The 'Cancel the Oscars' thing is just plain bulls***t. Here's why
Wednesday, October 14, 2020 at 1:15PM
by Juan Carlos
I’ve been itching to discuss this for quite a while now. Ever since the pandemic, the way we watch films has dramatically shifted. Cinemas are now either closed down or maintained with stringent health safety measures. Drive-in cinemas have experienced a resurgence in popularity due to their safer conditions. Meanwhile, we have seen films dropping on streaming platforms, VOD, and virtual cinemas at such a rapid rate that it is quite hard to even keep track of what is being released.
Meanwhile, AMPAS made several changes in its rules to adjust to the current world we are living in. So for the first time, the Academy allowed streaming-only films in as long as there was an intention to exhibit them theatrically (I still don’t know how they would prove intention, but that's another discussion). Also, they have extended the eligibility period: from January 1 to December 31, 2020, it will now extend until February 28, 2021, a move that seemed hastily done months ago and now makes even less sense since majority of the films that were supposed to screen in the last months of the year in cinemas have now moved to late 2021 anyway.
And then this opinion piece from the Washington Post happened.
In an article that adds itself to the chorus of people saying that the Oscars should be cancelled in its entirety, the writer asserts that the Oscars should be cancelled because...
-
The number of Oscar films are bound to drop compared to what Academy voters and Oscar watchers consider in a normal year.
-
It would be harder for people to convene for the Oscars ceremony.
-
Making the Oscars socially distanced would defeat the point. If it is done in Zoom, then glamour is dead.
UGH! Let's get as candid as possible but also substantiate it with facts to debunk these three points, especially the first one.
Point 1. The number of Oscar films are bound to drop compared to what Academy voters and Oscar watchers consider in a normal year.
Sure, the number of films that screened in actual cinemas did drop precipitously. But when we follow the new Academy rules, which allow for streaming, did they? The answer: not really.
While there is no singular record of all the films this year that were released in different platforms (and we are not yet factoring in how many of these films would actually do the paperwork to become "eligible"), we have a healthy number of films that are viable contenders or will at least be eligible.
A number of genre films received considerable buzz this year. Unlike past years when the types of films up for Oscar consideration have been noticeably homogenized to the typical genres -- biopics, dramas, true stories, message movies -- films in other genres have had people talking in 2020: horror (The Invisible Man), action (Tenet), comedy (The King of Staten Island), superhero (Birds of Prey), period comedy (The Personal History of David Copperfield), and sports (The Way Back) and all of those films could be considered legitimate contenders for some category or another this year.
Streamers like Hulu (Palm Springs), Amazon (One Night in Miami, Sound of Metal), Apple TV+ (On the Rocks, Cherry), and Disney+ (Soul) all have placed their bets in the Oscar game too. Meanwhile, Netflix is an animal of its own, with several contenders already under its belt and more to come. Some of them are actual Netflix productions (Da 5 Bloods, I’m Thinking of Ending Things) while other have either migrated from other studios (The Trial of the Chicago 7) or been picked up at festivals from Sundance (The Forty-Year-Old Version), Venice (Pieces of a Woman), or Toronto (Bruised, I Care a Lot). And that's not yet even talking about their future releases: Mank, Hillbilly Elegy, or Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom.
This has also a banner year for independent films. Without the usual ways of growing its audience (for better or for worse), these films have had to find comfort in VOD and virtual cinemas. We've seen an unprecedented dominance of works from directors that are female, POC, or from other minority groups: The Assistant, First Cow, Never Rarely Sometimes Always, Emma, Shirley, and Miss Juneteenth are just some of the early releases directed by female filmmakers that continue to find passionate audiences. Chloé Zhao’s Nomadland, Lee Isaac Chung’s Minari, Andrew Ahn’s Driveways, and Isabel Sandoval’s Lingua Franca are just some of the films this year from Asian filmmakers that have received critical acclaim. A lot of the films already mentioned are from people of color too: Regina King, Spike Lee, Radha Blank, Channing Godfrey Peoples.
Non-English titles could also make a dent in the awards conversation in a perfect world. International Feature submissions from last year that weren't nominated or released in US theaters in 2019 (and are therefore theoretically eligible) include And Then We Danced (Sweden), A White, White Day (Iceland), The Painted Bird (Czech Republic), Beanpole (Russia), The Whistlers (Romania), Those Who Remained (Hungary), and In the Life of Music (Cambodia)s. Netflix has its own stable of non-English language films that have sparked some conversation including The Platform (Spain), I’m No Longer Here (Mexico), Nobody Knows I’m Here (Chile), Cuties (France) and The Life Ahead (Italy) starring legend Sophia Loren. Other buzzy non-English language titles have been picked up by distributors like Neon (Ivory Coast’s Night of the Kings and Mexico’s New Order) and Sony Pictures Classics (Mexico’s I Carry You with Me). Distributors like Film Movement, Kino Lorber, Music Box, and MUBI have their own releases.
