Wednesday, June 24, 2009

10 Best Pictures? Reactions and the Star Trek / Up Situation

Like presumably many of you I talked to a lot of people today about the new Oscar rule which will bring us 10 Best Picture nominees instead of 5. Reaction seems to be divided between "yes! it'll be more inclusive and exciting" and "yikes. it'll still suck only now it will signify less".
Take this Academy voter from the member at large branch reacting to the news today (I trust the source who asked and then conveyed her response):
I personally like it when it’s more open to people. That’s going to be terrific. But the only problem is that they should increase the nominees of Best Actor and Best Actress only to make it fairer
Yikes. She wants more nominees elsewhere, too? How will we be able to make fun of the Globe and BFCA excesses if AMPAS does the same thing? And if the Academy keeps adding won't it turn into the EMMYs with so many categories that winning them seems an inevitability if you just keep at it and work the right type of series movies.

Another Academy member (from the technical branches) that I contacted myself was not at all pleased. He said:
These days it is difficult to find 5 films, much less 10, that are worthy of an Academy nomination. A cynical person might deduce that having 10 nominations is the only way the studios can garner a few nominations. Don't we already have the People's Choice Awards?
My line of thought falls closer to this more cynical thought. Box office has always been its own reward. Why are people always so adamant that blockbusters need statues too? I agree that they sometimes deserve them but I also believe with all my heart that the only reason that people are so adamant that they deserve so many and so angry at their annual snubs is that these are the films that have been seen. It's not necessarily because they're the best. It's because they're available to have opinions about. If you expand anyone's film viewing to include not just the 10 biggest hits of the year, chances are you expand the idiosyncracies as to what each person considers "best". I don't think the problem with the Oscars has been their love for smaller movies. The problem is their (collective) general lack of imagination in what constitutes quality. Quality can be found anywhere: small movies, big movies, medium sized movies and within any genre. Choosing a good subject for a movie can give you a leg up towards quality but subject matter and tone (seriousness) ≠ Quality.

Star Trek is not a contender. There's at least 20 more typically Oscar
viable features on the way. Up on the other hand probably is.

I bring all this up because I'm a little bewildered as to why people think this will mean a great deal of popcorn in the Best Picture field. Take E! Online mentioning Star Trek (2009) (and The Hangover as Best Picture possibilities. Sid Ganis didn't announce 100 nominees for Best Picture, he announced 10. Comedies and light sci-fi are still not going to be towards the top of Oscar's wish list. Why would they start loving genres they've never loved if they double their nominees? If you double your nominees you might see one or two universally acclaimed hits nominated along with December's limited releases that were greenlit with gold statuary in mind but those popcorn pictures will still have to feel prestigious in some way to make the cut. Therefore, Star Trek is out. It's from a franchise that has been around for 40 years. It's silly and fun. Up is also silly and fun but it's got that undeniably moving opening and a resonant contemporary theme and Pixar itself IS a prestige element. So Up is probably in.

My killjoy point is this: don't get your hopes up for the blockbusters. No matter how many websites start becoming convinced that The Hangover and Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince will be competing on March 7th for the industry's top prize, they won't. Mostly the expanded competitive field will just mean more slots for the type of movies Oscar likes to nominate i.e. serious dramas, message movies, period pieces, war films and films that smell of prestige in some way (lauded source material, famous auteurs, you know the type). Look at what the NBR and the BFCA put in their top ten lists whilst hoping to predict the Oscars. Yes, occassionally a blockbuster or "fun" movie will pop up in there but it's still the anomaly. They announced a doubling of the nomination slots, not a transfusion of their own tastes.

P.S. I'll be updating my Oscar predictions Sunday since we clearly all need to rethink this year's competition.
*