Much has been made in industry publications about the Oscars snubbing both Wall*E and The Dark Knight in the Best Picture category. (Sidenote: both those films made my Top Ten of 2008.) The claim reads as follows: In order to reverse the recent trend of declining ratings for the awards show, the academy needs to nominate films Joe Six Pack has actually seen, the ones which make a lot of coin in the theater, as opposed to the "real" best movies of the year. This way, the viewer can play along at home, making the ceremony much more interesting and relevant. When films like Slumdog Millionaire, The Reader or Milk get the nod, it further affirms the perception Hollywood is out of touch with the mainstream.
I have to ask one question which one one seems to bring up. What's the point? If we were to hand out Oscar statues for Best Box Office or Most Popular, then Paul Blart: Mall Cop would be in the running for an award. And isn't the People's Choice Awards designed for this very purpose? Since when did nominations become less about the quality of the work than about what the people have a vested interest in?
One of the great saving graces of awards for any industry is that each organization is able to recognize artisits who wouldn't normally be recognized. What is Mad Men's average rating, yet it won Outstanding Drama Series? 30 Rock is in the same boat. In the last 13 years, the high water mark-ratings wise-for the telecast was back in 1998, when Titantic made James Cameron King of the World. We can view this telecast as an abnormality because of the phenomenon the movie turned out to be with tweens and Leo Dipcario-obsessed fans. But lets kick the tires anyway.
A $600 million grosser is the States alone, Titanic easily outpaced every other flick at the box office. It would take the combined efforts of #2-4 on the 1997 money list to eclipse the film domestically (Men in Black $250.69 million, The Lost World: Jurassic Park $229.08 million, Liar Liar $181.41 million). Each of the five nominated films that year ranked within the top 50 money wise. Certainly the telecast was helped by the household name recognition the Best Picture nominees brought to the table; no one will dispute that. And ratings show the kudo-fest is helped anytime popular movies are included among the big nominations.
But I argue something else. It is not about the ratings, silly. It's about honoring the craft, bringing movies to a wider audience who may not have seen them. In a time when absolutete garbage like Four Christmases can make a staggering $120 million (or the $94.5 million payday for Beverly Hills Chihuahua), does it make any sense to fly off the handle when the "most popular" movies aren't included in the Best Picture category? It's widely known viewers will watch anything with pretty people or explosions. They'll sit through mind-numbing suckitude like American Idol (sorry guys) instead of giving Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip a chance. Just look at the weekly television ratings. What kind of show dominates? Reality. The stuff which doesn't demand the audience think.
Isn't the idea of an awards show to shine a spotlight on the best films of the year, regardless of how much money they made? If we're just going to give the nominations to the perceived most popular flicks of the year, why should anyone try to make anything for the sake of art? Each studio should submit a list of films they plan on making, along with the attached talent, at the beginning of every year. At that point, through a vote of the citizenry, each category is filled with nominations regardless of the actual product. It would place a premium on what the people think and thereby assure massive viewer tune-in to watch their faves get love.
But here's the problem: what sounds good on paper-or to Joe Six Pack-isn't necessarily good product. Reese Witherspoon, Vince Vaughn, Jon Voight, Dwight Yokam, Tim McGraw, Robert Duvall, Sissy Spacek, Jon Favreau, Mary Steenburgen and Kristin Chenoweth sounds like a pretty dang good cast in a family comedy, right? The result-the aforementioned Four Christmases-is perhaps the most vile piece of dreck which came out last year. Who wants to see THAT nominated for anything aside from a Razzie?
Here's one more point. The Oscars and Grammy's and Emmy's are all industry awards to show appreciation for the industry. Bowing to outside pressure would be akin to consumers at any local store being able to vote for the "Best in the District" award. A store may have terrific sales numbers, high consumer satisfaction, zero turnover, zero shrink...all factors which would qualify them as a "Best" store, but if the consumers at another, lower performing store, vote that store in, what should corporate do?
