“How To Kill The Academy” by The Hollywood Reporter
I have always read Stephen Galloway with respect. Seems like a smart guy. But in the new Hollywood Reporter, his offering suggests that he doesn’t have much of a grasp of what The Academy is or what other similar institutions in this town have suffered over recent years.
He blithely offers “10 Easy Tips” – the first sign that something truly stupid is coming – to remake The Academy. And I have to say, he’s right. Most of these ideas would remake The Academy… into a grotesque parody of itself and its membership.
Let’s start with the three that actually make some sense… all of which have been discussed internally for years. Galloway’s #2. Scrap the museum. Yes. It is a great project, but as with so many other projects, it came along at just the wrong time in the real estate bubble. I don’t know that “scrap” is necessary, since the land can’t be sold at its fair value right now, but table it for 5 years… pretty much. And really, there is no other choice.
Galloway’s #4. Fix the foreign-language rules. A no-brainer. But having countries nominate is neither mind-boggling nor The Problem. Same with the Doc committee and its weird rules. The challenge is to expand opportunity for films to participate and to process the films in a way that makes the number of films consumable for a larger percentage of Academy members.
My personal suggestion is to accept national nominees, but to also have a committee – although committees are always fraught with trouble – that can add another 10 – 20 titles from around the world. Basically, this would be very political, but would serve as a safety net so each country’s industry politics would not rule out films that should be seriously considered. It is ridiculous that countries that produce a handful of films a year have the same number of potential nominees as a country like France or Germany. Perhaps a 3-nominee-per-country maximum is in order.
And in terms of voting, digital delivery – which I will discuss later – is an absolute game changer for both categories.
I don’t claim to have The Answer to these two troublesome processes. but we all know, these things need to be fixed.
Galloway’s #7. Hire the right Oscar host. Really? Is that like “only make the movies that will be great and make money?”
Okay… now on to the destructive stuff.
What really struck me about Galloway’s suggestions is that they are mostly steeped in the stench of inflexible, simplistic, corporate thinking. My overall sense is that he is suggesting treating AMPAS like any brand you would market, trying to maximize the awareness and revenues with no concern whatsoever for the soul of the organization. I’ll explain one by one…
Galloway’s #1. Put an outsider in charge – First, let’s see a single example of where this worked out for an organization like The Academy.
I think the world of Dan Glickman as a person and as a film lover. But he didn’t do anything that advanced MPAA in his 5 years running the organization. An outsider cannot lead a headstrong organization where, ultimately, membership really is in control. You need someone who really understands the players and their interests, not someone who would come in to do what almost every new senior manager does… changes for change’s sake, trying to bring strict order to people who do not want to be told what to do, and an imposition of that person’s personality on the organization.
Janice Min is a perfect example. She didn’t fire everyone from THR… but lots of people were gone when she got there and more were shown the door. And lots of new people are there. It’s working out well… because the place was on the verge of being out of business and needed real change.
The Academy is not a broken mess like THR was. Not even close. AMPAS has grown, but it’s not a different organization at heart than it was from early on. It’s still a country club. Bringing in “a visionary” assures only one thing… that that visionary will enjoy 2 or 3 years of not having to work while collecting on their contract with The Academy.
Galloway’s #3. Refine membership – Utter bullshit. The Academy is about its tradition. it’s about the heritage of the industry. That is the only thing that really makes the organization unique in a world of wannabes. Yes, there are retired cranks who have too much time on their hands and cause trouble. But putting older members out to voting pasture is as ugly a suggestion as I have ever heard. Maybe some of that Academy money can go to putting ice flows in the Santa Monica harbor so we can send older Academy members to their death like proper Vikings. Oy.
Galloway’s 5. Go back to five nominees for best picture – This is one of those “what if we poop our pants” arguments that keeps The Academy from progressing into the future that is there for the organization.
This is the second year of 10 nominees – not 5 drama and 5 comedy/musical like The Idiot Globes – and let’s look at what films have, probably, gotten in that would not have. There is “The Pixar Slot.” Is that embarrassing? Precious and Winter’s Bone. Problem? An Education and 127 Hours? Feeling faint? Inception and District 9. Can you deal with genre? A Serious Man and The Kids Are All Right.
