Academy Awards: back to 5 Best Picture nominees?

[oscarnerdjulief]

There's an article on Hollywood Reporter stating that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences may go back to 5 Best Picture nominees instead of having a system where between 5 and 10 can be considered.  (They have to get 5% of first place votes.)

Anybody have an opinion?  Critics worry that some of the more interesting choices would be eliminated if there were just five... like maybe Selma or Whiplash would miss the cut.

I read that they were doing this because ratings for the ceremony were lower, but I don't see how changing to the original 5 would do anything to help that problem.

If you don't watch the show, what would make you watch?  I predicted Oscars the whole year, it's a passion of mine, and even I thought the show was dull and went to bed early.  For me, it's dumb to say, "Oh, nominate Mockingjay and the kids will watch" or "Nominate American Sniper and people will flock to the awards."  I don't think that's the Academy demographic no matter what---do you?

[ECB]

Mar 4, 2015 14:15:24 GMT -5 oscarnerdjulief said:

 Critics worry that some of the more interesting choices would be eliminated if there were just five... like maybe Selma or Whiplash would miss the cut.

My take on it, though, is that these movies probably don't have a chance to win, then.  I'm not a super avid Oscars watcher or fan, but I felt a bit overwhelmed when they increased the # of movies in this category.  It seemed like overkill. 

But if even being "nominated for best picture" means something, then maybe they should keep it.

I don't really care one way or the other - I jsut remember my initial reaction when I realized there were so many.

[evans]

Mar 4, 2015 14:15:24 GMT -5 oscarnerdjulief said:

If you don't watch the show, what would make you watch?  I predicted Oscars the whole year, it's a passion of mine, and even I thought the show was dull and went to bed early.  For me, it's dumb to say, "Oh, nominate Mockingjay and the kids will watch" or "Nominate American Sniper and people will flock to the awards."  I don't think that's the Academy demographic no matter what---do you?

I don't really have an opinion on weather there are 5 or 10 so I'll just address the second part.
What would make me watch? Not going 3.75 hours on a Sunday. I used to watch the Oscars but unless a film or actress/actor I really like is nominated - I just watch the fashion now.
I get bored. The best stuff shows up on youtube so why bother staying up late when I can just watch it the next day?

[IIOY]

Mar 4, 2015 14:34:08 GMT -5 ECB said:

Mar 4, 2015 14:15:24 GMT -5 oscarnerdjulief said:

 Critics worry that some of the more interesting choices would be eliminated if there were just five... like maybe Selma or Whiplash would miss the cut.

My take on it, though, is that these movies probably don't have a chance to win, then.  I'm not a super avid Oscars watcher or fan, but I felt a bit overwhelmed when they increased the # of movies in this category.  It seemed like overkill. 

But if even being "nominated for best picture" means something, then maybe they should keep it.

I don't really care one way or the other - I jsut remember my initial reaction when I realized there were so many.

ITA.  I don't think people take 10 nominations seriously, and nothing has changed with the larger number of nominations.  We all know who the front-runners are, and those are the ones discussed ad nauseum in the lead up.  Expanding the category to 10 was a bizarre Hail Mary.

However, I also agree that returning to the original five would not make a dent in ratings.

Personally, I didn't watch this year because there was no suspense as to who would win.  The show is too long and too awkward/not funny enough to keep my attention.

[dr.girlfriend]

LOL, my first thought was that my Best Picture-themed menu was a LOT easier when there were only 5 nominees. :-) That said, though, I like the 10, and the ability to spotlight smaller films (like Whiplash, which I still think was one of the best films of the year). I like that they don't always do all ten if they don't think there are films worthy of that.

I think if they want more people to watch they need to 1.) Keep interesting and talented hosts (god, James Franco was just horrible), 2.) Move the time slot from so late on a Sunday night and 3.) Cut all the freaking fat from the ceremony -- just have excerpts of the musical numbers and move the In Memorium to online only or something. I'm sorry, but Lady Gaga's tribute to Sound of Music, although awesome, was NOT a necessary part of the ceremony. I also think they should limit it to one speaker per award, but that's mostly because I cringe every time I see that someone else is expecting to speak and won't get a chance because the first person is blathering on.

[oscarnerdjulief]

Sorry this is disjointed.

I think the problem is that in theory the change from 5 to 6-10 should lead to more popular or diverse choices, but so often it seems like more of the same. There are just some exciting or innovative movies that the Academy won't like no matter what. I was disappointed when Nightcrawler and Gone Girl missed out. Others were upset that blockbusters like Guardians of the Galaxy missed out. Also, critics praised some edgier fare like Under the Skin and Babadook that were never really on the radar.

It just seems like the Academy only goes for the typical Oscar bait. No female protagonists in sight----Gillian Flynn and Nick Hornby were snubbed for "Gone Girl" and "Wild." Best Actor nominees are almost always from best picture nominees; Best Actress less so. (Felicity was the only one this year, I think.)

I would not be for eliminating In Memorium. They definitely could limit it to someone singing during the photo display. There was no point in a Jennifer Hudson song after the pictures were done. That and the Sound of the Music bogged down the show when there were still 7 or so big categories to reveal.

I've already read two books that are being adapted into movies: "The Revenant" and "Brooklyn." They were really good, and "Me and Earl and the Dying Girl" won at Sundance and seems to be a good YA read.

Preview for next year: Here are some names in the mix for Best Actress: Cate Blanchett in "Carol," Meryl Streep in "Ricki and the Flash" (sigh), Jennifer Lawrence in "Joy," Marion Cotillard in "Macbeth," Lily Tomlin in "Grandma," and Saoirse Ronan in "Brooklyn." I'm very excited about the last.

There are also new Tarantino and Spielberg films this year.