No, stop the bellyaching about The Dark Knight or ratings or anything else. Allow the academy to expose the public to new films, stories and experiences outside their tiny little bubbles. We don't have to agree with them; in fact, we can debate picks and winners until we're blue in the face. (Crash is still rubbish, by the way.) That's part of the fun. The public has the People's Choice Awards. The people who actually care about legit film awards have the Oscars.
Originally posted on: The Movie Rambler
- On Blogger: My Take: The Oscars
-
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
jj79- February 12th, 2009
- (no subject)
-
- jj79
- February 12th, 2009
I've been at this game a LONG time. Nearly a decade, in fact. I've covered major blockbusters (The Dark Knight, Mission Impossible 3) to the smallest, most low budget flicks in the world (The Good Life, Ring of Death). Never have I wanted to argue with a reader more than I do right now.
Make that multiple readers.
Here's the review in question: Fireproof.
Now, onto selected comments:
"Marriage, God's way, is the ONLY way that brings lasting, maximum satisfaction, because God designed it so to be. I think this noble film deserves a 10! I pray that God will bless the folks at Sherwood Pictures, as long as they continue to grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior and soon-coming King, Jesus Christ!"
"hes just mad at this movie because hes atheist"
And my favorite one of all:
"Dude. Did you even WATCH the movie? Because you are wrong on SO many points. First things first, I am not a fan of Christian films because they are so easy to fall into the preachy stereotypes. Yeah, its easy to tell the acting isn’t that great but I can only think of two or three places they bring up religion. Every single movie ever made brings up religion a few times within its contexts. You just know a religious company made the movie therefore your not even giving it a chance. Its FAR from being “preachy” or “spouting bible verses at every chance”. In fact, I don’t think they even bring up a single bible verse. Next time you want to bash a movie, be sure to watch it first because it makes you sound like a 3rd rate wannabe journalist with all your flaws in your article."
See, the thing is, I know EXACTLY what happened here. Someone affiliated with a church got hold of the review and passed it onto all their friends. Know how I know? Nothing I've written for IGN has garnered this kind of reaction. Hell, nothing I wrote for DVDTown or DVDShrine did, either. I so very badly want to comment on each of these things, but I have a policy of not engaging with the readership at IGN. No good can come of it.
(Note: the movie has a 37% "fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes. DVDTalk and DVDVerdict both say basically the same things in their reviews. So I know I'm not wildly off base.)
- DVD Release: "X-Men" Animated April 28
-
- jj79
- February 12th, 2009
VOLUME 1
Night of the Sentinels (part 1)
Night of the Sentinels (Part 2)
Enter Magneto
Deadly Reunions
Captive Hearts
Cold Vengeance
Slave Island
The Unstoppable Juggernaut
The Cure
Come The Apocalypse
Days Of Future Past (part 1)
Days Of Future Past (part 2)
The Final Decision
Till Death Do Us Part (part 1)
Till Death Do Us Part (part 2)
Whatever It Takes
VOLUME 2
Red Dawn
Repo Man
X-Ternally Yours
Time Fugitives (part 1)
Time Fugitives (part 2)
A Rogue's Tale
Beauty & The Beast
Mojo Vision
Reunion (part 1)
Reunion (part 2)
Out of the Past (part 1)
Out of the Past (part 2)
The Phoenix Saga (part 1): Sacrifice
The Phoenix Saga (part 2): The Dark Shroud
The Phoenix Saga (part 3): Cry of the Banshee
The Phoenix Saga (part 4): The Starjammers
The Phoenix Saga (part 5): Child of Light
*****
After a handful of episodes being available on out-of-print DVD, the X-Men 1990's animated series is finally coming to legit DVD. April 28 is the date; each is a two disc set with episodes 1-33 total.
(For the record, the OOP discs are from Universal and feature The Phoenix Saga and ten other episodes. Disney released a disc of eps around the time of X2 but nothing since. Maybe, just maybe, if these sell well, other Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends won't be far behind, not to mention Hulk, Silver Surfer and a veritable stable of other 'toons us geeks know and, um, love. (That cover art sucks, though, doesn't it?)
Originally posted on: The Movie Rambler