Hey! I’m feeling pretty great about those extra five films being honored with nominations. Last year people screamed about Star Trek and Transformers 2 getting in because The Academy wanted to have a more attractive show. Didn’t happen. Now Galloway is throwing out the threat of Burlesque or The Tourist… which didn’t come close to happening. You know what films were on deck after the 10? Another Year, The Town, Shutter Island… nothing remotely embarrassing as you had in a group of 80something people who are stocking an awards show and living off the fact of the awards mania.
I really liked 5 nominees. And when the idea was first passed by me, I argued against it. But Condon was right and I was wrong. The Academy is honoring more good movies with more variety than ever. Going back to five would be closing ranks against both challenging small films and quality popular films. Why?
6. Extend the president’s term – Why? Please offer an example of what has been blocked by “the mandarins who run the Academy on a daily basis.” This is not like the US presidency, in which major philosophical changes are a part of the job. Every major idea that has been blocked seems, in the end, to be blocked by members/Governors, not the staff. This doesn’t mean that the staff doesn’t have some DMV moments. But more power for the president seems iffy.
Galloway’s 8. Bring in board muscle – Seriously… what do you think The Academy is? Chevron?
The Academy is NOT a major corporation. It is, again, a country club that does some charitable work and takes care of its membership’s legacy, putting on a big show annually that pays for it all. It’s not a business seeking to have an IPO or to grow by 10% annually. That would be the destruction of The Academy.
Maybe Comcast will buy The Academy! Or maybe The Academy can buy Roger Ebert’s thumbs… very powerful.
Galloway’s #9. Regionalize – The Academy is Beverly Hills-centric because the industry is Beverly Hills (and the rest of the west side) centric. The single theater that AFI has, really, anywhere, is lovely. Great theater that would not likely exist without AFI. And why is it in Washington? Because AFI was looking to lobby in Washington and had zero presence. And what of the rest of AFI? Have you noticed that they gutted their film festival in LA? Have you watched them cry for attention with list after list and event after event that is trying to be televised to raise profile and revenue?
“The Academy” has a worldwide presence. AFI has a presence in two cities. Get it?
Galloway’s #10. Be transparent – Maybe the worst idea of all. Take all the challenges of the Oscar season and then make it more unpleasant for everyone who doesn’t win. GREAT idea.
Oscar has become an industry. That’s not really a good thing. But at the core… at The Academy… it’s still about honoring the best work of the year as perceived by the 6000 members of The Academy. If you win, you win. If you lose, you are one of 4 or 9… you are not the 5th place horse in a 5 horse race.
Would I love to know all the numbers? Sure. It would be fun and telling. But thank GOD, I do not. Thank GOD We do not.
It’s an overused reference, but… the humanity…. the humanity…
The one major change that I believe The Academy has to embrace is secure digital delivery for the films in contention. Yes, seeing films on a big screen is the #1 choice. Should be. Will be. But the DVD screeners exist. They aren’t going away. And the ability to deliver all the content on an equal footing, in Hi-Def, is a big step forward. Also, studios can better control what is available when. The cost will be lower. And the foreign and documentary candidates and shorts can all be accessible to voters early and often, again, at little cost. This changes the game. There would still be committees, but watching 18 movies in 2 months in the comfort of your home is a very different time obligation that spending 4 – 6 hours every week for two months going to a screening room. Yes, there will be those who claim to have watched all of their group of films having not done it. But getting the process to be, say 800 Academy members strong, instead of 200, has to be better all around.
What I read into Galloway’s ass-backwards list is the ideas that:
1. The Academy is terribly broken and needs massive change.
2. He would like to see The Academy run more like a corporation than the mom & pop it is.
3. The Academy is overrun with dumb old people
4. He’d like to have more information so we can have Fantasy Oscar games to play.
I disagree – strongly – with all four notions.
The Academy needs to figure out what its TV show should be to keep it fresh as well as to preserve the integrity and history that makes it the #2 TV event of the year after the Super Bowl.
If The Academy becomes more of a corporation, like everything else in this business that has become more of a corporation, it will turn to shit. The Mission Statement of The Academy has never been to maximize The Academy. That is the central drive of all major corporations.
Those “old, dumb people” have given the world decades of the entertainment that keeps the art form of movies alive and thriving. Hollywood has a big problem with ageism as it is. For The Academy to go that way would be a breach of the very idea of the organization. Might as well stop preserving those old people’s work as well. Blech!
And the worst thing that has happened to Oscar – and to much of the Hollywood star system – is overfamiliarization. Too many people with too many uninformed opinions. And more detail would simply create even more uninformed opinions… as a little information is a very dangerous thing. (That’s how we ended up in a $4 trillion war in Iraq.)
