed to Writer/Director Joints
Only a small handful of filmmakers can write AND direct really really well. Most can do one or the other really really well. The best films in all of film history are usually collaborations. There are some who can do both — like Bong Joon Ho, the Coen brothers but for whatever reason, lately, this seems to be the high bar – someone who can do both. They might be able to do it, but should they do it? If it means something to them, then yes. But we seem to be missing those really great screenplays that used to drive the Oscar race.
This is why they often split Director and Screenplay with Best Picture. They have come to mean almost the same thing. But they didn’t used to. Aaron Sorkin is a great writer. Maybe he’ll be as great a director someday. But why can’t we just get screenplays by Sorkin, directed by someone else? I mean, every so often? There is just too much pressure on an artist to be able to deliver on both counts. I think.
3. Shrink Best Picture Back to Five
I’m sorry to be the bearer of bad news. I have spent years making the case that ten Best Picture contenders is the way to go. It would satisfy both the need to represent popular films and be inclusive and diverse. It also means more money for sites like mine since more movies are in the running. Who’da ever thunk a little movie that could like CODA would pull in a win like it did when it only had THREE Oscar nominations?
CODA might have made the cut with five, but it might not have. I’m starting to see now that the ranked-choice ballot is too limiting for the final climax of the night. A climax is meant to be the big bang of the whole thing but more and more it’s starting to feel like eating your salad after your meal, or ending sex with foreplay. I’m just saying.
The only way we can get back the excitement of Best Picture the way it was intended was to shrink it back to five. The popular entries haven’t ever made it in. Without Spider-Man: No Way Home, the ONLY movie people will remember from last year, or without Top Gun Maverick this year, what is the point of having ten? So we can have more nominees the critics like?
I know people who love the Oscars love having ten. But if you want to SAVE the Oscars, shrink it back to five.
4. Open up the Ceremony to the Public
This is probably my most controversial suggestion. I am lucky enough to go to the Oscars every year. It’s really fun. I always feel like a Queen for a day (as opposed to schmuck for a lifetime). There is nothing more luxurious than attending any event the Academy throws. They are first class in every way. But I also wonder if we might consider making them bigger, not smaller, by inviting people to buy tickets to a live show. I know the idea is to invite Academy members and those getting nominations but is there a way to have them at a much bigger venue? Like the Hollywood Bowl?
Maybe this is a crazy idea, perhaps even desperate, but I just wonder what that would be like?
5. Hire a Great Host
We’ve been over this. I won’t foist Ricky Gervais upon you yet again. I would just say that this is the time to reconcile politics and understand that hundreds of millions of potential viewers might not be Biden voters. Already Democratic politics has merged with Hollywood, while at the same time, a wave of censorship has blanketed the industry and social media.
Can any awards show truly be free if it must also be held to the ideology of the politics of the left? What would happen if they, say, flirted with something more universal? Hillary is on Apple-TV. The Obamas are on Netflix. Their documentaries are represented. Nancy Pelosi shows up. It wasn’t always like this. It’s only become this way recently, where everything has been sucked into Team Blue.
Now granted, this is also controversial. But I’ve noticed a barrier now between telling the stories of what is happening in our country and telling stories that make the Left look good and the Right look bad. This is just too limiting, I think. Though I understand how people feel and I know this is a lost cause. I still think it’s worth considering.
I’m just sure you can get anyone to really care that much if these awards are exclusive to begin with. Most Zoomers, if they think about the Oscars at all, don’t really see them as representative of awarding art or entertainment. They see them as overtly political. That might last a few more years but as the pendulum swings, it most definitely will not.
Maybe hiring a host who has no problem wading between worlds. More than anything else that will save the Oscar telecast, ratings-wise. Hollywood has long relied on fish-out-of-water stories. The host, then, must not be an insider but rather an awkward outsider.
Look, maybe it’s never going to be fixed. I just hold onto hope that we can fix this problem. We won’t fix it unless people start speaking out. They can’t really speak out until we shake ourselves free from this climate of fear.
I don’t mean any disrespect, but from my perspective the reason I used to watch music award shows back in the early 1980’s was to see musicians I usually didn’t see. Music videos changed that for me. Now I saw my favorite artists all the time. The music award show became less important to watch. I just think, movie stars, movies, directors, writers are so accessible that watching who wins the Oscars or any award show an outcome we have no control over becomes less important.
Also, don’t plenty of white men star in movies and win Oscars every year? Don’t plenty of white men direct movies every year?
You are describing a world that doesn’t exist. A world where white men don’t win a lot of Oscar’s and everyone else does. And as far as a great host who straddles both worlds? What are you even talking about? What both worlds?
I believe one of the reasons (maybe the main one) why Oscars are in so much trouble is something not depending on Academy and their political attitude. Every movie awards show is struggling now. The prestige that they provided years ago is no longer credible. Why? Let’s remind ourselves how it was back in 80s and 90s. We all watched old movies in tv. It was a great part of our every day entertainment. Kids have contact with older cinema and have a glimpse into film history. I don’t mean everybody loved it but they knew it better or worse. Now we live in a time when everything is available but at the same time streaming services flood us with magma of new products and novelties only. People don’t watch old movies. Youngsters don’t care about them; movies older than 10 years feels odd to them in almost unacceptable way. Older viewers don’t need them anymore too. Even those movies from 90s are like prehistory now for most of viewers. This is why movies like Blade Runner 2047 and Spielberg’s West Side Story made a box office flops. But to the point. Oscars were made not only of glamour and celebrities but especially were driven by their history. Now that history is faded as never before. So why people should care about another party for rich people? There is nothing more in Oscars for most of viewers. This is why there are not going back. There won’t even if in best picture would be ten Marvel movies. If you don’t know who won those awards before and why it was important why should you even care about winner of today? If public don’t feel the historical/sentimental meaning of these awards there is no longer any prestige in geting them. Marvel fans definitely don’t need Oscars to appreciate their favourites. I think it’s a deeper problem with cinema as a cultural branch. Academy has tried to replaced the history with narration about inclusivity but it’s not as substantial for movie awards so they loose viewers every year and this one could be especially hard.
