A Spirited 15 Rounds ...

[Mike S]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...and-major-studio-movies-disney-firing-1133161

I just found this bit so I’m quoting you again.

“Having an inappropriate sense of humor shouldn’t be a crime.”

 

[Princess Leia]

There may be an unexpected twist to the story. Two sources say there is a hope through the talks that Gunn could return in some fashion, even if it’s to develop and direct another Marvel movie. “An end-all verdict hasn’t been issued and conversations with Marvel are still ongoing,” says one source familiar with the proceedings.

That could be interesting

 

[AEfx]

If this category begins in 2019, I will be shocked if Black Panther isn't nominated.

Clearly was created for that purpose. I mean, I have seen several different video packages showing the announcement, and more than one has shown clips from BP in the background. It also was a response to films like "Get Out" - which didn't belong anywhere near the Best Picture category, but they felt they had to because of the cultural impact/approval of it.

It will take me awhile to really articulate my thoughts on it, because it is going to cause some interesting changes - but overall, I think it is a good thing.

 

[AEfx]

I guess the possibility of “Black Panther”, or worse, an animated film , winning best picture is too much for some people.

I am un-officially officially bestowing on you the title of "Forum Eeyore" LOL...

 

[AEfx]

The issue I have with this is that the Academy expanded the nominations from 5 to 9/10 because of popular films like The Dark Knight and Wall-E getting shut out. I’ll have to look at the lists when I get home from work, but I think the only two ‘popular’ films that have been nominated since were Toy Story 3 and American Sniper (Toy Story is the only one I would put in true blockbuster category though).

Do we know how this list is going to be curated? Will the Academy just pick the 5 highest domestic films of the year? Because if that’s the case, then Disney is going to be busy promoting everything.

They haven't stated the criteria for the category yet, but like all the rest - it will be voted on by the members. I actually think it might "curate" itself in that manner.

The more I think about it, the more I think it is a good idea. As you point out, they tried the "expand the category" thing, and it didn't really appreciably help. Let's not forget, it is also about getting better ratings/more stars for the Oscars (in both that case and this change). We went through a few years where the 5 Best Picture nominated films were all little-seen movies that most people hadn't seen - which means less people care about the awards.

It is interesting - "Hollywood journalists" don't seem to be taking this very well. It all sounds like a bunch of kvetching to me. It's worth a try. I think that they mostly object to the fact that this will legitimize Marvel films, etc. - which overall they rally against as "comic book movies" and their dissatisfaction over Hollywood in general more than the actual idea.

 

[Mike S]

They haven't stated the criteria for the category yet, but like all the rest - it will be voted on by the members. I actually think it might "curate" itself in that manner.

The more I think about it, the more I think it is a good idea. As you point out, they tried the "expand the category" thing, and it didn't really appreciably help. Let's not forget, it is also about getting better ratings/more stars for the Oscars (in both that case and this change). We went through a few years where the 5 Best Picture nominated films were all little-seen movies that most people hadn't seen - which means less people care about the awards.

It is interesting - "Hollywood journalists" don't seem to be taking this very well. It all sounds like a bunch of kvetching to me. It's worth a try. I think that they mostly object to the fact that this will legitimize Marvel films, etc. - which overall they rally against as "comic book movies" and their dissatisfaction over Hollywood in general more than the actual idea.

They’re scared. If Marvel movies are “legitimized” it means their artsy fartsy crap that no one sees means even less.

 

[TalkingHead]

I think the Academy finally jumped the shark today.

So can the winner of the "Most Popular" Oscar also win "Best Picture"? Or can a movie only be nominated for one of those awards? If it's one or the other, what's the criteria? For example, would Get Out have been nominated for "Most Popular" if the award had existed last year?

I don't see how this solves anything. It just adds another term to the critical discourse: popular. A movie can be good but not popular, popular but not good, and potentially not good AND popular.

Not to mention, ten Best Picture nominees is already overkill; having another 5-10 for the Most Popular category just shines a light on how mediocre Hollywood filmmaking has become.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I think the Academy finally jumped the shark today.

DO YOU THINK "BLACK PANTHER" SHOULD WIN MOST POPULAR? TEXT "OSCAR" TO 1-888-PLZ-DOIT

So can the winner of the "Most Popular" Oscar also win "Best Picture"? Or can a movie only be nominated for one of those awards?

