Features
Headlines
Search
Loading ...
Archives
As we all are well aware, one of the assumed reasons for the Academy’s recent decision to expand the Best Picture category to 10 nominees is the potential for the inclusion of popular films, which, the thinking goes, could help with the telecast’s ratings woes.
I’m less and less convinced that, had films like “The Dark Knight” and “WALL-E” been nominated, viewership would have been much better. And the dirty little secret of the animated feature film category is that it wasn’t a field pushed through by animators wanting their work to be selectively rewarded but, in actuality, an earlier attempt to widen the net to more populist entertainment.
I have always been of the mind that it’s not the films in the mix that necessarily affect the ratings (though that certainly has an affect), but the fact that the Oscars air after months and months of awards shows that essentially numb the public to kudos fests by the time the big daddy ceremony finally rolls around. And it seems 15-time nominee (and soon-to-be 16-time nominee) Meryl Streep agrees with me, going so far as to suggest the Academy move it’s telecast all the way up to January 1st.
Talking to Entertainment Weekly’s Missy Schwartz, this is what Streep had to say:
As time has gone on, so many other televised award shows precede the Oscars, and I do think that’s diluted their importance…Certainly, everybody seems exhausted by the time the same people have trampled up on stage at the Golden Globes, the SAGs, the Broadcast Film Critics, the Baftas….There are so many now and they’re all on TV. I mean, you wanna see some real acting? Watch somebody who’s won five times before they get to the Oscars, then they get up on stage and they do the performance of, ‘Oh! Yes!’ Wow, that’s a big job! And who could blame them?…I think the Academy should move it up to Jan. 1 and preempt everybody else. That is the big Kahuna, it’s the one that counts. And I think it’s just so bizarre that they allow themselves to be the caboose.
Of course, this kind of drastic change would alter the game quite a bit. The Oscar “season,” as it were, would be abbreviated considerably, leaving less time for studios to convince voters that this film or that is the best of the year. But I might actually be okay with that, because let’s face it, the show seems passe by the time it finally rolls around in February.
And to think just a few years ago it was an annual March showcase. Move it closer to the year at hand, stop stretching things past their expiration date and in the end, maybe the overall impact of the show and the honors bestowed will have the current pull of poignancy.
Just a thought. What do you think? Would it be wise to move the show to the beginning of the year?
Check out the full interview with Streep over at Entertainment Weekly.
26 responses so far
1 8-10-2009 at 11:44 am
AmericanRequiem said...
Well Streep would know, and it would be nice if people just chose the movies based on what they liked opposed to how the studio campaigns, though i doubt wed have so many great new releases in december, but it would be a nice way to close the year
2 8-10-2009 at 12:00 pm
Jonathan Spuij said...
If only this lobby would become stronger in coming months/years and they’d actually move up I’d love for that to happen.
3 8-10-2009 at 12:14 pm
red_wine said...
The winners are all so painfully obvious by the time of the Oscars, it is more confirmation than anything else.
Specially after last year, which was so predictable, so predictable that even beginners got only 1 or 2 wrong. Even Departures wasn’t a surprise after you spread the word. It was boring beyond belief.
But last year has left a really bad taste in my mouth. The entire Oscars were a debacle, most nominations and winners were a parade of the banal, managing to ignore the best in nearly every category.
It seemed very curious that you could predict the taste of a voting body consisting of distinct individuals to such an accurate degree. They were like like a herd of sheep running on the plain, it was a tremendous feat of group-think. I doubt the Oscars will ever be as relevant to general public as they were before. If only they could make themselves credible again to the people who actually watch them, put the best again in the best picture or best whatever, they will gain in respect and relevance.
4 8-10-2009 at 12:25 pm
Armando said...
Make it January 2nd!
5 8-10-2009 at 12:30 pm
AdamL said...
Excellent idea.
But I don’t really understand why they care about the ratings anyway – the idea of the show is to reward the best, not to score ratings. It’s not as if Hollywood will die without the ad revenues the show generates, so why the concern? Why would it matter one bit if only 300 thousand watched it?
6 8-10-2009 at 12:35 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
It takes money to put this show on, Adam.
7 8-10-2009 at 12:54 pm
Chad Hartigan said...
This has been my thought for a while too. It’ll never happen though.
8 8-10-2009 at 1:05 pm
Ryan said...
I think February would be ideal. People are still recovering from the holidays in January and February is a sweeps month.
9 8-10-2009 at 2:01 pm
Chris138 said...
It would make sense to have the Oscars earlier, or at least make it around the same time as the Golden Globes. As someone stated above, by the time the Oscar ceremony takes place it is very predictable and obvious who will win the awards.
I can see some reasoning behind having the Oscars at a later time, though. Not all of the contenders are are in wider release until January, and they are giving people time to go out and see the movies. However, nominating bigger movies certainly wouldn’t hurt their chances of getting more people to tune in and care about the ceremony.
10 8-10-2009 at 2:55 pm
The Z said...
If the ceremony were to be held earlier, though, most films would be released wide before then. That’s the main reason most contending films don’t go wide until a week or so before the nominations are announced. If you move the date up, you inturn move the wide release up.
Perhaps another rule change the Academy could consider is that the “limited, qualifying-run” should be abolished and replaced with a “must have a wide release before December 31st” rule. This would give the general movie-going audience ample opportunity to catch the films before the ceremony. And AMPAS members would still receive their screeners, albeit in October or November or earlier.
Personally, I think an end of January/beginning of February ceremony would be the best fit. Announce nominations the first Tuesday after the first Monday (in case the 1st is Tuesday) and have the cermony the last Sunday of January or first Sunday in February. At worst, the producers have three-and-a-half weeks to prepare a show, but what a fun three-and-a-half weeks it would be.
