Oscars 2012: BP Category Change and Contenders
After two years of nominating ten films for best picture, the Oscars have once again decided to shake up the Best Picture category, we will no longer have ten nominees every year nor will we have five nominees every year but a different amount from five to ten. Now for a film to get nominated it must get 5% of the Academy’s number one votes, what does this mean? It means that 240-300 Academy members must put a film at the top of their lists for it to get a Best Picture nomination.
The Oscars and I rarely agree or get along, their snubbing of The Dark Knight, their refusal to nominate Nolan or Lee Smith for Inception, Tom Hooper beating Aronofsky and Fincher and The Shawshank Redemption not winning Best Picture are all decisions that I will never understand. I do not look to the Oscars to verify or validate my opinion in film or to signal what films I should be celebrating, I look at the Oscars in depth every year as they are the most mainstream film event on the television calendar and whining about their decisions is so much fun.
When they announced that they were nominating ten films I unlike many, was happy with the move. It gave films like District 9, Up and A Serious Man recognition and publicity that they deserved yet would not get from the Oscars in previous years. While it was satisfying as a film fan to see these films nominated, I soon came to realize that it was a completely pointless exercise. Having the additional five nominees was like letting a bunch of under aged teenagers into a nightclub and then refusing to serve them any drinks. By looking at the Best Director and Best Editing categories we could see what five films were truly in the running and lets face it, by the time it gets to Oscar night whether it is five or ten nominees it is always diluted down to a simple two horse race. King’s Speech vs. The Social Network, Avatar vs. The Hurt Locker, Slumdog Millionaire vs. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Speaking of a horse race I wonder how many horse race jokes will be made regarding Spielberg’s War Horse come January
Despite my dissatisfaction with the genuine winning possibility of the extra five nominees, I was not craving a change in the Best Picture category. The common argument for this new system is that five nominees was too small and ten nominees are too much, perhaps five nominees is too small but is ten nominees really too much? Are you saying that year on year the Academy could not come up with ten films they deemed worthy of a Best Picture nomination? I agree they should not be forced to reach a number if they do not feel a film does not deserve to be there but year on year critics give their top ten lists, are the Academy really incapable of doing the same? Or are they just annoyed that the ten gives more chance to films that are not of “Oscar standard”? Reports have indicated that the nomination of Winters Bone was the catalyst for this change and while I was not a fan of the film, was its inclusion really such a damning verdict that they were scraping the barrel with ten nominees?
This move is clearly a compromise between Academy members wanting go back to the simpler days of the five and the publicists trying to push this as a must see TV show. I agree with the notion that they should not be restricted with how many Best Pictures they choose however I am not sure if this is the best way to do it. The 5% mark is what leads me to confusion; my question is this…what if fifteen films get 5% first place votes? Ok maybe it is unlikely but not impossible, would we really get fifteen nominees? Or is ten the cut off point? Also what if one film were to get 70% of the Academy’s first place votes and another film 30%? Again unlikely but would we really only get two nominees? Or when a film reaches the 5% mark do further number one votes for that film get discounted as the film has a nomination and then the number two choice comes into play? These are questions that I am sure will have been explored and answered on various sites by now but they are questions that I believe highlight potential flaws within this system. Why can’t they just send a blank ballot to each member and say write down your favourite films of the year, don’t think about number restrictions just write down the films you liked the most. Then you take those lists and find the films that are written most and those are your nominees. Perhaps that idea is better on paper than in practice and could potentially lead to more confusion than this new system but it is surely something that they could pull off (Granted I have not given it much thought)
They say that this change will bring more excitement to the nominations announcement, they seem to have finally realized that most of the Oscar nominees are predicted before they are made and the only way they can think of making it unpredictable is by changing the number. It just seems like a desperate attempt to infuse excitement into a nominations announcement that could not be less exciting. If they want the nomination announcement to be a big deal, then don’t announce them first thing in the morning as they do in the U.S and instead make it a highly advertised, prime time event. If they want to bring higher ratings to the Oscars then they should have realized by now that changing the Best Picture category is not going to do it.
