Thursday, September 25, 2008

Oscars, Oscars: Comments on Award Hype and the Status of the Awards Show

Last time at The Vault, I posed the idea that current Oscar hype is unnecessarily overwhelming. Given 24-hour news services, we are inundated with constant updates on the smallest tidbit of information that could affect who is in the lead in the race to secure an Oscar nomination. These updates are often superficial, sometimes including analysis of movies that have not even come out yet. But, as reader Teddy Riley points out in his comment on that post, not all Oscar coverage is necessarily bad. Looking at promising upcoming films is a good way to alert movie audiences of films that might otherwise slip under the radar. There is a fine line, however, between critically parsing a film's components to look for Oscar worthiness and bestowing an Oscar crown just because the plot and the lead actor sound like they fit the Oscar formula. I went out into the world wide web in hopes of finding Oscar predictions that can be examples of the better ways to handle our innate desire to choose the winner of any competition--even if the contest is still five months off. I found what I was looking for at Cinemablend.com, where Katey Rich recently wrote her thoughts about current contenders for the Oscar race in her post "Oscar Prediction Mania 09: Let the Games Begin!" What sounds like another superficial post based on little more than hype is actually a thoughtful, well-put-together look at films who may be Oscar contenders, based on word from previews at film festivals and Ms. Rich's own viewing of films that have actually been released. On top of looking for decent analysis of the Oscar race, I also looked at responses to the recent announcement of who will produce the upcoming 2009 Oscars, namely Laurence Mark (right side of picture) and Bill Condon (left side), who respectively produced and directed Dreamgirls. This announcement has created a flurry of debate in the blogosphere and elsewhere on the state of the Academy Awards Ceremony itself, comments that are summed up nicely in a post entitled "Can the Oscars Be Saved?" by Patrick Goldstein of The Big Picture, a blog that is featured on the Los Angeles Times's website. For ease, I have posted my comments down below, as well as the links where you can find the original article and comment.

"Oscar Prediction Mania 09: Let the Games Begin!" by Katey Rich
Comment:
Ms. Rich, thank you for your detailed thoughts about the Oscar race! I particularly like that you have managed to separate yourself from the superficial hype that many pundits engage in when covering the Academy Awards and instead ground yourself in films that have already been released, either in film festivals or to the general public. After all, if the film has not been released yet (or as you mention, even completed yet!) how can one make a genuine claim about its Oscar chances? On that note, you mentioned that with so many Oscar potential films being released in December, some are bound to "get lost in the shuffle." Do you think that this will lead to a new look at marketing strategies as films try to stand out among the myriad of Oscar hopefuls? For instance, the marketing department at Warner Bros. seems to be pulling out all the stops in their attempts to get The Dark Knight recognized, re-releasing it in January and offering free Blu-ray copies of the film to Academy voters. Do you think other studios will start looking at employing similar tactics, or is this something they are already doing? On a similar note, I'm interested in your prediction that The Dark Knight will increase Oscar viewership during the upcoming Awards ceremony. Do you think there is a chance that the lengthy coverage of Heath Ledger's Oscar chances will burn out potential audience members by the time the Academy Awards rolls around in February 2009? While I agree that people are attracted to rooting for films they've actually seen, there may be a chance that some people will be numb to Ledger Oscar talk since it has been on everyone's minds since his untimely death. It will be interesting to see if The Dark Knight does indeed have the effect you predict. Given how the Oscars have become such a slow, dragged-out affair, I remain doubtful that even The Dark Knight can pull its ratings out of the mire. Many of those who root for its success may be satisfied finding updates online instead of wading through the ceremony itself.

"Can the Oscars Be Saved?" by Patrick Goldstein
Comment:
This is an excellent look at the reactions to the appointment of Mr. Mark and Mr. Condon! It is helpful to have a compilation of the various views on the state of the Academy Awards so that they can be compared easily. You also have some interesting ideas about how to fix the Oscars. I am intrigued about your suggestion to split the technical awards off from the main awards ceremony. This would certainly have the benefit of shortening the main broadcast, as well as reducing it to the awards that viewers care the most about, such as Best Picture and the various Best Acting categories. But conversely, since the technical categories are the ones that people are the least interested in, is there any guarantee that anyone will watch them if they have their own awards show? True, the younger generation may be more attracted to categories having to do with special effects and the like. And, as you suggest, it might be a good place to experiment with new, more effective ways of handling the ceremony. I feel, however, that such an awards ceremony will be much less of a draw than the current incarnation of the Academy Awards and would not be a successful endeavor. Indeed, I am not sure that there is any real way to fix the Oscars. It is already a dragged-out affair. The skits, musical numbers and tributes do serve to break up the monotony from the slew of presenters handing out the awards. Unfortunately, this also lengthens the proceedings, creating the need for more distracting gimmicks, creating a vicious circle in an attempt to balance length with entertainment. The shortest way to handle the affair would be to cut the films down to just handing out the awards, but this obviously would be an extreme solution. Other than splitting the technical awards off from the show, do you have other suggestions for how to improve the Academy Awards? What changes should be made for the 2009 ceremony? Besides better-staged musical numbers, is there anything else you hope that Mr. Mark and Mr. Condon will bring to the show?

1 comment:

George Thabit said...

Thank you for your well thought out and coherent post covering the upcoming Oscars and the issues surrounding this award show. I thought that your lead in paragraph gave good grounding context for the topic of the post, tying in with what you discussed in your last blog entry. However, as a reader I found it a bit tricky to discern what you would be explicitly discussing in this post. Perhaps separating this declaration into another paragraph would have been effective, stating something along the lines of “in this post, I went out into the world…”

In your first comment, I felt that the degree of your questioning of the author demonstrated your careful scrutiny of their opinions. It shows thoughtfulness and engagement that is much needed in the blogosphere. However, as a reader of your blog post, I found myself feeling that perhaps it would be better to choose a few questions to pose and then rather than ask the others, directly offer your opinions about those questions’ subject matter. I think however that the subject matter of this post is excellent, as it is tricky for both viewers and movie studios to deal with a current movie starring a deceased actor. Regarding Heath Ledger, I personally believe that his performance in The Dark Knight is deserving of an Oscar regardless of his untimely death.

I completely agree with you in your second post that the Oscars have become “a slow, dragged-out affair.” Something needs to be done about this. I was thinking that instead of providing coverage in real time of the events, perhaps showing a condensed version of the event would retain viewership. I for one do not even bother watching the Oscars because of how slow they move. I personally believe that if the show’s producers are ultimately looking to maximize viewership for their sponsors, as you also intimated, they are not doing so effectively by lengthening the production with additional gimmicky performances and the like. I also agree with you that the prospect of splitting the technical awards and the main awards into would likely result in a disproportionate viewer interest in the main awards. Despite the significance of technical performance in movies, the average movie watcher is unaware and frankly unapreciative of the degree of production put into producing a film.

I want to thank you for your post, as it provides insight into an area that I am unfamiliar with. I happen to be one of those “average movie watchers” who is unaware of industry news and developments. Your blog keeps me informed of elements in the film world that I would not otherwise think about.

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.