The news broke today in sources like EW and Variety that the Best Picture category at the Oscars will up the number of nominees to 10 starting with the 2010 ceremony. The Best Picture category has had five nominees for years, but back in the 1930s and early 1940s, having up to 12 nominees was common. This decision is already sparking debate among film aficionados, and there are certainly pros and cons to each side.
On one side, some people are arguing that doubling the number of nominees devalues the honor of receiving a Best Picture nomination. I can see where these people are coming from, because I would hate to see a few mediocre films sneak in just because there now have to be 10 nominees. And being one of five select films certainly seems to hold more prestige than being one of 10. I think we'll have to see what films get nominated next year before we can really judge the effectiveness of this new method, but I'm choosing to remain optimistic for now.
The last Oscar ceremony was the one with which people were the most vocal about the Academy ignoring commercially successful films. Granted, many commercially successful films are not up to Academy standards, but giving "The Dark Knight" and "WALL-E" the shaft in favor of "The Reader" and "Frost/Nixon," upset critics and fans alike. "The Reader" and "Frost/Nixon" were still critically acclaimed, but they didn't receive the rave reviews "The Dark Knight" and "WALL-E" did. They just happen to fit the mold of the type of film the Academy likes to recognize.
Many people feel "The Dark Knight" and "WALL-E" were left out of the major awards - even though they were recognized by virtually all of the critics awards - purely because their mass popularity automatically made them not prestigious enough for voters. The outcry over the Academy ignoring these films likely made them rethink their methods, so if having 10 nominees means movies like "The Dark Knight" and "WALL-E" will actually get recognized, I think that's a huge plus. Anyone who knows me knows how much I complained when "The Dark Knight" failed to earn a Best Picture nomination this year.
And it means movies like "Up" and "Star Trek," the best reviewed movies of the year so far, might actually have a shot. This also paves the way for more comedies to have a shot at a nomination, like July's "Funny People," which already has strong early buzz. If this practice had been in place two years ago, a critical and audience favorite but small film like "Once" may have had better odds at getting more than just a Best Original Song nomination.
And as First Showing points out, the Best Picture winner has become so predictable in recent years (really, who didn't see the "Slumdog Millionaire" win coming?) that adding more nominees to the mix might make the telecast more interesting. And since most publications and organizations like AFI typically release a list of the top 10 best films of the year at the start of awards season, honoring 10 nominees at the Oscars doesn't seem like that much of a stretch.
So what do you think? Will doubling the number of Best Picture nominees work in Oscar's favor? Or will it devalue the level of prestige associated with receiving a nomination?
Are libraries obsolete? – I think not!
10 years ago
1 comment:
I personally think that there are far too many "Best Picture" nominees now. If you think about it there are now 23 feature length movies every year that hold that acclaim (3 animated, 5 foreign, 5 documentary and 10 main). So if the academy decides to increase the amount of Best Picture nominees it would be in everyone's best interest to eliminate the other categories. Not only would movies such as Wall-E and The Dark Knight have a chance to go up for the ultimate prize but such gems as Waltz With Bashir, Man on Wire and The Class would also be on an even playing field.
It would also make the Oscar telecast significantly shorter and hopefully weed out such undeserving movies as Frost/Nixon and The Reader.
Post a Comment