If you don’t look like this, then you shouldn’t be making movies.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/204cd6e5ece7d86ec43431dc7f552843d274922fde4871fac6feb4de15613884.gif
I think the oscars can be saved but by having a complete reimagining of it. If you want to survive you must adapt, and the oscars have not done that at all, just pander to current politics and that’s a kiss of death entertainment wise.
I would suggest to take a look at the only awards that attract young people: the Game Awards (videogames) and the Anime Awards.
So what can the academy learn from them and change:
1.- Handle the awards yourselves, not sell them to any company. Straight up stream them on Youtube and social media for free.
2.- Allow chat interactions even if they are toxic, that makes it fun.
3.- Sell publicity spots on the show and talk the studio moguls to make the Oscars the BIG movie night. Right now we have different events that seriously nobody watches like Disney’s showcase, TUDUM, etc. How about making the oscars all about showing world premiers of the coming popular films like in the Game Awards? Between each awards, instead of horrible comedy skits, there are coming soon trailers, first time announcements of films, of casting news, etc.
4.- Change the method of voting and combine between popular votes and electors. The nominees are selected by ALL the academy members (to avoid a line of 100% snob nominees and allow more popular films to get it) Keep the 10 BP nominees, but have two spots reserved for a comitee vote to allow popular films to get in. Have the winners be decided from 50% academy vote and 50% popular vote. You need people to be part of the fun in order to engage them. The oscars are seemed now like an aristocratic thing that is alienating.
5.- Include in the show as presentors or commentators the people that love movies, cinephiles, internet personalities that are focused on films. You know, regular people.
6.- Make the show about the films of the year, showing exclusive looks at how they were made, comments from the directors and actors, show sketches, the costumes, the music. I’m sure a lot of them would do it for free.
7.- Have specialized streams that traslate and have commentators differing from region: one for latinamerica, another one for Spain, other for France, other for Germany, other for China, other for Korea, other for Japan, etc. The oscars are becoming less and less an american thing and more a global thing, but the show is not reflecting that at ALL. It’s still 100% american, even becoming political campaings for democrats and let me tell you, we, the people not from the US, turn the tv off then and follow the awards from Twitter. It’s UNBEARABLE.
Just to show how a lot of this happens already. Almost every cinephile and oscar follower is WAY more excited about the simple nomination announcement than the show.
In general, democratize the oscars, make them more grounded. People are no longer swayed by glamour or stuff, but connection, people are so lonely nowadays that shows that make them feel lonenly, small and poor are destined to fail. You need to make people feel important.
“Flash enters the Speedzone” pretty much should have ended any and all talk about having a “popular vote”.
This reminds me of the infamous dust up with the Sci-Fi Hugo Awards when a bunch of angry neckbeards got Chuck Tingle nominated in multiple categories.
Your suggestions may or may not work, but this writer doesn’t want regular people deciding who made great art in movies.
She believes that if Hollywood focuses on promoting white men as the stars of the Oscar’s that will signal to the public that Hollywood is focused on telling great stories written and directed by great white men movie stars, writers, and directors.
This will sell the Oscar’s as a night to celebrate and honor excellence and these great white male actors, directors, and writers, with beautiful women
dressed in glamorous clothing
and that will have American audiences paying attention to
the Oscar’s again.
Men cannot be described as heteronormative. (Also, no hyphen necessary) Men can be described as heterosexual or as promoters of heteronormativity.
Heteronormative is an adjective that is used to describe actions and situations.
“of, relating to, or based on the attitude that heterosexuality is the only normal and natural expression of sexuality.” – Merriam-Webster
Men ARE uniquely built to be great directors. Thank you, Sasha, for being fearless enough to tell it like it is, in this social media/twitter infested bullshit.
Thank you for being proud of your voracious misogynistic views. We won’t forget!
It’s weird how when men win awards for writing, nobody here complains that women are more empathetic than men and thus are uniquely built to be great writers.
BS is the idea that men are physiologically built to be film directors. My spatial sense sucks, which is why my wife defeats me easily at tile-laying style board games and room redecoration.
Women ARE uniquely built to be great directors.
Counterpoint:
Not ALL men are are uniquely built to be great directors.
Hell, not even all male directors are built to be great directors.
In fact, Hollywood is packed with men who are immensely shitty directors.
Furthermore:
Planet Earth has approximately 3 billion men who would be utterly incompetent directors. 3 billion men can barely read a roadmap or match a shirt with a necktie.
Though I will concede this point:
Male predators outnumber great male directors by a ratio of 500,000:1
In addition:
Not ALL women lack the genetically superior eyeballs to be directors.
So how about this:
If your favorite fetish male filmmakers fail to win an Oscar, maybe your first fucking instinct should not be to grope around looking for a brilliant Asian woman director to blame.
