Oscar Bait: Difference between revisions
Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.8.6
No edit summary |
(Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.8.6) |
||
Line 22:
Indeed, many of these movies have not done well at the box-office in recent years. The diminishing ratings of recent Oscar telecasts may be related to the dislike the casual viewing public has for the average Oscar-nominated film. Some have argued that it's time the voters started getting back in line with "popular tastes" (though there are a few recent nominees that ''are'' blockbusters). But the people who do the nominations are unlikely to change their criteria, so the status quo continues. In extreme cases, this can lead to an [[Award Snub]]: movies widely accepted to be genuinely deserving but don't appear to tick the correct boxes are overlooked in favor of less-deserving fare which does.
It's worth nothing that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences [https://web.archive.org/web/20100721172303/http://www.moviecitynews.com/Notepad/2009/090624_pr.htm announced] that starting with the 2010 ceremony (honoring the films of 2009) the Best Picture category would be expanded to include ''ten'' nominees instead of the long-traditional five. [https://web.archive.org/web/20120112210336/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=
It's also worth noting recent Best Picture winners like ''The Departed'' and ''No Country For Old Men'', along with the large number of depressing historical dramas (read: Oscar Bait) that don't win. The Academy may be able to detect more blatant bait.
|