The Academy has flaws. Plenty of them. But it’s not a rotting carcass. If worse comes to worse, their TV deal will be cut by 20%. Of course they don’t want that. But it’s not like the show is being canceled. (See: AFI) It’s still a big fat paycheck for the organization.
The first step to killing a golden goose is to forget what the goose is. Don’t try to get the goose to make platinum eggs because gold prices are down this year. Prices fluctuate. Don’t start daydreaming about how great the pate from a golden goose’s liver would be and how you could make as much as you would from 3 years of eggs selling it… because you are left with a dead goose.
Terrible ideas, Stephen. And now, let’s welcome Chris Dodd to Hollywood… and keep our fingers crossed that he understands the landscape of his job a bit better than Galloway understands The Academy.
Well said, particularly your summation of his four points. Fantasy Oscar games indeed. le sigh. I just KNOW that Star Wars was the second choice in 77, despite all evidence pointing to Julia being the film that Annie Hall actually beat in the serious categories. I know it because it feels right! Yay, fantasy oscar, such a fun game, getting to fix all the ‘mistakes’ of the past!
You know, though, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to make voting results available to scholars at the Mary Pickford library 80 years after the fact if all nominees are now deceased. It would allow, and perhaps even promote a little bit of interest in the early days of oscar without stepping on anyone’s toes. However since there are still nominees from the 1930s oscars still around, it wouldn’t do to allow the voting results of their years to become public. and this isn’t to say that a press release of the full results are trumpeted, just that the records would be unsealed for scholarly investigation. I mean, I would LOVE to know the vote margin on 1935’s best picture race, because at the time it was considered the biggest upset (and most egregious oscar travesty yet) that Mutiny beat Informer. Up until the 50s, before the french critics dictated to the poor benighted Americans that CK was da greatest film evah, Informer losing was still considered oscar’s greatest error by the press. :-p
Perhaps Galloway should spend some time at the Linwood Dunn theatre with some of the public screenings/events held there. I didn’t see any journalist covering Anne Coates or Walter Murch’s discussions of the art and craft of editing that they put on in 2009. Or maybe it’d be useful to go to public events at the Samuel Goldwyn, like Film Formats through the ages last year or the annual summer series, the doc series, John Ford’s Upstream etc. The Academy does great things, but if you’re not interested in cinema and are only interested in oscars, you’re missing 2/3 of what the Academy does.
Really need to DP/30 Anne Coates…
she’s a treasure, make it so. 😀
Another good one would be Ned Price, on the changing state of film restoration and the process films now go through to be preserved for both film and digital home entertainment.
A DP30 series covering the heads of restoration/preservation departments at the major studios would be pretty fascinating.
David, sorry, but your friends who are Academy members that found Inception TOO LOUD, are a problem. The future is only going to continue to provide us with films that push the edge and having them judged by out of touch old people, is a huge freaking problem.
If they don’t get sent out to pasture. They need to do their best to get as many young folks into the Academy as soon as possible because the longer the old fogies are aloud to skew this award show older. The sooner it will be a wonderful streaming broadcast on the internet.
I wish the Academy would stop trying to move the oscars sooner — they will never be first because all the critics awards will always come before the oscars, and all the other awards shows will simply move to December — do they not get that. Do not get that they are the Academy Awards? — still the most prestigious award given out — they should move back to march and bring some credibility and integrity back to the oscars — when voters actually have the time to watch all the nominees and choose the right nominees — and not just rubberstamp whatever movie everyone is talking about. Also, how about allowing us viewers to watch the movies nominated, that way we have a vested interest in the show leading to higher ratings — just look at the success of the kings speech, the figher and black swan — I’m so sick of the Academy trying to move the ceremony. This should not be a rushed ceremony, it is about giving out the best — and their insistence on moving it to January, which I hear they are still talking about, is just not going to accomplish that.
the changes that will impact the academy are the changes that are driving the industry itself….
the growth of the international market, for example…. the commodification of the film industry for another…. both of which make Hollywood, more and more, into a provincial outpost.
movies are going the way of the novel… the biggest problem for the Academy…. declining ratings because movies are a smaller and smaller piece of the public’s interests.
it’s one thing to make yourself into a joke when you are actually powerful, but, in the future, the prestige of the Academy will be dependent on the quality of their picks.
This year will hurt them.
What about this year will hurt them, Bob?
No baiting… truly interested in what damaging elements you see.