How does this eyeball theory apply to Kurosawa, who was nearly completely blind when he directed Ran, what many consider to be his greatest film?
It’s weird how when men win awards for writing, nobody here complains that women are more empathetic than men and thus are uniquely built to be great writers.
Also let’s be VERY CLEAR about the Oscars and LGBTQ+ winners. This is for all of you that are saying you “must be gay or POC to win an Oscar”.
NO out gay actor has ever won a Best Actor Oscar
NO out gay actress has ever won a Best Actress Oscar
ONE out gay actor has won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar (John Gielgud)
ONE out gay actress has won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar (Ariana Dubose)
ONE out gay director has won a Best Director Oscar (John Schlesinger)
TWO films with LGBTQ+ themes have won Best Picture* (Midnight Cowboy, Moonlight)
So you can sit down with you white cis man victim card.
*I refuse to acknowledge Silence of the Lambs as LGBQ+ themed.
Consider the case for Carol, universally acclaimed as one of the greatest LGBTQ+ themed films of all time. Directed by the illustrious Todd Haynes.
Let’s never forget how the Oscars treated Carol, with the Academy’s supposedly obligatory subservience to gay filmmakers.
Oscar voters in 2016 decided they would rather leave two Best Picture slots empty rather than nominate the masterpiece in which two extraordinary women had little use for any men in their lives.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c91dde2df389f90441c8d9753157afa10a44c7750327b051d9fe3f3108f9eeeb.gif
Absolutely the perfect example of how there is actually no agenda happening.
Carol not receiving Best Picture nomination was a travesty and eternal shame on Academy. A serious WTF moment.
Best reviewed movie of the year, absolute hit in Cannes, two acclaimed performances and it was not enough for them?
And it’s not that they disliked it completely – movie got 6 nominations. But not the main one – for some reason.
That season was all about “eating raw bison liver” and PR machinery behind it. And that was that.
The ideology of victimization has been inserted within the inustry. It does not matter talent, story, movie making. The buzz is about who is the greatest victim of all and that is the deserving one. If someone is white, or man, or has traditional preferences that means that person is an oppressor and does not deserve recognition. In the other hand if there is someone outside those “oppressing” groups it means that someone is a victim and therefore deserves all the recognition. The consequence is that this is a berrell without end since there will always be someone who has not been included (the average person who does not work in the movie making) and that makes this industry “discriminative” and “exclusive”. Is there any logic behind this reasoning? Who does care about a system which is based on such ideology?
We see you cry like a bitter grievance buffoon so you can play the victim too.
“If someone is white, or man, or has traditional preferences that means that person is an oppressor and does not deserve recognition.”
Listen to yourself whine.
Look at this snow white photo.
Realize you sound like a jackass.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c91baa00d1eb77baacad1d3a4b743c9c132cd3ec1723caaace0235b968b98545.jpg
It’s only white men that play the victim card today.
question, is gold derby rigged lol? I never check there but I have been this yr and they have Empire of Light in the Top 10 but the movies below have way more votes and this also happens in other categories. The only reason I ask this is that it’s important if voters go to gold derby to see what they’re supposed to vote for
I truly believe the era of televised award shows pulling an audience greater than a small number of diehards is over however, here’s a thought.. Start by going back to awarding what could reasonably be determined the actual best in their respective category rather than junk like CODA, Green Book, Crash, Bullock, Chastain, Smith or Malek etc. Perhaps then people may actually show an interest again.
Awarding Oscars with an eye towards the TV ratings seems like an idea that will makes things worse instead of better. Frankly, caving into the Dark Knight fanboys really is the root cause of a lot of this.
Please, please, please bring back 5 nominees for best pic. It was far more an exciting show and a more suspenseful show with just the 5. I also miss sweeps – I know, I know, there are people that like the spreading of wealth on oscar night, but I love a good ole 7 or 8 win sweep!
Only one category uses the preferential ballot. Bringing back plurality with 5 nominees only affects one of the 23 Oscars. Let’s say CODA wasn’t one of the 5, what would have won? Winning for any other nominee other than Dune would have been a 2 Oscar winner. Dune would make the most sense, but it won in highly technical categories. I don’t know if it would have won.
West Side Story would likely have won if CODA wasn’t there.
Unlikely as there was little enthusiasm for it. The Power of The Dog would most likely have won. It lost its big awards to CODA. It was literally a head to head between those two. CODA won the fight in acting and Screenplay and that led to Best Picture win.
It’s only gay/bi, POC and women who get things they don’t deserve. They’re stealing things from people who deserve it, ie straight white men.
Yet straight white men keep winning (and getting nominated) for all those awards.
Someone should write a book about all the Oscars that gay/bi people unfairly stole from heteronormative white dudes born with “traditional preferences.”
Well, maybe there aren’t enough examples for a whole book. Or a blog post. Or even for a tweet.
Someone should at least have a bitter half-baked opinion about it. So thanks for filling that void, Roberto.
Yes, that’s the point. It’s a sarcastic reply to the claim that minorities are not deserving of anything and only get awards and nominations because of fear of being called racist, homophobic or misogynist. There are double standards when it comes to who doesn’t deserve it and only getting awards because of who they are. Completely forgetting it has been the reverse for decades. They Completely ignore the privilege that those straight white men have. Only when we put people on equal footing can we be able to say for certain whether only group deserves to win all the awards.
The first thing to trying to “fix” the Oscars is to present what’s wrong with them.
I’m not sure this article does that.
