-
[QUOTE=luprki;5524947]My answer to the original question is- nominate movies that most of us has seen.[/QUOTE]
which is mostly generic cgi and vfx driven movies with a far from intellectual plot or no plot at all. this are the movies that do bank now unless it is Avatar or Star Wars Original Trilogy VFX level, Oscars will never nominate and to an extent, I agree with them.
I think some studios need to have more faith in the audience trough. many people want more than summer flashy cgi dumbed down films entertainment. I think if studios puts out more mainstream movies that can still have VFX but be extremely thoughtful and deep in thinking, more often than they do. it will be a win win for everyone including the Oscars, because the Oscars will nominate these movies and many people would have seen it.
-
[QUOTE=Castle;5525138]which is mostly generic cgi and vfx driven movies with a far from intellectual plot or no plot at all. this are the movies that do bank now unless it is Avatar or Star Wars Original Trilogy VFX level, Oscars will never nominate and to an extent, I agree with them.
I think some studios need to have more faith in the audience trough. many people want more than summer flashy cgi dumbed down films entertainment. I think if studios puts out more mainstream movies that can still have VFX but be extremely thoughtful and deep in thinking, more often than they do. it will be a win win for everyone including the Oscars, because the Oscars will nominate these movies and many people would have seen it.[/QUOTE]
I mean, Joker, Mr. Holmes, the John Wick movies, there's non-CGI stuff a lot of us have seen. I mean, most are still genre and/or action, but still, there are options.
-
[QUOTE=Castle;5525138]which is mostly generic cgi and vfx driven movies with a far from intellectual plot or no plot at all. this are the movies that do bank now unless it is Avatar or Star Wars Original Trilogy VFX level, Oscars will never nominate and to an extent, I agree with them.
I think some studios need to have more faith in the audience trough. many people want more than summer flashy cgi dumbed down films entertainment. I think if studios puts out more mainstream movies that can still have VFX but be extremely thoughtful and deep in thinking, more often than they do. it will be a win win for everyone including the Oscars, because the Oscars will nominate these movies and many people would have seen it.[/QUOTE]
The reason (that the studios) have been given is that those movies don't play well internationally (particularly China). The cultural nuances aren't the same, the best American movies that play well in China are usually those with the simplest plots...
-
[QUOTE=Vakanai;5525592]I mean, Joker, Mr. Holmes, the John Wick movies, there's non-CGI stuff a lot of us have seen. I mean, most are still genre and/or action, but still, there are options.[/QUOTE]
We need more balance of CGI and Plot. Inception, Gravity, Interstellar, Blade Runner, The Matrix, Jurassic Park 1993. Studios need to make more of this films than what we have now and the oscars need to be more inclusive of this films
-
They should let the Muppets host the Oscars. Tell me you wouldn't tune in to watch the Muppets host the Oscars.
-
[QUOTE=Vakanai;5525592]I mean, Joker, Mr. Holmes, the John Wick movies, there's non-CGI stuff a lot of us have seen. I mean, most are still genre and/or action, but still, there are options.[/QUOTE]
The Oscars should have a best action choreography category
-
[QUOTE=Alan2099;5527017]They should let the Muppets host the Oscars. Tell me you wouldn't tune in to watch the Muppets host the Oscars.[/QUOTE]
Hey, that would likely get me on board.
-
The actual Oscars ceremony was doomed to lose viewership every since they started live-casting the On Cinema At The Cinema Oscar Specials.
-
[QUOTE=Castle;5525138]which is mostly generic cgi and vfx driven movies with a far from intellectual plot or no plot at all. this are the movies that do bank now unless it is Avatar or Star Wars Original Trilogy VFX level, Oscars will never nominate and to an extent, I agree with them.
I think some studios need to have more faith in the audience trough. many people want more than summer flashy cgi dumbed down films entertainment. I think if studios puts out more mainstream movies that can still have VFX but be extremely thoughtful and deep in thinking, more often than they do. it will be a win win for everyone including the Oscars, because the Oscars will nominate these movies and many people would have seen it.[/QUOTE]
But the question is not the quality of the movies, it’s how the Oscars can get its rating back.
-
[QUOTE=OopsIdiditagain;5527026]The Oscars should have a best action choreography category[/QUOTE]
I have said for years they need a 'Best Choreography' Oscar, that covers dance/fights/stunts in one. Basically any strong movement based sequence would be eligible.
