Oscars In January?
Let’s assume that Nikki Finke’s source – and she has gotten a lot from the very top of The Academy in the last year – is accurate and that there is talk about Oscar in January.
It’s not crazy at all.
In fact, I have been suggesting that this is a necessary move to bring the ratings up… and I have been saying it for years.
The old thinking that studios needed January and February to get voters to see the films is not only antiquated thinking, but it’s just plain wrong. The studios still pile up December in order to muscle into the race at the last possible moment. The season is backloaded for all the wrong reasons and an earlier nomination and show would force a lot more quality pictures to roll out over months instead of weeks.
An earlier vote – nominations on, say, January 11, show on January 30, the week between the NFL Conference Finals and The Super Bowl – would put enormous pressure on the TV show producers… but I have to say… the show has been dubious… and lacking spontaneity. This could help bring it back. It would also keep the parade of award shows from boring the world to tears before the one award show that matters lands.
Critics have whined for years about too many movies to see for their year end lists and group voting… but these same groups – the sole exception of consequence being National Society of Film Critics – have insisted in voting on awards in early-to-mid December, not even taking until the end of the year. That’s a mess and I have zero sympathy. Besides which, there has not been a single year in the last decade where I had more than 4 movies that mattered in the awards season left to see after Thanksgiving… and usually, i have seen most of the key movies twice by then.
If I can do it, any critic can do it. If critics can do it by December, Academy members, with screeners, can certainly do it by mid-January.
Would this mean that the studios would have to go back to sending out screeners and getting serious about people seeing movies in November and even October? Yes. But they also stopped seriously worrying about piracy a couple of years ago and now more than half the screeners arrive on the doorstep with no signature required. Let’s not bullshit each other.
And keep in mind, folks… this move would cost my business a LOT of money… minimally, tens of thousands… maybe into the six figures, depending on how things played out. I am not an uninterested party. It is in my personal interest for the season to go on forever. And still I say, for the sake of the importance of The Oscar and the power of the award, this is THE move to make.
I believe strongly that 10 movies works. Movies that people love, but aren’t high art, like The Blind Side, deserve a place at the table. And so do movies like The Hurt Locker, which did no business in the summer and still ended up winning. And so does Precious, which lost a lot of steam in December and may have missed the list with 5 nominees. And the 10 nominees were good for business. It made for a competitive feel up until the last few weeks, when it really became a two horse race.
So say there are 10 films… and the industry goes to a hotel to celebrate itself… and it’s off-the-cuff… and campaigning, while still important, becomes a little less of a factor.
You know, people see the movies they want to see. And they vote for the movies they want to vote for. And great, great movies often are not on the Academy list. And some mediocrity is, whether in 5 or 10. In the end, The Academy is 6000 people, not 6000 film critics. It’s not the Ten Commandments down from the mount.
A month is plenty of time for the year to end, for people to pick their favorites (and I would be very happy for voters to only have to pick 5 and the 10 nominees to come from that), and to put on a show in the barn. All the churning doesn’t put asses in the seats in front of TVs… it’s the glamor and the surprise and the celebration of the art form that is commercial cinema. And churning for two months does not a thing to make that more interesting for anyone other than obsessives, media that lives off of the show, and people who somehow can’t get The Hurt Locker in the DVD until February.
But you know what? If Summit had sent out The Hurt Locker in October, like they should have, instead of trying to bank shot it in December and getting very lucky (much as I love the film), every Academy member would have seen it before the end of Thanksgiving. And if that isn’t strategically sufficient, then you don’t have a good enough movie, do you?
i would celebrate the move.
I’m not sure that it wouldn’t be unfair – as the screener ban was and the move to 10 films was, a bit – to do it in July, when studios have already figured out game plans for the season. I know, it seems early to the real world, but even the choice of whether to take Film X to Toronto for the film festival is a major point of strategy that would change substantively for some films if this went through.
But still… I think that the chaos of it… the “come on, let’s get to it, we’re not waiting for fruit to ripen on trees, these are commercial movies and few Academy members have seen half of what’s on the Top 50 of Critics Lists anyway”… is exactly the way to reassert dominance. Oscar dictates. What’s important is when Oscar lands. And why does anyone need more than a month to make up their minds?
FYI, The Super Bowl is quickly becoming a February event so I wouldn’t really try to tie the move of the Oscars to it. If the season moves to 18 games, which it will, the Super Bowl will practically be during the Washington’s Birthday weekend.
In other words, the move of the Oscars would get it AWAY from the super bowl. OK, done rambling on your blog.
Best,
Flint
I don’t think I care much about when the Oscars are, but I would like to point out that there is a significant difference between “movies that mattered in the awards season” and movies that are good, an enormous number of which are shown to critics (at least, critics who don’t go to a lot of festivals) after Thanksgiving.
Except the NFL is talking about getting rid of two pre-season games to get to 18, meaning the Super Bowl would still fall early in February.
If Oscar moves forward, do all the other awards shift forward, too? Are we going to have more awards bestowing best of the year awards before the year is even over?
Wouldn’t this take out any potential “indie” (read: Sundance) films from Oscar love? Sadly, people can’t seem to remember a movie 6-8 months previous so a year would ostensibly kill any “indie” films from getting attention.
Then again the move might get distributors off their asses to put out films in a timely fashion so they can try for Oscar consideration (see: I LOVE YOU, PHILLIP MORRIS).