While animated features are usually associated with blockbusters, this year does not lack in films that could easily compete in the Animated Feature category. Studios like GKIDS (Ride Your Wave, Children of the Sea), Pixar (Onward, Soul), Netflix (A Whisker Away, Over the Moon), and Apple TV+ (Wolfwalkers) are surely viable contenders for that category.
Documentaries are vital now more than ever, providing works that are simultaneously entertaining and enlightening. Significant releases include Crip Camp (Netflix), Beastie Boys Story (Apple TV+), Rewind (FilmRise), A Thousand Cuts (PBS), Spaceship Earth (Neon), On the Record (HBO Max), Athlete A (Netflix), Welcome to Chechnya (HBO Films), Boys State (A24), All In: The Fight for Democracy (Amazon), Totally Under Control (Neon), Assassins (Greenwich), and The Truffle Hunters (Sony Pictures Classics). Those are just some of a huge crop of documentaries released in 2020 that could be in the conversation for Best Documentary Feature. We have never had a documentary nominated in Best Picture yet so this is also high time given the ever-increasing significance of documentaries to our film and cultural discourse.
The Washington Post's point is nonsense. I have kept a spreadsheet of films released this year (to the best of my abilities) and I can confidently say, we have enough more than enough films in terms of quantity AND quality that would make a completely satisfying roster of Oscar nominees. I’m not just talking about major categories. I’m including the technical categories as well.
Now, let’s talk more numbers. Here are the number of films eligible for the Academy Awards during the past decade and the number of films that were actually nominated per year*:
2010: 248 eligible, 31 nominated (12.50%)
2011: 265 eligible, 32 nominated (12.08%)
2012: 282 eligible, 24 nominated (8.51%)
2013: 289 eligible, 29 nominated (10.03%)
2014: 323 eligible, 32 nominated (9.91%)
2015: 305 eligible, 28 nominated (9.18)
2016: 336 eligible, 35 nominated (10.42%)
2017: 341 eligible, 30 nominated (8.80%)
2018: 347 eligible, 27 nominated (7.78%)
2019: 344 eligible, 27 nominated (7.85%)
* Excluding shorts and specialty categories like Animated Feature, Documentary Feature, and International Feature Film UNLESS they were nominated in other categories too.
Just by looking at those numbers over the past ten years, we can already prove that regardless of the number of films released in a year (which has ranged from 248 to 347), the Academy usually only nominates less than 10% of theem. This goes to show that the number of eligible films does not always matter. If you go back to earlier years, the number of eligible films continues to drop (1980 has 192 eligible films, for example).
The longwinded point is that this argument that “we don’t have enough films” is utter bullshit. Instead of trashing the films we've had this year (yes, that is what articles like this are doing to the wonderful work filmmakers have put out this year), this is the perfect time to advocate for the films that might have been lost in the loud year-end shuffle in a "regular" film year.
Elisabeth Moss in The Invisible Man for Best Actress? Delroy Lindo in Da 5 Bloods for Best Actor? Sonic the Hedgehog for Best Visual Effects? Emma. for Best Costume Design? Women directors in the Directing category? Go ahead and support the films that you love! There's plenty of time to campaign for the films.
If I may point out a silver lining in this, traditional Oscar campaigning generally includes a lot of gatherings and parties, all to get some votes via socializing with voters and insiders. With physical gatherings out of the equation, awards strategists will do most of their campaigning online. Which leads us to the second point to dismantle...
Point 2 - It would be harder for people to convene for the Oscars ceremony.
With the pace of how the United States is handling the pandemic (Trump be damned), it is a realistic projection that we will not be able to have a physical ceremony for the Oscars even with that push to April. But does that mean that they HAVE to cancel the ceremony?
As shown by the 72nd Primetime Emmy Awards, you can do an awards show while maintaining safety protocols. And instead of being an alienating thing for the audience, it can even be a unifying experience to watch an awards show done remotely. To see these craftspeople and even actors in their homes, doing their part in fighting this virus, is actually a touching thing. I personally felt that watching this year’s Emmys and Zendaya celebrate with her family as she won Drama Actress,The Schitt’s Creek cast and crew jubilating back in Canada while wearing masks, Regina King graciously accepting another Emmy while encouraging viewers to vote, The Succession cast cheering for their Series win while in their own homes. We can still have great awards moments like these even if the ceremony is virtual.
Sure, it might be weird (okay, yes it is) but with the terrific film work in 2020, there is simply no reason to not give filmmakers their due. We'll just have to do it in a new way.
And the last one….
Point 3. Making the Oscars socially distanced would defeat the point. If it is done in Zoom, then glamour is dead.
Uhhh….. How to answer this? We celebrate the Oscars because of the movies. We may not always or ever agree with their choices, but the thing that makes people come back to the Oscars is not just the celebrities in gowns, but the shared love for films. Again, I really liked how the Emmys did it. Some of the nominees dressed up, but some of them wore shirts and house clothes. And that is fine. We are living in unusual times, so let this year’s Oscars reflect it. Include the frontliners in the show. Show celebrities in their homes.