11 8-10-2009 at 3:05 pm
Guy Lodge said...
She’s nailed it — couldn’t agree more. It would also mean shows like the BAFTAs (which are the worst culprits of late) would be compelled to find their own identities again with more individual-minded voting, instead of just pathetically trying to predict the Oscars every year.
Streep for AMPAS president, please.
12 8-10-2009 at 3:31 pm
j said...
I’d put it on the first Sunday of February sweeps. It is true that the other awards shows seem like nothing except precursors and mean little otherwise. Voters should have a bit of time to see films.
At least they go by calendar year, vs. the Grammys with an eligibility period starting September, which makes no sense.
13 8-10-2009 at 4:00 pm
Helena said...
I totally agree with Streep.
Plus, I would like to see the release of possible contenders begin in Oct versus all being released in Dec.
As with so many being released at same time, some good dramas get lost in the mix.
14 8-10-2009 at 5:00 pm
John said...
I like the idea for 2 reasons.
1) as mentioned, have it be AT LEAST in between some of the other events (GG, SAG, BAFTA, BFCA, Indies). There is no element of surprise anymore, none. Have it be early February at the latest!
2) This pushes more serious contenders into the August realm and not September. I need good movies in August, people. I know there are some now. I’m talking in general.
15 8-10-2009 at 5:14 pm
Ken P. said...
I think they should move it up to Jan. 1. Something for the women to watch besides football. They also need to cut it down about 2 hours. It’s the most dreadfully long and boring show in TV.
16 8-10-2009 at 5:37 pm
Gustavo H.R. said...
Meryl’s so right I don’t even have to comment on it.
17 8-10-2009 at 6:14 pm
lac said...
Moving the Oscars up will probably loosen up the other award shows. Actors can say what they really feel rather than being politically correct so not to rub some Oscar voters the wrong way.
18 8-10-2009 at 7:09 pm
Encore Entertainment said...
I don’t really like the idea, it’s okay but for
1) the Oscars which is the biggest award generally marks the end of the season
2) the fact that we see all those shows before kind of makes predicting fun. Other than the last two years of horrid and boring choices we don’t ALWAYS know what’s happening. Sometimes the films need to build up over a period of time etc.
3) And one thing about voting for a film is that you have to let it stay for while to test its longevity. You can’t return immediately from the cinema and say that’s better. You have to think. This is a big decision.
4) And most importantly. It takes a while to count those votes and if films are eligible until the end of January they will need at least 1 month.
I say the middle to the end of February is just right. I hope that seeing Meryl is God they don’t move to change it…
19 8-10-2009 at 9:45 pm
Glenn said...
Even if they did move the ceremony much earlier then the other shows would just follow suit and we’d start seeing award shows in, like, October.
But she’s right. Most people, even those who aren’t Oscar fanatics, know what’s gonna happen.
I also think – and have done so for ages – that the effect of the Oscars has just worn off on a lot of the public. It used to be a chance to see all the celebrities in pretty (and sometimes crazy) outfits while also getting to be told what movies to see. These days you don’t need to actually watch to know the results since they’re online 30 seconds after they’re rewarded, and the next day there are pictures of the stars everywhere. Stars that we see everywhere now anyway. It’s not special in that regard anymore.
20 8-10-2009 at 11:29 pm
parker said...
Sing it, Meryl.
But make it December 31st – it’s not as if we film nerds have other plans.
21 8-11-2009 at 12:11 am
Sound Designer Dan said...
Hey Kris,
Why couldn’t they just stop airing the OTHER award shows?
They could still air the Oscars in mid-to-late February but just remove all the other ones (with the exception of the Spirit awards, those are pretty fun).
22 8-11-2009 at 5:59 am
head_wizard said...
Better idea then the lets add five new nominees and dilute our main catagory. I do actually like it it being the last of the group as sort of the finally moment of the season. But I wouldn’t mind it plus it would make predicting the winners harder with less precurssers so it would be worth a shot.
23 8-11-2009 at 7:08 am
KBJr. said...
Perhaps they should push the nominating and winners periods into the previous year. Start when the Globes do in early-December to nominate films, have the awards show in late January. I think its sooooo drawn out with the late-January nominations and then we’ve got to wait a whole month before the winners are announced. I wouldn’t preempt the Globes…but SAG, BAFTA, BFCA, and the lot are neither here nor there in the big scheme and can afford to be after the Oscars.
24 8-11-2009 at 7:29 am
Erik said...
it’ll never happen. You gotta stir up fake excitement for a while and then do the big finish. It would be like airing the American Idol finale one week after the auditions, you’d realize it’s not all that exciting and you didn’t get “emotionally” involved in the race.
Let’s face it: the Globes, the SAGs, the BAFTAs… they’re all watched the way people watch weekly auditions for the big prize. Who will give the best speech? Who will giggle like schoolgirls at the SAGs? Who will throw the phone at the hotel guy and get in a hissyfit for someone editing his poem/speech? How many bleeps can you fit into one Mickey Rourke speech? etc
25 8-11-2009 at 7:42 am
Marshall said...
I think it should be moved to the very end of January, but it’s in sweeps right now so its not moving.
Marshall
marshallandthemovies.wordpress.com/
26 8-11-2009 at 8:30 am
Melissa said...
I like it that means that we wouldn’t have to spend all our money in November and December because the films would be released earlier. August, September and October.
Maybe first week in February. They moved the Grammies to the last week in January.
Although there are about 5 or 6 contenders being released in October this year.