I think it’s a good idea though, aside from that.
With all due respect, DP, you’re seeing the forest for the trees. Ask yourself this: What’s really healthier for the industry at large? A) The Oscar award show being able to get higher ratings for ABC and a higher license fee by one upping the Golden Globes solely so they can say “FIRST!” (shades of the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary), or B) giving the otherwise soon-to-be-endagered species of quality non-presold/non-comic book/non-tentpole “serious” films designed for audiences over the age of 13 a chance to parlay the heat they get off nominatons into actually garnering an audience that would otherwise ignore them or wait for DVD? Unfortunately, the two are mutually exclusive. Yes, there will be less wasted ad dollars trying to prop up ego-driven Weinstein follies such as “Nine,” but at what cost ultimately?
Everybody knows the Oscar thing is a racket. Nobody is willing to call out the Academy or its cronies over that open secret.
When I see “Academy Award Winner” and “Academy Award Nominee” in any trailer or adverts, I reach for my revolver. Those phrases have become a crutch and it’s not healthy for anyone.
FWIW those “NFL Conference Finals” are Conference Championship games.
“…an earlier nomination and show would force a lot more quality pictures to roll out over months instead of weeks.”
Totally disagree here. If the show moves back, it will just mean that the last minute glut will move back too. Studios will still try to schedule all their awards movies within that narrow optimal window.
And it makes perfect sense. Movies — and especially awards movies — are usually about emotion. The intensity of an emotional, visceral moviegoing experience remains fresh in the mind for only so long. And if all else is equal, a new one will usurp the spotlight from an older one. Timing of release obviously isn’t the only factor at play, but it is *a* factor, and in particular it is one of the few factors that a studio can control.
Personally, I think the move from March to February was good, but I dread a move to January. Why? Primarily because of this very thing: if voters see a great (but not necessarily the best) movie, then fill out their ballots before the experience sinks in a bit, they’re going to be voting before they really have a good sense of how that movie sinks in. Before they can evaluate the movies with some emotional distance and objectivity.
It happens all the time, to any moviegoer, right? You see some movie that’s an amazing experience in the moment but doesn’t hold up over time. Another might not be as powerful in the moment but gets better as it settles.
Less importantly, but still a reason why I think the move would be bad, is that voters will have seen more of the eligible movies if they have an extra month. I don’t buy your arguments to the contrary. It took me till June to catch up with all the 2009 awards season films, and I’m still missing a couple. Maybe most Academy voters will be quicker than me, especially with all the free screeners they get, but the fact remains: the more time voters have to see what’s in contention, the more likely they’ll be voting for the greatest films and not simply the greatest among those with the most successful marketing campaigns.
Finally, I don’t see that this will change how the precursor awards work. When the move from March to February happened, everybody else just moved up a month to compensate, even though that meant announcing award winners in early December in some cases. You think that won’t happen again? You think NBR is going to have the integrity not to move to early November?
I just don’t see an upside.
Agreed, Joe. My point wasn’t to tie Oscar to the Super Bowl, but like the Globes have done in years past, to find a Sunday that is “open” at 5p on the west coast.
Chris – I don’t buy that. The “enormous number” after Thanksgiving is now, what, five? And of course, screenings and releases would adjust to the date. The return to loading December is a choice, not God’s will.
Diet – Firstly, one upping The Globes is not the point. The point is to have a living, breathing, relevant Oscar show… which is not all ego, but the financial engine that allows The Academy to do many millions a year in good deeds for film.
There are two or three movies a year that are driven by Oscar nominations… and like I wrote a moment ago, it’s a choice, not nature. Nine, by the way, is exactly the movie that tried to use nominations as a launch… before it fell apart.
Woo hoo, Landon Donovan! USA still alive and top the group ahead of England. Never would have thought that.
“When I see “Academy Award Winner” and “Academy Award Nominee” in any trailer or adverts, I reach for my revolver.”
God, you’re annoying. And still, stubbornly, wrong.
Also, why are you quoting the Nazis unironically?
Gosh darn it, Jeff. Don’t you understand? It’s a racket, man. It’s a RACKET! The Academy, man, they are out to get us. Chucky understands. He just understands. Why don’t you, man? WHY DON’T YOU?
I fully support Chucky playing with loaded firearms.
Biggie, man, YOU DON’T GET IT MAN! HE NEEDS THOSE GUNS TO PREVENT THE JACK-BOOTED WEINSTEINS FROM RUNNING ROUGHSHOD OVER THE PEOPLE, MAN! Come on, man. Join the revolutuon!
David: Maybe “enormous” is a bit of an exaggeration but I think you forget how many movies you see early because you go to a lot of festivals. Last year in my mini-major market, the following were screened between Thanksgiving and the week before Christmas, and I’d say all of them are either movies that appeared to be in the Oscar race or are terrific: “The Maid,” “Invictus,” “A Single Man,” “Brothers,” “Lovely Bones,” “Port of Call New Orleans,” “The Princess and the Frog,” “Nine,” “The Last Station,” “Orson Welles and Me,” “Sherlock Holmes,” “Avatar,” “Broken Embraces,” “Imaginarium of Dr Parnassus,” “White Ribbon,” “Crazy Heart.” And I’m not including crap (“Everybody’s Fine”) or stuff that screened early for no apparent reason (“Book of Eli”).