What I do like about this change is that now the Oscar race (Something I follow with keen interest) could potentially be a much more interesting beast, not only will we be discussing which films but how many films. Apart from this however, I find the change not to be bad or good but more why? I just don’t understand why this change needed to occur and what it will bring to the Oscars, I like that we are no longer fixed with a certain number and I like that the Oscar race could potentially be a more interesting thing to dissect and discuss but I cannot build up much enthusiasm for the change. Whether this change will help blockbuster and indie films as the ten did will remain to be seen and I will not know what I truly think of the change until the nominees are announced, just the same way as I did not know how I truly felt about the ten until The Hurt Locker swept that particular Oscar night.
Now that I have given my thoughts on this issue I want to know yours. Are you a fan of this change? Do you think they should stick to ten? Or do you think they should have stuck to five? Do you think this change will help blockbuster and indie films? Do you share my confusion with the possible complexities of the 5% rule? Let me know in the Your Say section.
Now, although summer is not even over yet I am going to take an early look at possible Oscar contenders. A month or so ago I did an article predicting what films from the summer could get a Best Picture nomination (This was of course based on the notion that there would be ten nominees) My three picks were The Tree of Life, Super 8 and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part Two. With this change to the Best Picture category I do not see Harry Potter or Super 8 picking up enough number one votes to get into the category. I think the Oscars will reward the achievement of the Harry Potter series with a technical sweep and Super 8 despite the support of Spielberg may just get lost and forgotten amidst the winter offerings. The Tree of Life is one that I also feel should be crossed off yet for some reason I have a suspicion about it. Yes many academy members may not have the patience with it but the film does have its admirers in high places. I could see this film just sneaking in based on the appreciation of Malick and the performances across the filmmaking industry. I may be horribly wrong but I am keeping The Tree of Life as a contender.
What are the other films I believe could get a Best Picture nomination?
War Horse- This Steven Spielberg directed, emotionally centered, World War One drama ticks all the Oscar boxes. Epic in scope this is a film that could be a nomination front-runner.
Moneyball- Brad Pitt, Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Jonah Hill star in this against all odds, underdog baseball film, based on a true story, with a script co written by Aaron Sorkin and directed by Bennet Miller (Capote) also ticks a lot of the Oscar boxes. With a lot of buzz for the performances from Pitt, Hoffman and Hill we could be looking at Acting nominations and with Sorkin co writing an adapted screenplay nod as well.
J. Edgar- Directed by Clint Eastwood and starring Leonardo Dicaprio in the title role, I do not think this film is going to struggle to get the 5% while Hereafter, Invictus, Gran Torino and Changeling missed out on Best Picture nominations, Eastwood is still a darling of the Academy as his wins for Unforgiven and Million Dollar Baby show. With a potential Best Actor play for Dicaprio in the cards, this is one that could score nominations in the big categories of Picture, Director, Actor and Screenplay.
The Ides of March- Directed by George Clooney and starring Clooney, Paul Giamatti, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Ryan Gosling, Marisa Tomei, Evan Rachel Wood, Max Minghella and Jeffrey Wright this film could be a potential SAG winner. An impressive cast, a politically based plot and Clooney behind the directors chair all point to this film being a major player come Awards time.
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close- Starring Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock this is a drama centering on a young boy who receives a key from his father who died in 9/11. With Oscar winners Hanks and Bullock in the cast as well as an emotionally charged premise, this is a film that could get a lot of appreciation come Oscar time. Plus Stephen Daldry is directing and he has received a best director nomination for each of his previous three films (Billy Elliot, The Hours and The Reader)
Possibilities:
A Dangerous Method- Directed by David Cronenberg and starring Viggo Mortensen, Keira Knightley and Michael Fassbender (“I prefer…Magneto") A Dangerous Method is the story of the relationship between Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud, for some reason I am picturing a psychiatrists version of The Prestige staring Aragon and Magneto rather than Batman and Wolverine…what a star studded sentence that was.