I think it can be both? Regardless, it comes across as desperate on their part.

having another 5-10 for the Most Popular category just shines a light on how mediocre Hollywood filmmaking has become.

I saw 8 of the 9 Best Picture nominees and 7 of the 10 top grossing domestic releases for 2017. I completely understand why there was zero overlap on those lists. The latter just aren't that good.

 

[Princess Leia]

So can the winner of the "Most Popular" Oscar also win "Best Picture"? Or can a movie only be nominated for one of those awards?

I don't see how this solves anything. It just adds another term to the critical discourse: popular. A movie can be good but not popular, popular but not good, and potentially not good AND popular.

I was literally thinking about both of these things. A film can be both good AND popular, but there are a bunch of Academy members who disagree. I thought that the Academy expanding was going to fix this.

These are the best picture nominees ever since they expanded the number. There have been nominated movies who have been in the Domestic Top 10, but The King’s Speech was the last Best Picture to even crack the top 20, and that was 7 years ago! The most representative year was probably the first year they made the change. There were 2 sci-fi movies and an animated movie.

I’ll be curious to see what voters may think if people in the acting categories are nominated from ‘popular’ nominated films. Example- Michael B. Jordan for Black Panther.

 

[smile]

an award with electrolytes!

 

[the.dreamfinder]

They’re scared. If Marvel movies are “legitimized” it means their artsy fartsy crap that no one sees means even less.

Because, ultimately great art is great art, no matter where it comes from. The pretense of the so called “Oscar bait” gives crap films shots they don’t deserve because they look the part.

This medium is so young and there is so much potential that it’s difficult to grasp.

We can do better.

 

[AEfx]

I was literally thinking about both of these things. A film can be both good AND popular, but there are a bunch of Academy members who disagree. I thought that the Academy expanding was going to fix this.

These are the best picture nominees ever since they expanded the number. There have been nominated movies who have been in the Domestic Top 10, but The King’s Speech was the last movie to even crack the top 20, and that was 7 years ago! The most representative year was probably the first year they made the change. There were 2 sci-fi movies and an animated movie.

That's honestly why I don't get the kvetching/confusion. Clearly, there is more information to come about eligibility. But the idea itself is not bad, and I think folks who are feigning great confusion about the intention beyond that aren't thinking about it practically.

In most cases, it is obvious what category most films will fall under. Sure they may be outliers - and who knows, yes, maybe one film will indeed win both awards one year. I just see this is as sort of a take on what the music industry has always been like.

This is also clearly a response to pressure for the academy to "diversify" - both in terms of identity politics and audience share. It gives them a world where they can give an award to both Moonlight and La-La-Land.

The more I think about it, the more it is a good idea IMO. I mean, when you look back at the entire history of Best Picture winners, the Academy hasn't done so hot in actually picking the creme of the crop, particularly for the winner. When you look at each year and the films that have become representative of their respective eras, compared to who swept awards, they often haven't done a great job, at all. This helps them hedge their bets better, having recognized a wider variety of pictures.

 

[Princess Leia]

That's honestly why I don't get the kvetching/confusion. Clearly, there is more information to come about eligibility. But the idea itself is not bad, and I think folks who are feigning great confusion about the intention beyond that aren't thinking about it practically.

In most cases, it is obvious what category most films will fall under. Sure they may be outliers - and who knows, yes, maybe one film will indeed win both awards one year. I just see this is as sort of a take on what the music industry has always been like.

This is also clearly a response to pressure for the academy to "diversify" - both in terms of identity politics and audience share. It gives them a world where they can give an award to both Moonlight and La-La-Land.

The more I think about it, the more it is a good idea IMO. I mean, when you look back at the entire history of Best Picture winners, the Academy hasn't done so hot in actually picking the creme of the crop, particularly for the winner. When you look at each year and the films that have become representative of their respective eras, compared to who swept awards, they often haven't done a great job, at all. This helps them hedge their bets better, having recognized a wider variety of pictures.

I mostly agree, but I hope this doesn’t take ‘popular’ films out of the running for Best Picture (or at least being nominated for Best Picture)

 

[the.dreamfinder]

 

[AEfx]

I mostly agree, but I hope this doesn’t take ‘popular’ films out of the running for Best Picture (or at least being nominated for Best Picture)

We will find out more, I am sure - but like I said, I see no reason one couldn't be nominated for both.