Is it the television ratings? That’s a whole other issue besides the awards show itself. People aren’t watching network television anymore. They’re streaming, watching whatever they want, whenever they want.
Then again, the 2022 ratings were much higher than the previous year, so there’s that. (Personally, I think the ratings were down in 2021 because it was such a horrible venue, no host, etc… It was a bad ceremony altogether)
In other news,
‘Amsterdam’ – after 5 reviews – 44 score on MC and 20% on RT.
Ouch.
Not a lot of people know this, but it’s a fact that David O. Russell was born with girl’s eyeballs.
My suggestions:
Here are two suggestions, one easy to do and the other would require a restructuring.
1. Best In Show Structure
I have been promoting this best in show structure idea previously and elsewhere on this thread. I would suggest 7-8 different categories with 3-5 nominees each:
Best Contemporary Drama
Best Period Drama
Best Comedy
Best Musical (which could be combined with comedy)
Best Science Fiction / Fantasy / Horror / Effects Driven
Best Animation
Best International
Best Documentary
They would be ranked in each category. With voting on-line, it would be easy to write a program to assist the voter in ranking overall. Each category has a winner from the ranked list. Each winner advances to Best Picture. With the master ranking, there is no need to canvas the members a second time.
From last year I could see of the BP nominees:
Best Contemporary: King Richard
Best Period: Power of the Dog or Belfast
Best Comedy: CODA
Best Musical: West Side Story
Best Sci-Fi: Dune
Best International: Drive My Car
This would allow blockbusters to have their moment on stage. It also shows a breath of nominees. And, there would be more contenders
2. Award in groupings
Setting aside my suggestion above, they should block the awards to give them out back to back.
Announce the three shorts together, with the presenter talking about how the short medium offers many opportunities to share stories and lives. Then those three are given out.
Announce the specialized film categories: international, animation, and documentary awards
Announce the preproduction artistic awards (cinematography, production, hair and makeup, and costumes) together with the presenter going through the importance of every piece fitting towards an artistic vision. Then the awards are given out.
Announce the two writing awards
Announce the postproduction artistic awards (editing, sound, and special effects)
Announce the two music awards
Announce the supporting acting categories
Announce the lead acting
Announce Director and Picture
There are 9 blocks of awards to schedule around. It would give a more sense of urgency and less feeling of bloat. It’s the pointless bloat that is a huge part of the reason why I don’t watch the show.
I think this is good! I bet that was great to watch LOTR clobber the rest of the movies tho, but since they won’t vote for a LOTR anymore this is good imo
No! It’s just prove that The Lord of The Rings was just that good. Or should I say they were that good. It was about rewarding a groundbreaking trilogy.
LOTR couldn’t win anymore, it’s not zeitgeist and there’s a preferential ballot
There’s no Lord of The Rings anymore. That’s the real problem. Which film has been anywhere close to that quality and made similar amount of money. Let’s not forget that it was highly acclaimed (94 MC)and was the second highest grossing film after Titanic. Both its MC score and box office are exceptional. Amazing really.
metacritic scores mean nothing to me but anyways, they should’ve awarded Nolan’s Batman films they are the greatest blockbusters since LOTR and the reason the ballot expanded. Those were brilliant crime epics w great reviews and box office
Yes. That’s the essential thing that gets lost in the chatter whenever The Dark Knight pops up as an example of “movies that appeal to the masses.”
It’s no special trick to appeal to the masses when a slick simple-minded action movie targets 100 million simple-minded ticket buyers.
What The Dark Knight and LOTR did that was so astonishing and extraordinarily rare is attract 100 million smart ticket-buyers to movies that were thrilling, brainy, cinematic masterpieces.
The Oscars are not about honoring movies that earn a billion dollars. But the Oscars are sometimes about honoring billion-dollar movies that are brimming with intelligence and artistry.
The fact that movies like that don’t come around very often is nothing new. Over the past 95 years it only ever happens once or twice every decade.
And that’s fine. It’s normal. Relax.
Look at all the living legends directing movies right now. We’re such lucky fuckers to be living through an era of so many lovingly crafted masterworks.
“Look at all the living legends directing movies right now. We’re such lucky fuckers to be living through an era of so many lovingly crafted masterworks.”
Totally. Despite the lazyness of mainstream Hollywood (and elsewhere, as well, in the industry, with plenty of remakes, sequels and copycats), there are STILL people like Jordan Peele, Daniels, Taika Waititi, Pedro Almodóvar, Javier Fesser, NACHO VIGALONDO (let’s put him in CAPITAL LETTERS: TimeCrimes, Extraterrestrial, Open Windows and Colossal are a streak of 4 tremendously original and risky works that are both complex and entertaining… he’s already an Oscar nominee and I am convinced it is a matter of time that he will be nominated or even win for Original Screenplay), and so many more, going against the stream and daring to risk, even when they make some commercial/mainstream film (clear reference to Waititi’s Thor films, which better or worse, are an animal of unique kind).
Filmmaking is far from over, and honestly there are at least two perfect combos of art/meaning/entertainment this year with Everything Everywhere All At Once and Nope, films that can be enjoyed at a superficial level, but are inviting to explore their multiple layers, meaning and suggestions repeatedly
I still wonder if some of the reaction to Dark Knight would have been as intense if Ledger hadn’t died. If that had been the case, would the not entirely successful left-hand turn Nolan took in the final act have been scrutinized a bit more publicly? Would people have felt comfortable questioning the need for two different Prisoner’s Dilemma sequences? Or how anticlimactic the ending was?
