# "The Oscars go on too long" **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 23, 2015, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463 "2015-02-23T23:51:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/41 "2015-02-25T02:39:58Z")
Since 1980, according to Box Office Mojo, the average B. Picture winner earned 7X the median box office gross of all movies released their respective year - the only film to earn _less_ than the median was “The Hurt Locker”. Even if you take out the four winners that were the biggest film of the year (Rain Man, Titanic, ROTK, and Forrest Gump), B. Picture winners earned an average of 5X the median grossing movie. ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/42 "2015-02-25T02:51:04Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Additionally, most B. Picture winners ranked in the top-10 box office grosses of the year they were released - it is only recently, since 2007 when the nominations were expanded to more than five, that there has been a break in the correlation between a films popularity and the odds of it winning B. Picture. > > However, even since 2007, the idea that the Academy awards B. Picture to films that are outside the “mainstream” is not really accurate. “Slumdog Millionaire” grossed $141 million, “The King’s Speech” grossed $135m, “Argo” pulled in $136m. “The Hurt Locker” and “The Artist” are the anomalies, not the norms. That was exactly my point. This notion that big hits are being shut out by the Oscars doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. For instance, the idea that a $141mil movie (“Slumdog Millionaire”) was not ‘multiplex fare’ seems ridiculous to me. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/43 "2015-02-25T03:01:15Z")
Btw, I made a typo - nominations expanded to more than 5 in 2009, not 2007. And, yes, I [created a spreadsheet](https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B956CzjkwM9vY2VFMXlnOV92cUU/view?usp=sharing) tracking the box office of all B. Picture nominees from 1980-2013. Why do you ask? :o ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/44 "2015-02-25T03:02:27Z")
> [@ISiddiqui](#): > > That was exactly my point. This notion that big hits are being shut out by the Oscars doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Well, yeah, but as you asked the question, I took the opportunity to answer it. ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/45 "2015-02-25T03:12:18Z")
I felt that you thought I was saying big movies don’t tend to win :D. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2015, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/46 "2015-02-28T17:11:01Z")
> [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > **astorian** , what were the giant blockbuster popular hits of this past year that you think _should_ have been nominated? > > Really, I don’t understand the idea some people have that the criteria of whether or not a film is good should be based only on box office. By that reasoning, Fifty Shades of Grey should win next year. You misunderstand me. The voters are supposed to honor whatever movies and actors they think are the best. It’s not their job to pick movies and actors that will attract viewers. If a voter thinks “Birdman” was the best movie of the year, he should vote for “Birdman,” even if most people never saw it. But if the result is an awards ceremony that most people don’t care to watch, ABC will eventually stop televising it, and the Oscars will be no more prestigious than the Spirit awards. ---
**Author:** ![rsat3acr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a3d4f5/32.png) [@rsat3acr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rsat3acr)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2015, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/47 "2015-02-28T18:48:56Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Btw, I made a typo - nominations expanded to more than 5 in 2009, not 2007. > > And, yes, I [created a spreadsheet](https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B956CzjkwM9vY2VFMXlnOV92cUU/view?usp=sharing) tracking the box office of all B. Picture nominees from 1980-2013. Why do you ask? :o very impressive spreadsheet ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2015, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/48 "2015-03-01T01:32:48Z")
One of my favorite opening lines: “Hi, I’m Conan O’Brien, and for the next seven hours, I’ll be your host as we explore Oscar magic…” ---
**Author:** ![tenacious\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/439d5e/32.png) [@tenacious\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tenacious_j)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2015, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/49 "2015-03-01T05:12:09Z")
I’m in The Central time zone. I love The Sound of Music, NPH, and watching the Oscars. I have seen all but one of the best picture nominees and don’t care whether a movie is a blockbuster or your sister made it in the backyard, as long as it’s good. Having said all that, they are a little too long and they’re definitely too late. I know they want to keep us entertained, but by the time the Gaga number happened I was begging for them to let it end. We have friends over for the Superbowl every year because it runs from 5 to 9. People can still go home, put the kids to bed, and go to work on time Monday. The Oscars, on the other hand, is 2 hours later, a huge difference if you need to be at the office by 7:30. No way my friends are coming over that night, especially with their kids, and honestly I wouldn’t want them there that late. Ideally I would want them to cut some of the musical numbers and move it up an hour. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2015, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/50 "2015-03-01T12:03:47Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > The Departed, it looks like you’re right. I had thought it was a more esoteric movie, like No Country for Old Men. Nope, just a shitty remake of a good foreign film. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2015, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463/51 "2015-03-02T18:44:10Z")
I could be way off, but I think the problem has been the decline of “middlebrow” films. Increasingly, you have superhero/comic book action movies for the masses and esoteric movies at the arthouses, with few mainstream movies for grown-ups in between. _ **Casablanca** _ was solid middlebrow fare. _ **The Godfather** _ was solid middlebrow. So was _ **Forrest Gump** _. But there are fewer and fewer movies that aim for favor with both critics AND mass audiences. The Oscar is never going to honor _ **Guardians of the Galaxy** _. That’s a given. So, if Hollywood isn’t producing quality middlebrow fare, that leaves the arthouse flicks. I repeat, I DON’T suggest that voters have a duty to consider the effect their selections will have on the Nielsens for the Oscar telecast. IF, hypothetically, the annual baseball awards were given out on a highly-rated TV special, I wouldn’t want the voters thinking, “Hmmm… Mike Trout is young and telegenic, while Miggy Cabrera is pudgy and speaks broken English, so I’m voting for Trout.” The object is to rewards the people you think performed the best. If the end result is an awards show that fewer and fewer people care to watch, that’s a separate issue entirely. Viewers will return when popular movies and stars are up for big awards. If that never happens, the ratings will continue to dwindle, and there’s no host who can do much about that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-oscars-go-on-too-long/713463.md?page=2)