Contagion- Directed by Steven Soderbergh this virus-based, action-thriller has a cast of Matt Damon (Oscar winner), Kate Winslet (Oscar winner), Marion Cotillard (Oscar winner), John Hawkes (Oscar nominee), Bryan Cranston (Emmy winner), Laurence Fishburne (Emmy winner), Gwyneth Paltrow (Oscar and Golden Globe nominee) and Jude Law…(Oscar nominee and Tottenham fan) this is another SAG contender but is its thriller plot a bit to thrillery for the Oscars? Thrillery is now an accepted word on Movie Parliament. Come to think of it these possibilities sound more exciting than the contenders…mind you if the Oscars were about which films were the most exciting and truly the best then we would have a very different set of nominations and winners…
The Descendants- George Clooney again and from Alexander Payne (Sideways) I can see this smaller indie style film falling into the shadows due to the heavyweights discussed above. Plus The Ides of March with its more star studded cast may be the Clooney movie of the awards season.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo- Many would have this up there with War Horse however I am still hesitant about the true awards potential of this film. I see this along with Tintin to be a film that will do well critically and commercially over the winter season but will not break the Best Picture category. Yes Scorsese won an Oscar for a violent, thriller remake but that film had Dicaprio, Nicholson, Damon, Wahlberg and the fact that Scorsese was WAY overdue behind it. Despite losing out to Boyle and Hooper (Two Brits funnily enough) I do not think that the Academy think Fincher is overdue and ultimately this film may well prove too violent and too fun for their tastes.
Hugo Cabret- Scorsese experiments with 3D with a cast that includes Chloe Moretz, Sacha Baron Cohen, Jude Law, Emily Mortimer, Ben Kingsley and Christopher Lee. This may prove to be to much of a family/children’s adventure film to be a big Academy player plus it is in 3D and although Avatar was a contender, are the Academy really fans of 3D?
What do you think? Do you agree with my choices? Are there films I have left out? Give us your early Oscar predictions and thoughts in the Your Say section.
By Movie Parliament Prime Minister,
Michael Dalton
The Oscars and I rarely agree or get along, their snubbing of The Dark Knight, their refusal to nominate Nolan or Lee Smith for Inception, Tom Hooper beating Aronofsky and Fincher and The Shawshank Redemption not winning Best Picture are all decisions that I will never understand. I do not look to the Oscars to verify or validate my opinion in film or to signal what films I should be celebrating, I look at the Oscars in depth every year as they are the most mainstream film event on the television calendar and whining about their decisions is so much fun.
When they announced that they were nominating ten films I unlike many, was happy with the move. It gave films like District 9, Up and A Serious Man recognition and publicity that they deserved yet would not get from the Oscars in previous years. While it was satisfying as a film fan to see these films nominated, I soon came to realize that it was a completely pointless exercise. Having the additional five nominees was like letting a bunch of under aged teenagers into a nightclub and then refusing to serve them any drinks. By looking at the Best Director and Best Editing categories we could see what five films were truly in the running and lets face it, by the time it gets to Oscar night whether it is five or ten nominees it is always diluted down to a simple two horse race. King’s Speech vs. The Social Network, Avatar vs. The Hurt Locker, Slumdog Millionaire vs. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Speaking of a horse race I wonder how many horse race jokes will be made regarding Spielberg’s War Horse come January
Despite my dissatisfaction with the genuine winning possibility of the extra five nominees, I was not craving a change in the Best Picture category. The common argument for this new system is that five nominees was too small and ten nominees are too much, perhaps five nominees is too small but is ten nominees really too much? Are you saying that year on year the Academy could not come up with ten films they deemed worthy of a Best Picture nomination? I agree they should not be forced to reach a number if they do not feel a film does not deserve to be there but year on year critics give their top ten lists, are the Academy really incapable of doing the same? Or are they just annoyed that the ten gives more chance to films that are not of “Oscar standard”? Reports have indicated that the nomination of Winters Bone was the catalyst for this change and while I was not a fan of the film, was its inclusion really such a damning verdict that they were scraping the barrel with ten nominees?