None of Nolan’s Batman trilogy were nominated, unlike all three Lord of The Rings movies. They were completely different in terms of scale, storytelling and overall achievement. TDk was elevated by Heath Ledger’s performance. Otherwise it’s just another superhero film. Nolan’s best films are Memento, The Prestige, Dunkirk and Inception. I’ve not seen Tenet, first and last Batman movies and Interstellar.
I don’t like it. It devalues the Oscars. I prefer to keep it as rare as possible. What’s the point of saying something is the best when you have multiple best film categories?
You are just afraid white men might not keep winning.
I don’t get this. How did you arrive at that conclusion from my previous comment? You’ve completely misread my comment as well as my intentions. And not for the first time either.
If the Academy wants to attract more viewers, they should adopt a “Best in Show” style Best Picture.
Under this approach, the Academy eliminates the Best Picture category (not the Oscar) and creates two new feature film categories: Best Theatrical Film (Comedies and Dramas) and Best Genre Film (Fantasy, Horror, and Sci-Fi). These categories will only have five nominees a piece and will allow the Academy to honor the films they are currently rewarding, while establishing an Oscar race for more well regarded films that they never honor. Each Academy member will then vote for a winner (no ranking yet) in the newly created categories.
To determine Best Picture, the Academy member will rank their winners of the five feature film categories: Best Theatrical Film, Best Genre Film, Best International Film, Best Animated Film, and Best Documentary Film. In tallying the votes, the ballot will be awarded to the highest ranked film that won its category by the entire Academy. Therefore, if a member ranked a Traditional Film, who did not win their category, as their top preference and International Film, that did win their category, as their second choice, the International Film will be awarded that members ballot. The Best Picture will then be determined by a majority, not plurality, of votes.
Overall, this system would build suspense throughout the night, as the “nominees” for Best Picture are revealed with each feature film category win. It will also help non-traditional films have a chance at Best Picture, especially if the Theatrical Film category is split amongst a few films. At worst, the system establishes the Best Genre Film category and awards films that the Academy typically does not acknowledge.
I have been using this same idea but with different categories with 3-5 nominees each:
Best Contemporary Drama
Best Period Drama
Best Comedy
Best Musical (which could be combined with comedy)
Best Science Fiction / Fantasy / Horror / Effects Driven
Best Animation
Best International
Best Documentary
They would be ranked in each category. With voting on-line, it would be easy to write a program to assist the voter in ranking overall.
Each category has a winner from the ranked list.
Each winner advances to Best Picture. With the master ranking, there is no need to canvas the members a second time.
From last year I could see of the BP nominees:
Best Contemporary: King Richard
Best Period: Power of the Dog or Belfast
Best Comedy: CODA
Best Musical: West Side Story
Best Sci-Fi: Dune
This would allow blockbusters to have their moment on stage. It also shows a breath of nominees. And, there would be more contenders.
Damn great points there, Sasha !
Hire a Great Host — I thought the 3 women last year were very entertaining. We should bring them back, or a combination of 3 comedians – any comedians.
So, let’s turn the Oscars into the VMAs… The awards show that passed from 10 million viewers ten years ago to 4 million this summer.
Lots of you focus more on TV than on cinema, and it shows.
To be fair, it is incredibly absurd to hold an awards show for music videos on a channel that no longer shows them.
How many movies does ABC broadcast ?
Real question, no idea.
Obviously not that many. But the absurdity of the VMA’s is pretty legendary
Nope, nope and nope…
While the Oscars are trying to save themselves with sometimes ridiculous ideas (Zack Snyder’s double win is a clear sign), Kevin Feige wins again with the announce of Hugh Jackman back as Wolverine in Deadpool 3… and Krasinksi joking or half-joking that he could ALSO be there as Mr. Fantastic (again).
Maybe AMPAS should learn a thing or two of how the MCU is sweeping the floor with the competition…
“Who’da ever thunk a little movie that could like CODA would pull in a win like it did when it only had THREE Oscar nominations?”
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5ed120b38dd3400adf00b5a5b1322188858c725e1934ced7651aa0818b7d5335.gif
Literally almost everyone knew.
Don’t tell the people at Gold Derby that. I think they still have Dog winning, even six months later.
I came here for 1 reason…
Sasha no offense but you’re drunk… go home!
Vengeance an academy awards movie???
Child please.
So you are a troll?
Maybe it’s one of the high profile AD banned posters having a little fun?
Not banned.
No I’m not I genuinely enjoy the site
So, anyone with whom you disagree is a “troll”?
No, but anyone who comes here just to yell at Sasha is here just to be a troll.
I had never heard of Sasha Stone until I hit the link to this article. But since you have zero tolerance for anyone disagreeing with her on anything (“yell at”), your “no” was clearly a yes.
Oh no feel free to disagree with her…but the main purpose of this post was to come here to yell at her, instead of having any sort of productive conversation. Lots of people disagree with her and express it, and I too will push back on her ideas…but when the point is to yell just because—that’s just being rude and trolling.
Nothing is going to save the Oscars. Maybe one year, centuries from now, an Oscar will be found in an amber nugget and some scientist will revive them for an out of control amusement park allowing Laura Dern time to become the goddess she is.
And Athena is pure brilliance. I feel sorry for the people who get lost along the way.
It’s been years since I watched anything on live TV that wasn’t sports, and I genuinely cannot remember the last time I watched live TV that wasn’t either sports or movie awards. Trying to improve TV ratings is pointless. Want people to watch the Oscars? Live stream it for free on Youtube, AppleTV, and Disney+.
