Variety reports that the Academy will now nominate 10 films for Best Picture–a practice they haven’t done since 1943 (and even back then, it was largely a concession so that all the studios might get a select favorite in that group).
So, what do you think? Given the priority ranking system they use, might this give outlier films with smaller, avid followings (Children of Men, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, etc.) a better shot at getting same street cred during awards season? Is this a sop to commercial interests given The Dark Knight’s snub last year and Pixar’s perpetual exclusion? Are we going to see more indies, foreign films, and early releases or (gulp) more “hits” like Mamma Mia!?
I’m surprised that they’re making such a huge change to something that has been successful for over 50 years, but I suppose it could be for the best. After that stinker “Crash” won a few years ago, I don’t have any qualms about opening up the field a bit. Like this year, I felt “The Wrestler” really deserved to a least get a nomination.
The question is whether scattering the votes out may result in some wacky winners. ArchiveGuy, when you say they vote with a priority ranking system, does that mean that one movie gets 5, one gets 4, etc.?
This will be a disaster of biblical proportions. There are rarely enough quality movies these days to get 5 nominations, much less 10. I predict they switch from this in less than 3 years.
The thing is that with a list of 5, they almost always miss some of the year’s best movies.
Expanding the list to 10 at the last awards would probably have increased the average quality of nominated films, since it likely would have meant including films like The Dark Knights and WALL-E that were better than some or most of the five movies they did nominate. (The Reader? Why?)
No, it means a stack is made of every film that gets a #1 vote. Any films with no #1s are out. Then they take the shortest stack, and redistribute those ballots based on the #2 rankings. Then the next shortest stack. And so on and so on. Hence, one ballot, one vote (not a numeric tabulation).
Essentially, a film that gets mentioned by 80% of the ballots, but only in the #3 or 4 position (they can rank up to 5) has a much smaller chance of getting in than a film with only 15% of the ballots if all those ballots rank it as #1. Some more explanation.
OK, with that system the chances of a really off film getting the nod are lessened considerably. Gives the studios more bragging rights (Nominated for Best Picture!) even if there isn’t a snowballs chance of the movie actually winning.
That’s unquestionably true, though the Director slate will still be limited to 5, so while the list is a wider one, there will still be the perception of which films were in the “top” 5 and which the “bottom” --and since Best Picture winners almost never win (once in the last 70 years) without a Director nomination, will Academy members prioritize their vote even more based on what favorite has a better chance of winning as opposed to which they simply think is the best?
Conversely, it’s going to strain the pocketbooks of some of the studios even more during campaign season. Strategically, with only 5 slots available, studios often put their money on the horse in their stable with the best chance of sneaking in, and siphon more of the advertising dollars toward that film (for FYC ads, etc.). With more at stake, will that same amount of $ get watered down amidst more contenders, or will each studio with more than one film in play end up doubling its investment to get as many seats at the table as possible?
That’s an interesting point. Even within the industry there’s a lot of open confusion as to what the distinction is between the two - hell, there’s an academic term for the notion that a director more or less makes the movie himself.
It’s a marketing scam. When a film gets nominated, more people want to see it. I’ve know lots of people who will rush out and see any film nominated for Best Picture that they haven’t already seen because they want to see all of them before the awards show.
What that means, of course, is that it’s increasingly likely that most of the Academy doesn’t really like the Best Picture winner.
A film could easily win the award with 80% of the Academy actively hating it. That’s possible now, but highly unlikely. But the Academy requires a simple majority of votes, so with 20% and all the other candidates getting 6-10% or so, 20% works just fine.
Any small group – older academy members, younger academy members, etc. can vote as a block and win the award for any film they choose.
Just so long as other blocks don’t combine their collective voting strength behind one candidate, too.
Vote splitting is often overhyped as a variable in these sorts of things, but speculation now will run even more rampant. And since none of the other categories are expanding, we hold the very real possibility that a film gets nominated for Picture and perhaps…nothing else? 15 years ago, Four Weddings and a Funeral managed a pic nod and only one other nomination (screenplay), so if the right type of breezy, popular (and light on fancy production values) hit strikes a chord, you may have more weird anomalies popping up.
I’m positive this was done solely in response to the uproar over the best movie of last year being completely snubbed (The Dark Knight for those who are just now emerging from their rock).
I mean, in ten years, who will remember Slumdog Millionaire, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon and The Reader?
I can see Milk being considered a “great movie” for some time to come, but the Benjamin Button backlash is already on and Frost/Nixon is already being called overrated.
Of your list I only saw Slumdog and Dark Knight and I liked Slumdog much better. Other than the opening scene and the pencil trick, I didn’t like Dark Knight much at all.
It may or may not be a great idea, but they HAVE to try it, because the ratings have been dwindling for years, as the Oscars become less and less distinguishable from the Indie Sprit awards.
Increasingly, all the awards go to art-house films that the public in general hasn’t seen and isn’t interested in seeing. People won’t keep tuning in each year to watch movies they’ve barely heard of win awards.
If there are ten nominees, there’s a better chance that one or two movies people actually care about will be up for big awards. That can only help the ratings.