The 96th Academy Awards

[James Cameron]

The Oscars also need to work on their credibility most of the great filmmakers of the last 20 years have been snubbed because of identity politics and money from streaming sites. So getting Tarantino, Nolan, Aronofsky, and PT Anderson oscars over the next couple is a priority.

Who out of those is getting snubbed? The Whale got loads of nominations last year, as did OUATIH in 2019, Oppenheimer is nominated this year and Licorice Pizza got 3 nominations including best director in 2022. How exactly are they getting snubbed? I think it's the other way around. It's black and brown, asian, female, and queer filmmakers who are consistently snubbed, even after big wins like EEAAO and Moonlight.

[Scott Taylor]

???? He was nominated for best supporting actor.

Yah I hadn't seen his name there on my glance through. Good.

Though - its really quite a thing for the Academy to only pick him and America Ferrera for the Barbie movie. And no nomination for Greta Gertwig. I know the compromises the Academy has to make, but Barbie was the biggest movie of 2023 and it was way more than your usual Hollywood blockbuster fare. That success was due to Gertwig and Robbie, primarily. Fererra had a pretty minor part, and Gosling was kind of a joke role along with all the other Kens.

[Mister Mets]

Yah I hadn't seen his name there on my glance through. Good.

Though - its really quite a thing for the Academy to only pick him and America Ferrera for the Barbie movie. And no nomination for Greta Gertwig. I know the compromises the Academy has to make, but Barbie was the biggest movie of 2023 and it was way more than your usual Hollywood blockbuster fare. That success was due to Gertwig and Robbie, primarily. Fererra had a pretty minor part, and Gosling was kind of a joke role along with all the other Kens.

It's not about compromises, as much as it is that each nomination has to be the first choice of enough members of the academy.

So it's not like anyone votes for a slate of candidates in each field. Everyone has their choice.

It may be that Margot Robbie got the same number of votes as America Ferrera, but that it wasn't enough to crack the Lead Actress category.

I suspect that a problem for Robbie is that there was a better heightened performance in a fantasy comedy about an artificial woman learning to develop her own agency in Poor Things, so the people who would be inclined to vote for a Barbie had that choice instead.

[Tofali]

The Oscars also need to work on their credibility most of the great filmmakers of the last 20 years have been snubbed because of identity politics and money from streaming sites. So getting Tarantino, Nolan, Aronofsky, and PT Anderson oscars over the next couple is a priority.

white ppl practice identity politics as the academy continuously illustrates as a body it has no credibility at all and I'm sure they'll give all those directors you mentioned above their own career-defining oscars for their contribution one way or another..

before "money from streaming sites" there was miramax so long as there ARE ways to lobby and campaign for awards "working on credibility" is a nonsensical endeavour.

[Scott Taylor]

It's not about compromises, as much as it is that each nomination has to be the first choice of enough members of the academy.

So it's not like anyone votes for a slate of candidates in each field. Everyone has their choice.

It may be that Margot Robbie got the same number of votes as America Ferrera, but that it wasn't enough to crack the Lead Actress category.

I suspect that a problem for Robbie is that there was a better heightened performance in a fantasy comedy about an artificial woman learning to develop her own agency in Poor Things, so the people who would be inclined to vote for a Barbie had that choice instead.

I see your point but Poor Things sounds like the dumbest Frankenstein ripoff ever and no one went and saw it. I just think people in the Academy don't have respect for movies like Barbie.

[krazijoe]

I see your point but Poor Things sounds like the dumbest Frankenstein ripoff ever and no one went and saw it. I just think people in the Academy don't have respect for movies like Barbie.

Just because people saw a movie does not make it better than ones that didn't. There have been many years where a Best Picture nominee didn't get a Best Director nominee and this happens to be one of those years...

[James Cameron]

I see your point but Poor Things sounds like the dumbest Frankenstein ripoff ever and no one went and saw it. I just think people in the Academy don't have respect for movies like Barbie.

You should check it out Scott!

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I see your point but Poor Things sounds like the dumbest Frankenstein ripoff ever and no one went and saw it. I just think people in the Academy don't have respect for movies like Barbie.

I think the Academy values little known, but excellently made art house films more than billion dollar box office popcorn movies.

[Scott Taylor]

I think the Academy values little known, but excellently made art house films more than billion dollar box office popcorn movies.

Absolutely. But it always sticks in my craw a little because they are basically rewarding mediocrity. Just because something has a celebrity in it and is made by Hollywood doesn't make it better. Its the same as anything else Hollywood produces, just more avante garde. Meanwhile, non-hollywood produces stuff like this all over the place.

[choptop]

I'm sorry but why is Barbie on the list?

[Nods]

Who out of those is getting snubbed? The Whale got loads of nominations last year, as did OUATIH in 2019, Oppenheimer is nominated this year and Licorice Pizza got 3 nominations including best director in 2022. How exactly are they getting snubbed? I think it's the other way around. It's black and brown, asian, female, and queer filmmakers who are consistently snubbed, even after big wins like EEAAO and Moonlight.

I hate to use the term legitimate vs illegitimate filmmakers but I don't think any other terminology would apply to what the Oscars have become. So let me start off by posing some simple questions for you...looking forward to the next Katharine Bigelow film. Barry Jenkins really hit it out of the park with Moonlight and he's been following that up with massive hit after massive hit. 12 Years a Slave was awesome how many films has McQueen made again.

Every year the Academy decides what film makes them look good. They'll fill out the nomination slots with the legacy filmmakers who are always making great films. But they don't get to win...if they do win in directing or best picture well they have to share the award. Like Tom McCarthy who produced and wrote Spotlight but didn't get the directing award that went to Cuaron...who might have a another movie coming out at some point at some time. Alejandro G Iñárritu great filmmaker...could have had back to back Oscars...where was his last film released again.