This move is clearly a compromise between Academy members wanting go back to the simpler days of the five and the publicists trying to push this as a must see TV show. I agree with the notion that they should not be restricted with how many Best Pictures they choose however I am not sure if this is the best way to do it. The 5% mark is what leads me to confusion; my question is this…what if fifteen films get 5% first place votes? Ok maybe it is unlikely but not impossible, would we really get fifteen nominees? Or is ten the cut off point? Also what if one film were to get 70% of the Academy’s first place votes and another film 30%? Again unlikely but would we really only get two nominees? Or when a film reaches the 5% mark do further number one votes for that film get discounted as the film has a nomination and then the number two choice comes into play? These are questions that I am sure will have been explored and answered on various sites by now but they are questions that I believe highlight potential flaws within this system. Why can’t they just send a blank ballot to each member and say write down your favourite films of the year, don’t think about number restrictions just write down the films you liked the most. Then you take those lists and find the films that are written most and those are your nominees. Perhaps that idea is better on paper than in practice and could potentially lead to more confusion than this new system but it is surely something that they could pull off (Granted I have not given it much thought)
They say that this change will bring more excitement to the nominations announcement, they seem to have finally realized that most of the Oscar nominees are predicted before they are made and the only way they can think of making it unpredictable is by changing the number. It just seems like a desperate attempt to infuse excitement into a nominations announcement that could not be less exciting. If they want the nomination announcement to be a big deal, then don’t announce them first thing in the morning as they do in the U.S and instead make it a highly advertised, prime time event. If they want to bring higher ratings to the Oscars then they should have realized by now that changing the Best Picture category is not going to do it.
What I do like about this change is that now the Oscar race (Something I follow with keen interest) could potentially be a much more interesting beast, not only will we be discussing which films but how many films. Apart from this however, I find the change not to be bad or good but more why? I just don’t understand why this change needed to occur and what it will bring to the Oscars, I like that we are no longer fixed with a certain number and I like that the Oscar race could potentially be a more interesting thing to dissect and discuss but I cannot build up much enthusiasm for the change. Whether this change will help blockbuster and indie films as the ten did will remain to be seen and I will not know what I truly think of the change until the nominees are announced, just the same way as I did not know how I truly felt about the ten until The Hurt Locker swept that particular Oscar night.
Now that I have given my thoughts on this issue I want to know yours. Are you a fan of this change? Do you think they should stick to ten? Or do you think they should have stuck to five? Do you think this change will help blockbuster and indie films? Do you share my confusion with the possible complexities of the 5% rule? Let me know in the Your Say section.
Now, although summer is not even over yet I am going to take an early look at possible Oscar contenders. A month or so ago I did an article predicting what films from the summer could get a Best Picture nomination (This was of course based on the notion that there would be ten nominees) My three picks were The Tree of Life, Super 8 and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part Two. With this change to the Best Picture category I do not see Harry Potter or Super 8 picking up enough number one votes to get into the category. I think the Oscars will reward the achievement of the Harry Potter series with a technical sweep and Super 8 despite the support of Spielberg may just get lost and forgotten amidst the winter offerings. The Tree of Life is one that I also feel should be crossed off yet for some reason I have a suspicion about it. Yes many academy members may not have the patience with it but the film does have its admirers in high places. I could see this film just sneaking in based on the appreciation of Malick and the performances across the filmmaking industry. I may be horribly wrong but I am keeping The Tree of Life as a contender.
What are the other films I believe could get a Best Picture nomination?
War Horse- This Steven Spielberg directed, emotionally centered, World War One drama ticks all the Oscar boxes. Epic in scope this is a film that could be a nomination front-runner.
