So now that the Oscars – which is nothing more than a tool to promote the movie industry – have 10 best picture nominations, I’m sure there will be more attention to the small but deserving films that can’t afford to spend millions of dollars on Oscar campaigns and ads in Variety, right?
I doubt it.
Blockbuster movies = more fans = more people interested to see if ‘their’ movie wins = higher ratings = more advertising profits.
The 2009 Oscars were probably the best Oscars I’ve ever seen – which is not meant to be as much of an insult as it appears, since usually they’re borderline unwatchable – and I was kind of hoping they wouldn’t tinker with the formula.
Even with the current system of having five nominees, there is always a film or two that is considered a total long shot. I’m going to feel bad when the number of long shots swells to six, seven, or even eight films. Plus, won’t this just “water-down” the accomplishment of being nominated?
I’ve always wanted a system in which the number of nominees changes each year based upon the strength of the season. Slow year? Three nominees. Robust year? Seven nominees. I suppose that system, however, would technically be a betrayal of the title “Best Picture,” which, by definition, is completely relative to the other films that year and makes no assertion to objective quality.
The next Oscar ceremony is scheduled for March 7.