It is time to embrace the peculiarity of this film year and let that translate to this year’s nominations. Different doesn't mean bad. We have plentiful reasons to celebrate this year in film and we can surely do that from the safety of our own homes.
So, do your homework, start watching films, and shut this “cancel the Oscars” thing down.
Reader Comments (60)
I for one hope they don’t cancel them and thankfully I don’t expect them to. I’m fully aware that the creation of the Oscars was all for selfish reasons but still I care for the constant that is the yearly ceremony.
I’ve seen a lot of great cinema this year and the years being combined simply because films are showing in different ways other than a packed cinema screening does not mean we are not getting great film. This piece really summed up my outrage feelings and I’m thankful for it
The Oscars have always been a reflection of the greater times we're living in, be it good, bad, or covid. The Post article was whack, but at the same time, I can't outright dismiss anyone who might not be thrilled over seeing the so-called "asterisk Oscars" next April. Like, do we really want Glenn Close winning her longggg overdue Oscar on a Zoom call in her living room in a T-shirt and jeans (like some did at the virtual Emmys)? Thanks, Trump. And thanks, Academy, when "The Wife" was RIGHT THERE! Anyways. Unconventional fare getting its due could be thrilling, but I could see those types of wins being outright disgarded for not being seen widely at all or not being "Oscar-baity" enough. I mean, Elisabeth Moss getting in for "The Invisible Man" would be crazy cool, but in normal years, the Academy denies Toni Collette and Lupita Nyong'o? Bitch, please. At least postponing the show later in 2021 (not canceling it) could get us hopefully to a place where the Oscars can convene in a "new normal," and we can obsess about them in the fashion we always have and the haters can continue to stay pressed and complain/ignore them. No easy answers. Great read, Juan Carlos!
"the thing that makes people come back to the Oscars is not just the celebrities in gowns, but the shared love for films"
You know nothing, Jon Snow. Without the gowns and the live performances no one will give a fuck.
Reading the comments I can only wait for our extinction. It's what we deserve.
I'm seeing a lot of talk about ratings again and I just wish the media hadn't helped people have such a skewered view of it. FACT: all ratings are down for everything. SECONDARY FACT: The Oscars is still the second highest rated event each year, far above other awards shows, and has been for decades
...so what has really changed? Except an increase in the griping?
But yes, if the ceremony is on zoom the ratings will be at an all time low. I just hope someday the US can get their s*** together around COVID like most other countries have.
I'm all for postponing it. Unlike the 2020 Emmys, which had its nominees' shows already in the can, it is very clearly not the case for the movies. The only thing I could see working is everything streamed. An Oscar is an Oscar, some would argue, but I would hate to win an Oscar under these conditions. It's bad enough in a regular year when people argue someone else should have won, how much worse when someone argues you wouldn't have been nominated in a regular year? Awful. I want an Oscar (TM), not an Oscar*.
I agree 100% with what has been said here. I can't think of a single reason to cancel the Oscars. There will be plenty of movies to choose from, and Academy members have always watched these movies in private screening rooms or on their TVs. Only a handful of members see these at festivals, and probably fewer went to see them at movie theaters.
In person? Who cares? Haven't they been watching all the cool stuff that has been zoomed and streamed from different locations? Just look at the DNC state roll call. That had to be more difficult to pull off than sending dresses to nominees and making sure their cameras are turned on.
The Oscars have been so rote and samey for years, and here's a chance to be a little bit different. I'm more excited about these Oscars than I have been in recent memory.
Once again, beautifully written.
madeofstars - I can see your point about winning an Oscar this year (I feel that way about this year's Tonys), but there are *plenty* of movies already in the can. I've been doing the virtual film festival circuit the past few weeks and there are so, so many great films coming our way-- both traditional Oscar contenders and artfilms that would usually be overlooked but might not be this year because of COVID. A dearth of contenders is not a problem we're facing. I'm beginning to think that 2020 was going to be an annus mirabilis for film. (It still may be.) That a few blockbusters got pushed back is not going to make it a subpar year.
Dan Humphrey,
Oh, the truths you speak! It is such a beautiful win, isn't it? And I agree, it has aged beautifully. I also love that she became the second actress to follow a Supporting win with a win in Lead (Streep was first). It took twenty years for Blanchett to become the third, and almost ten years more for Zellweger to become the fourth actress, though I am not much of a fan of the latter. I think Zellweger did good work, but Judy Davis' performance nearly twenty years ago could not/cannot be topped.
What Streep, Lange, and Blanchett did to earn their second Oscars, however, cannot be repeated nor topped by ANYONE. That's that on that. Also, I have to laugh at those that deride Lange's win for "Blue Sky." Such obvious sour grapes... (Than again, who's got the gold, bitch? And the Emmys, and the Tony, and the SAG, and the Globes.)
I mean, the actressing - the sexuality, the sensuality, the mania, the madness, the melancholia, the exuberance... Mz. Lange's serving was and still is fit for the gods.
::shakes head and fiddles with hair like Marilyn Monroe::
Carly xoxo