As enticing as Punxsutawney Phil’s Groundhog Day 2010 prediction might have been (6 more weeks of winter), the more shocking revelation of February 2nd was the Academy’s decision to open up the Best Picture Nominee list to include 10 pictures-Avatar, The Blind Side, District 9, An Education, The Hurt Locker, Inglorious Bastards, Precious, A Serious Man, Up, and Up in the Air. In the following video, Academy President Sid Ganis explains the board’s resolution to “return to a past Academy tradition.”
Yes, 1939 saw the nomination of 10 great films-Dark Victory, Gone with the Wind, Goodbye Mr. Chips, Love Affair, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Ninotchka, Of Mice and Men, Stagecoach, The Wizard of Oz, and Wuthering Heights. As Ganis points out, these movies varied greatly in genre: historical epics, a Western, a comedy, etc. So too do the nominees this year. He continues to defend the Academy’s decision to return to 10 films by citing that in most years from 1931 to 1943, the Academy had included 10 nominees, one year including as many as 12 nominees. Instead of the typical 5 nominees that has become customary, beginning with this 82nd Academy Award season, 10 movies will be up for Best Picture. The Academy “will be casting [its] net wider. In casting that net wider, who knows what will turn up?”
I think the fear in opening the playing field is just that. What’s going to happen? Could this dilute the category? Certainly being 1 of 10 nominees does not hold the exclusivity of being 1 of 5. Nevertheless, as Ganis acknowledges, winning the Best Picture category is “the pinnacle of an honor for a motion picture, and it is a singular honor.”
Over the past few years, I have made a genuine effort to see all Best Picture nominees, but needing to see 10 films is rather daunting. At the same time, opening the category to more films has the potential to entice more viewers to watch the Oscars on March 7th. Casting the net wider for nominees acts as a great opportunity to broaden the audience of people watching the Oscars. Typically, Oscar nods help any movie’s box office. Perhaps opening up the Best Picture category is exactly what the industry needs. With the recent trend of shrinkage (Miramax studios recently closed and many studios, such as Sony, are in the process of shrinking departments), casting a wider net may help the business grow.
Intellectual Perfectual Said:
on February 6, 2010 at 5:43 pm
I certainly agree with you – nominating ten films versus five certainly takes away a level of prestige from the nomination but the prestige in winning still remains constant – its still only one winner. That said, if we’re to watch all the nominated films ten is a bit much – if each film is two hours long who can genuinely be expected to spend twenty hours watching these films?
Fortunately, we’re not the judges so it doesn’t change much for the average viewer but for enthusiasts it certainly doubles the amount of time you’d spend watching nominated films – something which may not be such a bad thing after all given their high level of enthusiasm in the first place.
Ariel Said:
on February 8, 2010 at 6:52 pm
I also agree… the prestige of receiving a nomination for Best Picture is certainly gone as a result of the academy deciding to increase the number of nominees to 10.
One thing in particular that I would like to point out is that out of the 10 films that were nominated for Best Picture, 6 are studio films (non-independent), which is in stark contrast to recent years, where the overwhelming majority of Oscar nominees have been indies. This shows that the increase to 10 will not only bring in a larger audience because there are more nominees, but also because the additional nominees themselves seem to be blockbusters with wider audiences.
However, this is the first year I can remember in ages when so many studio films were critically acclaimed, so perhaps the studios are simply making better films. Yet at the same time, due to the financial crisis that our country is currently in, the future of true independent cinema is bleak and it looks like studio films are going to become more of a mainstay at the Academy Awards, as they were in the golden age of Hollywood from the 1920s to the 1960s.
Jake Said:
on February 9, 2010 at 12:45 pm
I also agree that nominating 10 films decreases the prestige of being nominated, especially considering I don’t even think a lot of films deserved to be nominated when we were still at 5.
It is completely subjective, but lets look at a few recent years….
Did The Reader deserve to be compared to Slumdog Millionaire? Did Finding Neverland or Sideways deserve to be compared to Million Dollar baby?
1939, especially to film historians and critics, was one of the best years for film making in the history of cinema. I don’t think 2010 was anywhere close, let alone a reason to bring back that many nominations. The box office has been hurting for years, especially with internet piracy, and Hollywood just needs more fans now. They need people going to see more movies, they want more competition and higher viewership for the Awards, and distributors want to be able to put “nominated for best picture” on the back of more DVDs.
TA Sattler Said:
on February 12, 2010 at 4:15 pm
So, I think we can unanimously decree that having ten candidates for best picture undermines the importance of the nomination. I know people say this is going to affect marketing, but that seems really insignificant to me personally. I will say that my gut feeling tells me that there were a lot more feature films made in 2010 (5000-7000?) than in past years. With Bollywood and other huge foreign markets booming, maybe its about time we broaden the nominees.
So I’ve heard a few of the arguments now, and I feel like saying that maybe we shouldn’t be so considered with how many films got nominated, as we should focus on the quality of the films themselves. Of the Blockbuster films, the only one I might question is Inglorious Basterds, although I think a part of that stems from me having incredibly high expectations for a Tarantino WW2 film where Brad Pitt (who I like to pretend is impersonating GWBush in this film) leads a hit-team of Jews trying to singlehandedly dismantle the Third Reich. On second thought, I’m fine with a nomination based on having the bestest and most awesomest plot evar (ultimately, art is subjective, ain’t it?).
Jokes aside, I think we just came across a good year, and maybe Best Picture nominations should be based on an aggregate rating system. This way, all the best movies of the year make it in, regardless of how many other amazing movies there are. I know you’re thinking to yourself that discredits the term ‘best’, but no, there’s still ultimately one best film. A movie should be nominated based on its own merit and limiting nominations to some arbitrary number when there are so many different genres and things that can make a movie great just seems wrong.
By the way, I loved Sideways thank you very much!
cagutos Said:
on April 28, 2010 at 7:46 am
In recent years, the novelty of award shows has been on the steady decline and networks/production companies are fighting to raise more interest. Things like adapting the Best Picture category to the 10-picture nominee model is supposed to draw in bigger bases to support the films. More money will obviously be spent by studios wasted on awards campaigning and campaigning for the show itself. Following the comments before me, I agree that ultimately the Academy will just be appointing five joke nominees that don’t stand a chance at winning, which is sad but ultimately the reality… and backstage politics of the Oscars.