You keep saying this, and I still don’t understand what you mean. In what way has the public been “shut out”? What is preventing the public from seeing and enjoying movies like Belfast, West Side Story, CODA, King Richard, etc.? You’ve never answered this question.
I don’t want the Oscars to die, but if they start showering bland Marvel movies with awards in the vain hope that it will attract TV ratings, they might as well be dead because they’d be completely pointless.
Wow, you didn’t even bother to mention the different number of lumps in the Perceptive region of their skulls.
Maybe ask Aaron Sorkin? I don’t think anyone’s forcing him to direct against his will.
There are probably arguments for doing this, but “If we had done this last year then CODA wouldn’t have won” isn’t a very good one.
Interesting thought, but I don’t see how it would work. Even if you move to a different venue, you’re still in LA, so you’re only selling tickets to people within driving distance. Very few regular people are going to travel by plane to attend the Oscars.
Again, the show has been mostly apolitical for years. There’s nothing we can do to end the political persecution that exists in right wingers’ minds.
“Again, the show has been mostly apolitical for years. There’s nothing we can do to end the political persecution that exists in right wingers’ minds.”
Wow, like wow. You can’t possibly believe that. So many jobs, nominations, and awards are due solely to affirmative action (institutionalized racism), during and following high-pressure, racist campaigns.
The Academy even gave an honorary Oscar to black, nation of islam nazi Spike Lee, a few years ago. And until Will Smith smacked Chris Rock during the ceremony this year, AMPAS treated Smith and his wife, Jada Pinkett-Smith, like royalty, despite it being a matter of public record that they were financial supporters of the noi, and her being openly racist since at least 1994.
I must be old because I hardly know the “stars” and celebs of today. I can’t pronounce their names, and really in my opinion their forgettable. Every once in a while someone stands out like Austin Butler, but I know so few actors.
Having streaming services compete in the Emmys is like apples and oranges. The streaming shows are available all day long 24/7, while the network shows are a one-time, once a week showing. If we want to see the show again, we have to pay subscriptions. So there should be two Emmys: one for streamers and one for networks.
The award shows should be on platforms like Twitter and Youtube. But the truth is that people don’t watch the shows because they don’t know the people being nominated!! For both movies & tv, there’s just tooooo much product and content and people don’t have time for it.
I don’t watch the Emmys because I only watch, maybe 6 shows, and they’re 2 dramas, 3 comedies, a lot of game shows, and no – none – late night talk show. But those talk shows are getting redundant and boring. The same people and celebs come on night after night rotating from one show to the other.
You say you know so few actors of today. Do you see the current films?
I’ve seen Elvis, the Woman King, the Beast, and one other one I can’t remember. I don’t go every week or every month because honestly when I read the summary of the movie it doesn’t interest me. (Besides I don’t have $11 every week to see a movie).
But when I was going heavy to the movies, to me it had “stars” – Dustin Hoffman, Pacino, Wesley Snipes, Denzel, Jennifer Lopez(I’ve seen just about every movie she’s made), “stars”. When I saw the Woman King I recognized 2 actors – the others I couldn’t recognize or know. I couldn’t pronounce their names. I went to IMDB to look them up to see if they had done anything prior and all of them were on streaming services. (and all of them were African-Brits). Now being able to recognize someone shouldn’t matter, it’s the story that matters. But the star & the story drives me to impulsively go to the movies.
Movies are like music. You have to open yourself up to new faces and new experiences. Please don’t fall back on the past. There’s plenty of good stuff being created every year. IF you don’t want to pay the $11 every time, there’s always Redbox or Netflix
“For both movies & tv, there’s just tooooo much product and content and people don’t have time for it.
I don’t watch the Emmys because I only watch, maybe 6 shows, and they’re 2 dramas, 3 comedies, a lot of game shows, and no – none – late night talk show. But those talk shows are getting redundant and boring. The same people and celebs come on night after night rotating from one show to the other.”
Good points. There is too much content now. I can’t keep up with anything on TV and I feel crumby for missing out on so much. General audiences (for movies) might feel similarly if they already can’t keep up with their favorite TV shows, anyway.
“I hardly know the ‘stars’ of today. I can’t pronounce their names”
Maybe you should stop bragging about this?
1. Get rid of preferential ballot.
2. Get rid of ABC and stream it.
3. The public doesn’t care, they catch clips on Twitter. They don’t care to watch a 3 hour long ceremony that really is only interesting to film/Oscar lovers. But also people don’t watch live TV like they used to—it’s just a fact.
4. The awards aren’t dead, they just don’t appeal to everyone, and it’s high time they cater to those who actually like the awards circus.
5. Nominating and awarding popular movies does nothing for ratings—haven’t we beat that horse enough…let it go.
6. Bring back the pomp. Bring back living Legends. Bring back the past winners in top categories to welcome the new winner—a la 2008 ceremony. (That would be catering to us)
7. ACADEMY NEEDS TO STOP APOLOGIZING FOR THEIR NOMINEES/WINNERS—they like what they like and need to stop caring what anyone else thinks.
8. I don’t care about a host, I really just want to be entertained—so give us a spectacle. Stream it so we can pay for it, and go all out for CELEBRATING the year in movies.
9. Have ALL the awards during the ceremony, not before or on breaks—that’s just rude and tasteless.
10. I actually like the idea of having everyday people like us being able to attend…however, make it a small set of numbers, not the masses—that way it keeps it focused on people who actually care and the actual awards and not the public who don’t care.
