But you should consider all the negative aspects (listed by many of us above) as well.
And again - all 10 nominees will have their honor diminished; those without BD noms will seem like also-rans.
And the anger at big hits not being nominated (no the Harry Potter, Star Trek, Twilight films won't make it it) will be greater than the anger over the Dark Knight snub - yet another unintended consquence of this badly thought out idea.
Originally posted by outsider: Will anyone remember all the Best Picture nominees after a year or even six months?
I like this point and agree with it. Look at the lists of films from the days when Oscars nominated ten films and you will see many films that got just a few nominations, sometimes only best picture, and are forgotten now.
Posts: 27152 | Location: Phoenix, AZ | Registered: February 02, 2003
And also - someone, whether a filmmaker, a critic or a fan, can rationalize one his/her film didn't make it in as one of five won't be able to when it is not one of the 10 - the blood pressure will increase, not decrease.
Every passing moment makes me think of more bad aspects of this,
This message has been edited. Last edited by: seanflynn,
My doppelganger Nikki Finke says what I said about this being a big studio pressure move is true, and says that the hit to the Academy's integrity is tremendous:
STUNNER! STUDIO PRESSURE SUCCESSFUL: Academy To Now Allow 10 Oscar Nominees In Best Picture Category (Worst Idea Ever) This hugely surprising and dramatic change for the 82nd Academy Awards is the direct result of intense lobbying by the major studios of the Academy Of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences. And outgoing president Sid Ganis, himself a former Sony/Columbia top executive, was especially vulnerable to the studio pressure because of his personality penchant for kowtowing to power and influence. I've learned he personally helped the studios impose their agenda on what is supposed to be the independent AMPAS board (but really isn't). This is a terrible idea. It is nothing short of nonsensical for such an extreme departure from the Academy Awards' storied past to be taking place. It devalues the rarity of an Oscar nomination and belittles the judging process. It's no secret that the studios have grown increasingly frustrated that their mainstream fare -- the four-quadrant films, the family-oriented toons, the superhero actioners, and the high-octane thrillers -- have not been able to garner enough Best Picture nods in recent years while the art house offerings of the rapidly dwindling specialty divisions and indie prods dominate the process. That, in turn, has hurt the Oscar broadcast ratings as little seen and often little known films compete with one another while blockbuster hits are left out of the Academy Awards show. AMPAS buckled for reasons of self-preservation. Understandable, to be sure. But today's announcement cheapens the entire nominating process. Why not 10 Best Actor or Best Actress or Best Director or Best Foreign Film nominations as well? The studios got what they wanted at the expense of the Academy's integrity.
You can love movies and still see no reason that every movie you love has to be given the stamp of approval by the Oscars.
Nut-uh. That's like saying "I love my wife, but I really hope she DOESN'T win the lottery."
There are plenty of obscure foreign and indie films I love in any given year and know they are completely outside the sites of the Academy and adding five more films to the best picture line-up is not really going to change that. Also a lack of an Oscar nomination does not lessen them in my mind or in my affections one little bit.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: pacinofan,
Posts: 27152 | Location: Phoenix, AZ | Registered: February 02, 2003
Originally posted by outsider: Will anyone remember all the Best Picture nominees after a year or even six months?
I like this point and agree with it. Look at the lists of films from the days when Oscars nominated ten films and you will see many films that got just a few nominations, sometimes only best picture, and are forgotten now.
Grammy FYC: Kanye West, 808s & Heartbreak; Black Eyed Peas, The E.N.D.; John Legend, Evolver; Paolo Nutini, Sunny Side Up; David Guetta, One Love; Kelly Clarkson, "Already Gone"; Jordin Sparks, "Battlefield"; Kings Of Leon, "Use Somebody"; Maxwell, "Pretty Wings"
If the membership of the Academy doesn't like this (and my guess is they really, really won't), and with this being a big studio move, I wouldn't be surprised if they just try that much harder to go with mainly outsider films.
And if they now show clips for 10 BP nominees, something else will have to be cut. And if they don't show clips of the nominees (something the show can do without in my mind) that will upset people.
My guess is the HFPA will use this as an excuse to increase their nominees - among other things, they take care of more of the people they want to serve, and sell more tables to their dinner.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: seanflynn,
A percentage of people will always be resistant to any changes. Interesting news. I havent had a chance to absorb this yet. I wonder if blockbusters like Paul Blart will have a chance now?