In the old days when film makers won Oscars they were allowed to continue to y'know make films. But now the awards are all political...the right looking person needs to win. And the studios might fund a project after they win the Oscar....but it tends to just be the one maybe a second one. They aren't viewed as prestige filmmakers they were just symbols that need to be tucked away and forgotten about. Which is what the Academy has been doing for the last 20 years. The problem now is after a generation of just rewarding good films that din't really inspire anyone and aren't really considered classics the awards have lost it's legitimacy. You are going to see a Wes Anderson film and to you it might be the best film of the year but you also know a part in your brain tells you this isn't going to win an Oscar.

[Zauriel]

I think the Academy values little known, but excellently made art house films more than billion dollar box office popcorn movies.

So that's why Super Mario never made it to the list of nominations.

[skyvolt2000]

The Oscars also need to work on their credibility most of the great filmmakers of the last 20 years have been snubbed because of identity politics and money from streaming sites. So getting Tarantino, Nolan, Aronofsky, and PT Anderson oscars over the next couple is a priority.

It's not so much identity politics....

The issue has been a lot of those POC lead movies were NEVER watched or talked about by the folks doing the nominations. Aside from the Moon Light, The Help, Green Door, 12 Years a Slave and so on. In most cases black misery films.

It's folks questioning how some movies get nominations and haven't come out out.
Box Office bombs getting nominations.
Or films NOBODY heard of (Outside of international ones) getting nominations.

Anatomy of a Fall
The Holdovers
Maestro
Past Lives
Poor Things
The Zone of Interest

I never heard of these films. Or I should say I never saw an ad or poster for these movies where I live.


It's more about MONEY.

Exclude black folks-you are going to get crappy ratings. Which means NEXT year-you are selling ads on tv at a LOWER rate.

Include black folks-you could still get crappy ratings but you are charging MORE for those tv ads.

[useridgoeshere]

I'm sorry but why is Barbie on the list?

It’s in the ratings draw slot that they made when they went to 10 BP nominees. I’m glad they’ve kept the other categories tight.

[Mister Mets]

I hate to use the term legitimate vs illegitimate filmmakers but I don't think any other terminology would apply to what the Oscars have become. So let me start off by posing some simple questions for you...looking forward to the next Katharine Bigelow film. Barry Jenkins really hit it out of the park with Moonlight and he's been following that up with massive hit after massive hit. 12 Years a Slave was awesome how many films has McQueen made again.

Every year the Academy decides what film makes them look good. They'll fill out the nomination slots with the legacy filmmakers who are always making great films. But they don't get to win...if they do win in directing or best picture well they have to share the award. Like Tom McCarthy who produced and wrote Spotlight but didn't get the directing award that went to Cuaron...who might have a another movie coming out at some point at some time. Alejandro G Iñárritu great filmmaker...could have had back to back Oscars...where was his last film released again.

In the old days when film makers won Oscars they were allowed to continue to y'know make films. But now the awards are all political...the right looking person needs to win. And the studios might fund a project after they win the Oscar....but it tends to just be the one maybe a second one. They aren't viewed as prestige filmmakers they were just symbols that need to be tucked away and forgotten about. Which is what the Academy has been doing for the last 20 years. The problem now is after a generation of just rewarding good films that din't really inspire anyone and aren't really considered classics the awards have lost it's legitimacy. You are going to see a Wes Anderson film and to you it might be the best film of the year but you also know a part in your brain tells you this isn't going to win an Oscar.

The Academy doesn't fill out nomination slots. That's not how it works.

Individuals choose their favorite in a category, typically one where they have experience (IE- writers pick screenplays, actors pick the four performances; some people are able to vote in multiple categories like writers who also direct) for the nomination. Then the members of the academy can vote among the nominees for all categories.

Often the winner of Best Picture doesn't win Best Director. But that's happened in the past. In the 1940s, 1950s and 2000s, there were three times each decade when Best Director didn't correspond to Best Picture. It was 50/50 in the 2010s, and that may be more about small sample size and a side effect of expanding the selection of Best Picture nominees.

Looking at resumes of winners, it seems that a big difference is that directors tended to be more prolific. Joseph Mankiewicz won Best Director twice in his first five years, but he also made nine movies in the same time period.

I like older movies and there are plenty of good ones that didn't win and were never seriously in the running because it was the wrong genre. I certainly think Spider-Man: No Way Home should have been nominated for a lot of awards, but recent Best Picture winners have included a sci-fi film about the multiverse, a Korean black comedy thriller and a romance with a sea creature.

It's not so much identity politics....

The issue has been a lot of those POC lead movies were NEVER watched or talked about by the folks doing the nominations. Aside from the Moon Light, The Help, Green Door, 12 Years a Slave and so on. In most cases black misery films.

It's folks questioning how some movies get nominations and haven't come out out.
Box Office bombs getting nominations.
Or films NOBODY heard of (Outside of international ones) getting nominations.

Anatomy of a Fall
The Holdovers
Maestro
Past Lives
Poor Things
The Zone of Interest

I never heard of these films. Or I should say I never saw an ad or poster for these movies where I live.


It's more about MONEY.

Exclude black folks-you are going to get crappy ratings. Which means NEXT year-you are selling ads on tv at a LOWER rate.

Include black folks-you could still get crappy ratings but you are charging MORE for those tv ads.

The relevant question is whether the films are good.

If you haven't heard of it, that may be more about promotion than anything that should matter to an Oscar voter.