This is a type of list that ACTUALLY can help start a conversation for rejuvenating the Oscars…..
The public doesn’t care, they catch clips on Twitter. They don’t care to watch a 3 hour long ceremony that really is only interesting to film/Oscar lovers. But also people don’t watch live TV like they used to—it’s just a fact.
So True!
Also- stop with the hundreds of commercials. Let the show go for 20-30 minutes and then break for a commercial.
Kill it!
“3. The public doesn’t care, they catch clips on Twitter. They don’t care to watch a 3 hour long ceremony that really is only interesting to film/Oscar lovers. But also people don’t watch live TV like they used to—it’s just a fact.”
yep oscars never moved with technology and new viewing habits. Massive reason for its dolldrums.
“4. The awards aren’t dead, they just don’t appeal to everyone, and it’s high time they cater to those who actually like the awards circus.”
This is another crux of the problem. Oscars want to court new audience which will never have interest in the oscars cause they don’t validate themselves through awards. In fact, awards are considered discriminating due to exclusive nature (there can be only 10 or 5 and ultimately 1 best) and old-fashioned gendering (Male and Female categories). We are talking about generation that invents gender on a fly and for whom school standards are lowered so that everyone who doesn’t measure up can keep an illusion of measuring up. It’s a different mindset. Awards will never work for them yet they are the primary target. No one cares for boomers and Gen X two demos that grew up on oscars and still are the staple audience. It’s all about Zoomers with Millennials as secondary.
5. Nominating and awarding popular movies does nothing for ratings—haven’t we beat that horse enough…let it go.
Absolutely. Zoomers won’t watch for reasons above while others can easily see through the ploy that always ends the same way – the winner is a movie no one watched. I will give an example from Emmys. Euphoria is the biggest show with Zoomers yet its nominations and Zendayas 2 wins resulted in the lowest Emmy viewership. Point being, they care for the show, they don’t care whether it’s validated by wins and noms. Or whetehr their like of it is validated as good taste by those awards.
But anyway, awards are dead. They are not new generation’s habit and their values directly clash with new generation’s values while studios see no profit from courting old generations that are dwindling. It’s over.
Yes. Yes. YES.
Kill it!
“3. The public doesn’t care, they catch clips on Twitter. They don’t care to watch a 3 hour long ceremony that really is only interesting to film/Oscar lovers. But also people don’t watch live TV like they used to—it’s just a fact.”
yep oscars never moved with technology and new viewing habits. Massive reason for its dolldrums.
“4. The awards aren’t dead, they just don’t appeal to everyone, and it’s high time they cater to those who actually like the awards circus.”
This is another crux of the problem. Oscars want to court new audience which will never have interest in the oscars cause they don’t validate themselves through awards. In fact, awards are considered discriminating due to exclusive nature (there can be only 10 or 5 and ultimately 1 best), old-fashioned gendering (Male and Female categories), etc. We are talking about generation that invents gender on a fly and for whom school standards are lowered so that everyone who doesn’t measure up can keep an illusion of measuring up. It’s a different mindset. Awards will never work for them yet they are the primary target. No one cares for boomers and Gen X two demos that grew up on oscars and still are the staple audience. It’s all about Zoomers with Millennials as secondary.
5. Nominating and awarding popular movies does nothing for ratings—haven’t we beat that horse enough…let it go.
Absolutely. Zoomers won’t watch for reasons above while others can easily see through the ploy that always ends the same way – the winner is a movie no one watched. I will give an example from Emmys. Euphoria is the biggest show with Zoomers yet its nominations and Zendayas 2 Drama Actress wins (2020 and 2022) resulted in 2 lowest Emmy viewerships ever cause target audience didn’t watch. They care for the show, they don’t care whether wins and noms validate it. Or whether their like of it is validated as good taste by those awards.
But anyway, awards are dead. They are not new generation’s habit and their values directly clash with new generation’s values while studios see no profit from courting old generations that are dwindling. It’s over.
Apologizing for nominees or winners defeats the whole purpose of an award for artistic merit.
I think Addison Rae should host. I know she’s only been in two movies, but she’s, like, 21 and has 39 million followers on Instagram and 88 million on TikTok! And no more old people (anyone over 35, duh!)
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/dad10d340956b99b4d272cdded397c0b07ce9c8268b839642094a6708cab5f20.gif
Film Twitter must collapse, most critics must lose their jobs. If this happens, things will get better. For cinema and for the Oscars too.
I would also say to nominate Avatar, Top Gun Maverick and other popular movies. Ppl say that doesn’t matter in ratings but what if Avatar can win and the word spreads that Avatar can win? That would be exciting and get ppl to watch imo
Avatar rerelease was up 85% in sales over the new Spiderman rerelease this yr. Avatar rerelease topped the box office this weekend w 30M. That’s a lot.
How do you know Avatar will even be a good movie? Maybe it’s going to be crap. Would you vote for a blockbuster film that makes a lot of money even though it’s crap? Then what’s the point in celebrating “the best”?
Those nominations are meaningless if Women Talking or another coma-inducing movie that no one will watch wins? Oscars had the highest ratings when Titanic, ROTK and Avatar winning were real possibilities (and 2 out 3 won). Eeye candy filler doesn’t do the trick.
Stop worshipping Disney/Pixar so much and nominate anime movies.