-
[QUOTE=Castle;5512210]Yes, I was going to say this that they were like the super bowl but I forgot, however the ratings of the last 20 years showed people still watched even when films were not LOTR and Gladiator. There is part of some prestigiousness the Oscars may have lost over the years that many dont care enough to watch anymore.
the Oscars feels more like the People's Choice Awards to many people now, than something with the name that calls itself The Academy of motions of arts and sciences,....you know Academic, meaning, something intellectual, extremely artistic, deep, objective thinking. Perhaps the oscars should take their own narrative back of why they once mattered.[/QUOTE]
So the pandemic is conquered, the theatres are back to full speed, and the first film you want to see on the big screen is [I]Nomadland[/I]? That's what I thought.
The Oscars have become about a recognizable genre of film - pompous, middlebrow, wearing its Hollywood politics on its sleeve - that is no one's idea of great motion picture entertainment. Worse, Oscar-bait films tend to be poor in spectacle and don't lose much when transferred to the video streaming format. This should have been the year for the Oscar-bait film, the year of direct-to-video; if people were going to go nuts over that sort of thing, no time like the present. The Oscars have ignored the films that people liked for too long and instead given us a steady diet of what some people in the industry think we [I]ought[/I] to like instead. That bait and switch is finally catching up with them.
-
[QUOTE=luprki;5529366]But the question is not the quality of the movies, it’s how the Oscars can get its rating back.[/QUOTE]
And I think the answer is that it is impossible for the Oscars to get their ratings back without lowering the quality of the movies they nominate.
[QUOTE=SteveGus;5531270]So the pandemic is conquered, the theatres are back to full speed, and the first film you want to see on the big screen is [I]Nomadland[/I]? That's what I thought.[/QUOTE]
The first movie I saw on the big screen after the pandemic was Judas and the Black Messiah, which was nominated for Best Picture. Nomadland didnt' get a theater release in my area, but it was one of my most anticipated movies this year. I likely would have had that on my list of first films to see in a theater, so I don't know what to tell you.
-
[QUOTE=Castle;5525138]which is mostly generic cgi and vfx driven movies with a far from intellectual plot or no plot at all. this are the movies that do bank now unless it is Avatar or Star Wars Original Trilogy VFX level, Oscars will never nominate and to an extent, I agree with them.
I think some studios need to have more faith in the audience trough. many people want more than summer flashy cgi dumbed down films entertainment. I think if studios puts out more mainstream movies that can still have VFX but be extremely thoughtful and deep in thinking, more often than they do. it will be a win win for everyone including the Oscars, because the Oscars will nominate these movies and many people would have seen it.[/QUOTE]
I think the problem here is a two-edged sword.
The question was: what could the Oscars do to get their ratings higher?
The answer is: Nominate movies most people care about.
It's not the artistic answer. It's not going to happen. But it is the answer to the question that was asked.
-
[QUOTE=Powerboy;5532883]I think the problem here is a two-edged sword.
The question was: what could the Oscars do to get their ratings higher?
[B]The answer is: Nominate movies most people care about.
It's not the artistic answer.[/B] It's not going to happen. But it is the answer to the question that was asked.[/QUOTE]
ALL OF THIS!!! The problem is the films that are more worthy of artistic appreciation are (by and large, minus some exceptions) just not the ones audiences gravitate to; the bulk of audiences like big explosions, CGI, superheroes, fantasy, light-on-depth romances, easy humour and a good scare. And in an age where cinema isn't as financially accessible, fewer films are watched, and therefore people spend their money on the films you 'should see on the big screen' OR the ones that provide them the best escapism from their mundane lives. And those are generally the loud, explosive, (relatively depthless) action flicks and romantic comedies.
The Oscars aren't and shouldn't be about which film is seen the most. They have an award for that, it's called the box office. So lets keep the art with the Oscars and the box-office with the action films, slasher movies and romantic comedies.
-
[QUOTE=Powerboy;5532883]I think the problem here is a two-edged sword.
The question was: what could the Oscars do to get their ratings higher?
The answer is: Nominate movies most people care about.
It's not the artistic answer. It's not going to happen. But it is the answer to the question that was asked.[/QUOTE]
This was the point of my first snarky answer to the thread. The Oscar's should be an insiders club focused on excellence in filmmaking, and not some kind of weird amalgamation of what's good and what's popular. The event loses credibility in both categories.