It is natural for people to look at the negative, though I think that will be the outlier. I can think of many more instances where it would have been beneficial. Say, 2009? As much as I dislike the film, Avatar certainly was overall very influential and deserving of recognition. If this system had been in place, both Avatar and the Hurt Locker would not have necessarily been competing against each other.

I'm honestly kind of shocked about the negative reaction - everyone seems to want the Academy to modernize and change with the industry, but...how dare they change, LOL.

 

[AEfx]

In other "news" today...rumor on the street is that Lucasfilm is exploring splitting up "Episode IX" into two parts...

 

[Rodan75]

In other "news" today...rumor on the street is that Lucasfilm is exploring splitting up "Episode IX" into two parts...

Ugh.

 

[Princess Leia]

We will find out more, I am sure - but like I said, I see no reason one couldn't be nominated for both.

It is natural for people to look at the negative, though I think that will be the outlier. I can think of many more instances where it would have been beneficial. Say, 2009? As much as I dislike the film, Avatar certainly was overall very influential and deserving of recognition. If this system had been in place, both Avatar and the Hurt Locker would not have necessarily been competing against each other.

I'm honestly kind of shocked about the negative reaction - everyone seems to want the Academy to modernize and change with the industry, but...how dare they change, LOL.

2009 was a great year, and I was (and still am) fine with all of those films competing against each other. We just haven’t had a situation like that in a few years. Bring on this blockbuster category, but keep the nominees varied as well.

I think it was you that mentioned Moonlight vs La La Land (if it wasn’t, forgive me), but it would have been possible that LLL wouldn’t have been nominated for Popular Film anyways (ended up 19th on the domestic charts). What were the Top 5?

1. Rogue One
2. Finding Dory
3. Captain America: Civil War
4. The Secret Life of Pets
5. The Jungle Book

Rounding out the top 10 were Deadpool, Zootopia, Batman vs. Superman, Suicide Squad, and Sing. Now, if I was a voter, I would have picked The Jungle Book; partly on story, but mostly on the incredible achievements in animation in that film. What would some elder Academy members say? “My grandkids likes Finding Dory so that’s what I picked.”

There are so many members who just do not care about categories that they don’t want to learn about, and it just frustrates me so much (I think it’s The Hollywood Reporter that publishes secret ballots and the reasons why certain films were picked).

In other "news" today...rumor on the street is that Lucasfilm is exploring splitting up "Episode IX" into two parts...

Everyone repeat after me- “Just because it works for Harry Potter and the Avengers does not mean it will work for another film.” Deathly Hallows needed it- that book had practically zero subplot, but somehow things were still cut despite being split into two films. Avengers is telling two chapters of a story, and while we haven’t watched the second half, the first film made the case for the split due to the character moments and developments.

 

[AEfx]

I think it was you that mentioned Moonlight vs La La Land (if it wasn’t, forgive me), but it would have been possible that LLL wouldn’t have been nominated for Popular Film anyways (ended up 19th on the domestic charts). What were the Top 5?

I don't know how much of it was before awards season or after, but La La Land grossed something way over $400M. I think it certainly fit the "popular" category.

I think you may be laser-focusing on raw profits when looking to define popular. Sure, that is a great indicator, of course - but I think it is pretty clear that they are talking "popular cinema" like "popular music" - people are really hung up on that "popular" word, and I think they are simply making the clear distinction (as audiences do) between the more "fine art" of cinema versus the audience pleasing blockbuster genre films people actually tend to go see.

And I don't honestly think there is anything wrong with that, LOL.

 

[doctornick]

I’ll be curious to see what voters may think if people in the acting categories are nominated from ‘popular’ nominated films. Example- Michael B. Jordan for Black Panther.

This to me is always what gets me. I'd actually have a little respect for the Academy if they at least considered "popular" films for the acting nods. A lot of the people nominated for Best Actor/Actress also take roles in more mainstream films. And you don't have to think a film is a masterpiece to have some of the best acting of the year.

Does anyone think that Brie Larson will be considered for Best Actress for Captain Marvel? If not, is it because she lost some degree of acting skills since being in Room?