Posts: 13901 | Location: canada | Registered: December 22, 2005
Originally posted by outsider: Will anyone remember all the Best Picture nominees after a year or even six months?
I like this point and agree with it. Look at the lists of films from the days when Oscars nominated ten films and you will see many films that got just a few nominations, sometimes only best picture, and are forgotten now.
Never mind forgotten. Some of them are crap.
Thinking of some of the possible nominees in the past ten years if they would have had ten slots (say "The Last Samurai", "Blood Diamond", "Australia", "Memoirs of a Geisha", "Cold Mountain", etc) should be enough to make one see the foolishness of this move.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: pacinofan,
Posts: 27152 | Location: Phoenix, AZ | Registered: February 02, 2003
G'Day, Talk about ridiculous knee-jerk reaction to the Dark Knight/ WALL-E/ Reader fiasco from last year!
This will mean some great films that would otherwise have been overlooked will now get recongnised. It also means that many average or bad films that would have otherwise been overlooked will now get recognised.
And this makes it easier for smaller films to get nominated, but how about win? With a wider spread it does mean that less votes could be needed to win. But I think if a film isn't the frountrunner or one of the 2 dark horses behind it the voters will dismiss it as they want their vote to mean something. Will your Letters of Iwo Jima be even considered a possible winner now?
It also limits the prestige of being nominated.
Couldn't they have just increased it to 6 or 7? if they really wanted to increase it
Congratulations West Wing, Emmys most honored drama. 27 Emmys including 4 best drama series "What's Next?"
Posts: 2454 | Location: Sydney, Australia | Registered: September 07, 2005
Again, until we see if members now nominate 10 films, I can't begin to predict the impact.
But it will mean a combination of more bloated Oscar-baited mediocrities (like Pacinofan's list), an animated film, a rare blockbuster with good reviews, and a bunch of lesser known films.
It will cheapen the category and the Academy.
One good result - the foreign language film or two that gets in and then doesn't get a FL film nomination will increase the pressure on that rancid category.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: seanflynn,
I actually agree with another poster in this thread who said that this just gives the GG's more cred because now Academy voters will be looking closer at the 10 movies they choose.
I also agree that anyone who thinks this means films like Twilight will make it in are on crack.
Originally posted by seanflynn: My doppelganger Nikki Finke says what I said about this being a big studio pressure move is true, and says that the hit to the Academy's integrity is tremendous:
In the eyes of mainstream America beyond the smog shrouded hills of Hollywood, the Academy has been losing its respect and integrity for years and it reached an almost irreversible point with this past year's crop of underwhelming Best Picture nominees. The studios probably realized that fact even if the Academy didn't.
The people lamenting this change as a blow to the Academy's integrity haven't been paying much attention the past few years or maybe they don't care about how the general public perceives the Academy. I suspect this change will help restore some lost respect and integrity if the ten nominees consist of more than one or two films people have actually seen and or actually like. If this change results in more films like The Reader and Frost/Nixon being nominated, then the Academy will continue losing respect and integrity.
FYC: "Up" for Best Picture and Kathryn Bigelow for Best Director
Again, until we see if members now nominate 10 films, I can't begin to predict the impact.
But it will mean a combination of more bloated Oscar-baited mediocrities (like Pacinofan's list), an animated film, a rare blockbuster with good reviews, and a bunch of lesser known films.
It will cheapen the category and the Academy.
One good result - the foreign language film or two that gets in and then doesn't get a FL film nomination will increase the pressure on that rancid category.
Yes thanx. It was a JOKE. J-O-K-E. Let's see....the awful Paul Blart, Twilight, ....hey The Hangover! Ya...yay....
=kidding. Transformers=
But, what if this happens now??? =kidding.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: babypook,
Posts: 13901 | Location: canada | Registered: December 22, 2005
And Zembia - again the law of unintended consequences - the #1 thing that usually is behind the Academy's moves is to undermine, not bolster, the GGs.
If I recall correctly, the GGs are held next year before final ballots are due.
And Academy members (this is not a bad thing in itself), particularly if they are to put in 10, not 5, choices, are going to be looking for guidance as to what to watch - and yes, it's true, even with screeners, the earlier date being over the holidays means fewer, not more, of the films are watched. So naturally the GG choices will have more impacts.