Or brilliant films about lonesome shells.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1444cc0690a756db2b3dea4ed3c2ce3e221d0f8690380b9f7297f017e57bdf18.gif
You shouldn’t dismiss the Tonys. Thy have realized they are an extended infomercial for Broadway conveniently placed at the onset of summer, the most crucial part of the Broadway season. Broadway was considered dead in the 90’s. Now it’s thriving, in part because of the Tonys.
The ratings can’t be saved on cable. I’m generation Z and I can tell you most do not know what the Oscars are. My parents and many other ppl I kno also don’t do cable tv anymore, we have roku w our streaming apps. To watch a football game I have to go to a much older friends house.
Send the show to Netflix
ABC owns multiple networks. A multicast like ESPN does for football might be an idea.
yeah football depends on what cable channel your team is playing on and what day but at least espn has streaming options for a cost. I think the oscars were on fubo and then u jus gotta delete the free trial after
What I meant is that you devote the multicast to showing different parts of the telecast. A dedicated backstage camera for the winners. A ManningCast style commentary of the ceremony. That kind of thing.
More than a few people have pointed out that big box office hits like Joker and Black Panther have made it to the BP field and they didn’t move the ratings an inch. Honestly, unless you can guarantee that a populist hit is going to win, why would ratings move. And obviously we can’t rig the results anyway, right? Right?
I’m personally very uncomfortable with the argument that if a woman or non-white American/European director wins an Oscar it’s because of some political virtue signaling or even blacklisting, especially in the absence of any tangible proof (such as a voter or voters going on record saying as much). In the director category, Zhao and Campion didn’t skew the stats, the Three Amigos did when they won five directing Oscars in six years. And to be honest, THAT kind of run isn’t likely to ever happen again.
I totally agree. Why is it automatically assumed that films made by non-white-male filmmakers are getting “special treatment” by AMPAS? That’s such a classic Republican/right wing tactic to devalue the works by non-white, non-male, and non-straight artists. Nomadland barrelled through all of the precursor critics awards, as did Jane Campion, as did Regina King…so does that mean they only earned their Oscars due to some warped application of affirmative action? That the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard. Why does a film have to be BIG to be deemed great and Worthy of attention? To me, watching Too Gun would be pure hell. Moonlight, however, is one of my favourite films of all time, and definitely deserved its best pic win by far. But from Sasha’s perspective, it would appear to be undeserving because of some alleged superficial push by AMPAS to meet its representation goals in response to #oscarssowhite, rather than winning based on actual merit. If AMPAS were truly forsaking straight white male filmmakers, then why wasn’t One Night in Miami nominated for Best Pic and director? Why didn’t Da 5 Bloods receive any nominations at all? Why didn’t Spike Lee win the directing Oscar for Black Klansmen? Why wasn’t Golden Globe winner Awkwafina nominated for The Farewell? Or Eddie Murphy for Dolamite? The argument that straight white male filmmakers are being passed over for awards in favour of minoritized filmmakers is simply ludicrous. These latter filmmakers have more than earned their plaudits based on their own merits; to argue otherwise is not only condescending and demeaning, but also, quite frankly, sexist, racist, and heteronormative.
I’m still not sure why people are still shocked about La La Land losing to Moonlight. Moonlight had 8 nominations, it’s not like it came out of nowhere. And not to put too fine a bow on things, La La’s frontrunner backlash was made all the worse when it got the absurdly high 14 nominations and people immediately began saying “will it beat 11 wins”. Meanwhile Jenkins and Ali were hitting the screenings and junkets hard with highly targeted one on one campaigning (which frankly is how the last six or so BP winners won).
I still say televised award shows are forever dead. I admit the ‘open to the public’ idea is interesting. A show at the Rose Bowl would look more aware of the public. But hard not to imagine 90 thousand people staring at their phones at dusk as CODA is announced the winner.
Nothing will bring in red states to the Oscars. Nothing ever. Read any awards post on FoxNews. The vitriol and hatred being vomited at all celebrities is overwhelming. Even if you had Kid Rock, Scott Baio and Ted Nugent attend these people would turn on their own before supporting an awards show.
I mean you could get Zendaya to host for younger viewers. Have some influencers attend and present. The Oscars should become a PDF. Or a string of social media posts (with acceptance speeches via Zoom) that pop up every few hours over a period of days.
Make it about content because no one wants an award show.
I think there is one way to save the Oscars: convince the Academy to leave ABC. Ratings are outdated. ABC is greedy. And yes, please convince pundits that there is no need to write 1,000 pieces about the struggling Oscars. The Oscars are alive and well, thank you! (And the Emmys, Tonys, and Grammys could only dream of their ratings.) The Oscars are the number one award show on TV. Enough with this nonsense.
Yes, being associated with live network television is a death knell.
I don’t think it’s fair to drag the Tonys into this. It’s just not a comparable show, given the specificity of its audience and locale, and the producers know it, which is why its always scheduled in the TV’s No Man’s Land of June. I don’t think the Tony’s are ever striving to be a ratings juggernaut; they’re only concerned with putting on an entertaining show free of bells and whistles–and they always do manage to succeed in doing that (James Corden notwithstanding)
The article could have ended there…
Absolutely agree with going back to five Best Pictures ! By the way i hate that freeze frame from Thelma and Louise just like i hated the freeze frame from Butch Cassiday and the Sundance Kid !
What about Breakfast Club?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ecf94bbaf036449da6aa199444da3514afc13400547e158028faf68b799bae57.jpg