Moneyball- Brad Pitt, Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Jonah Hill star in this against all odds, underdog baseball film, based on a true story, with a script co written by Aaron Sorkin and directed by Bennet Miller (Capote) also ticks a lot of the Oscar boxes. With a lot of buzz for the performances from Pitt, Hoffman and Hill we could be looking at Acting nominations and with Sorkin co writing an adapted screenplay nod as well.
J. Edgar- Directed by Clint Eastwood and starring Leonardo Dicaprio in the title role, I do not think this film is going to struggle to get the 5% while Hereafter, Invictus, Gran Torino and Changeling missed out on Best Picture nominations, Eastwood is still a darling of the Academy as his wins for Unforgiven and Million Dollar Baby show. With a potential Best Actor play for Dicaprio in the cards, this is one that could score nominations in the big categories of Picture, Director, Actor and Screenplay.
The Ides of March- Directed by George Clooney and starring Clooney, Paul Giamatti, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Ryan Gosling, Marisa Tomei, Evan Rachel Wood, Max Minghella and Jeffrey Wright this film could be a potential SAG winner. An impressive cast, a politically based plot and Clooney behind the directors chair all point to this film being a major player come Awards time.
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close- Starring Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock this is a drama centering on a young boy who receives a key from his father who died in 9/11. With Oscar winners Hanks and Bullock in the cast as well as an emotionally charged premise, this is a film that could get a lot of appreciation come Oscar time. Plus Stephen Daldry is directing and he has received a best director nomination for each of his previous three films (Billy Elliot, The Hours and The Reader)
Possibilities:
A Dangerous Method- Directed by David Cronenberg and starring Viggo Mortensen, Keira Knightley and Michael Fassbender (“I prefer…Magneto") A Dangerous Method is the story of the relationship between Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud, for some reason I am picturing a psychiatrists version of The Prestige staring Aragon and Magneto rather than Batman and Wolverine…what a star studded sentence that was.
Contagion- Directed by Steven Soderbergh this virus-based, action-thriller has a cast of Matt Damon (Oscar winner), Kate Winslet (Oscar winner), Marion Cotillard (Oscar winner), John Hawkes (Oscar nominee), Bryan Cranston (Emmy winner), Laurence Fishburne (Emmy winner), Gwyneth Paltrow (Oscar and Golden Globe nominee) and Jude Law…(Oscar nominee and Tottenham fan) this is another SAG contender but is its thriller plot a bit to thrillery for the Oscars? Thrillery is now an accepted word on Movie Parliament. Come to think of it these possibilities sound more exciting than the contenders…mind you if the Oscars were about which films were the most exciting and truly the best then we would have a very different set of nominations and winners…
The Descendants- George Clooney again and from Alexander Payne (Sideways) I can see this smaller indie style film falling into the shadows due to the heavyweights discussed above. Plus The Ides of March with its more star studded cast may be the Clooney movie of the awards season.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo- Many would have this up there with War Horse however I am still hesitant about the true awards potential of this film. I see this along with Tintin to be a film that will do well critically and commercially over the winter season but will not break the Best Picture category. Yes Scorsese won an Oscar for a violent, thriller remake but that film had Dicaprio, Nicholson, Damon, Wahlberg and the fact that Scorsese was WAY overdue behind it. Despite losing out to Boyle and Hooper (Two Brits funnily enough) I do not think that the Academy think Fincher is overdue and ultimately this film may well prove too violent and too fun for their tastes.
Hugo Cabret- Scorsese experiments with 3D with a cast that includes Chloe Moretz, Sacha Baron Cohen, Jude Law, Emily Mortimer, Ben Kingsley and Christopher Lee. This may prove to be to much of a family/children’s adventure film to be a big Academy player plus it is in 3D and although Avatar was a contender, are the Academy really fans of 3D?
What do you think? Do you agree with my choices? Are there films I have left out? Give us your early Oscar predictions and thoughts in the Your Say section.
By Movie Parliament Prime Minister,
Michael Dalton