The headline says it all. Is this some strange move on the Academy’s part to further dilute an already incredibly suspect process? Or, more likely, is this a response to the outcry last year against critical favorites such as “The Dark Knight” and “WALL-E” missing the cut. With 10 nominees, “the bubble” is all but eliminated and it’s a free-for-all.
As exiting Academy president Sid Ganis puts it in the press release (see below), “Having 10 Best Picture nominees is going allow Academy voters to recognize and include some of the fantastic movies that often show up in the other Oscar categories, but have been squeezed out of the race for the top prize.” I understand the desire to widen the net, considering the rather heated scrutiny the organization has received for some of its nominee choices, but is this the answer?
Of course, the way the release puts it, the AMPAS wants to “go back to some of its earlier roots,” back when the 10 nominees was the norm. But that was 70 years ago. Additionally, this raises a whole other slate of questions as it regards competition and Oscar advertising. With consistent awards budget cuts, a move like this could be seen as a breath of fresh air for studios stifled by the competition. Then again, it could open the door for even more campaign dollars. Is a “Star Trek” Best Picture push suddenly viable? But the fact remains, with a widened winner’s circle comes a vacuum where being distinguished is concerned.
The announcement dovetails nicely with a current AMPAS showcase of the 10 Best Picture nominees from 1939, a collective of classic-age cinematic gems including “Gone With the Wind,” “Stagecoach” and “The Wizard of Oz.”
I’ll have to turn this over in my head a bit but it seems the novelty of the BFCA’s 10 Best Picture contenders is the new black. And I guess you can add one more “top 10 list” to the end of year collective: The Academy’s Top 10 Films of 2009.” Incredibly bizarre. What do you think?
(Additionally, Greg Ellwood at HitFix is reporting that the Animated Feature category was on the chopping block but survived after all.)
Full press release:
The 82nd Academy Awards, which will be presented on March 7, 2010, will have 10 feature films vying in the Best Picture category, Academy Motion Picture Arts and Sciences President Sid Ganis announced today (June 24) at a press conference in Beverly Hills.
“After more than six decades, the Academy is returning to some of its earlier roots, when a wider field competed for the top award of the year,” said Ganis. “The final outcome, of course, will be the same – one Best Picture winner – but the race to the finish line will feature 10, not just five, great movies from 2009.”
For more than a decade during the Academy’s earlier years, the Best Picture category welcomed more than five films; for nine years there were 10 nominees. The 16th Academy Awards (1943) was the last year to include a field of that size; “ Casablanca ” was named Best Picture. (In 1931/32, there were eight nominees and in 1934 and 1935 there were 12 nominees.)
Currently, the Academy is presenting a bicoastal screening series showcasing the 10 Best Picture nominees of 1939, arguably one of Hollywood ’s greatest film years. Best Picture nominees of that year include such diverse classics as “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” “Stagecoach,” “The Wizard of Oz” and Best Picture winner “Gone with the Wind.”
“Having 10 Best Picture nominees is going allow Academy voters to recognize and include some of the fantastic movies that often show up in the other Oscar categories, but have been squeezed out of the race for the top prize,” commented Ganis. “I can’t wait to see what that list of ten looks like when the nominees are announced in February.”
The 82nd Academy Awards nominations will be announced on Tuesday, February 2. The Oscar® ceremony honoring films for 2009 will again take place at the Kodak Theatre at Hollywood & Highland Center® in Hollywood , and will be televised live by the ABC Television Network.
Comments
178 responses to “This year’s Best Picture category to feature 10 nominees”
Another step toward the People’s Choice Awards.
This seems like a really weak year to expand Best Picture to 10 films, but I guess that want to use some variation of “10 for ’10” in marketing for the Oscars.
There are years when I think you could probably come up with 10 movies that are solidly worthy of a Best Picture nomination but definitely not every year. It might work better if there’s some sort of fail safe to handle years in which there just aren’t that many great films. They could have a requirement that a film must appear on a certain number of ballots a to be eligible for a Best Picture nomination.
ganonlink1991, I like your idea. I have a feeling if that were the case, a lot of voters would go for five, and a lot would go for ten, with few in between. Giving us 7 or 8 a year.
As people have said, it all depends on what the nominees are, especially which ones don’t correspond w/director so probably are the extra five – whether more acclaimed indie, doc, foreign, or animated; or more movies that made tons of money (esp comedy/action) and can finally give the Oscars great ratings again.
I was looking at the top movies on Metacritic each year, and if the Oscars’ expansion means more of their nominees come from those lists, I’d be happy. For example, last year’s most acclaimed: Wall-E, The Class, Waltz with Bashir, Man on Wire.
Why does everyone always wanna call it a thin year? GOSH! And movies like my sisters keeper being nominated, hehe, there will be at least 10 films good enough, and this allows where the wild things are and up a chance so count me in
I think ten is too many. I would go with 7. One year too late for the Dark Knight. Makes sense from a mainstram point of view. I only wonder if the Oscars will become the Golden Globes with that much choice. This story was a fast ball down the middle for your site Kris.
chuck
Congratultions “UP”!
C’mon!!!! Scorsese, Jackson, Campion, Iñarritu, Eastwood, Marshall, Miyazaki, Mann, Cameron, Almodóvar, Frears and the Coen Brothers are releasing films! This is definately not going to be a weak year at all! I mean, it looks like one of the most exciting years this decade since 2002!!
Also, add Pixar’s latest hit “Up” as well as two buzzed independent films: “The Hurt Locker” and “Precious”. Also, who knows if there’s gonna be an independent gem that will pop out(Juno, Slumdog Millionaire) later this year.
I bet a whole shit load of movies planning on hitting early 2010 get bumped up.
Oh and don’t forget biopics such as Amelia and Julie & Julia and Taking Woodstock, Ang Lee’s latest film.
Kris, don’t sleep on Biutiful, Broken Embraces, Brothers or Where the Wild Things Are. 1 or 2 of those should crack your list of 20… I don’t think Green Zone will release this year.
I think, in the end, the list will simply more closely resemble that of the AFI (for better or worse).
I do hope some foreign language films find their way into the mix, though. I kind of wonder if The Diving Bell And The Butterfly and Pan’s Labyrinth (or The Lives Of Others) would’ve made the cut for 2007 and 2006 under this system.
just wait untiil people start bitching about a movie that didn’t make the top 10!
The crap of all this thing is that there is no more emotion to predict the best pic nominees anymore. With the precursors will be very easy to know the 10 choices. Also the brand “A best picture nominee ” will have the same value of a “BFC nominee”
And the big winners are…
The trades. Film campaigns will be ramped up more than enver to get a shot at the Top 10.
I don’t even want to begin to imagine what the Variety “Bruno” front page ad will look line.
On the plus side, at least we (probably) won’t have to deal with that pesky “orphan director” slot. So that a movie like, say, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly could actually be a Best Pic nom?
This could work out well commercially for the Academy (give the opportunity to nominate blockbusters). That would be cool. It could end up helping the Academy critically (allow them to nominate them gems they wouldn’t before cause they weren’t live action, fictional, drama). But really and what people keep thinking is that this will simply serve to nominate more oscar-bait movies.
When people make their lists about what would be nominated in 2008 we’re saying: TDK, Wall-E, Revolutionary Road, Doubt, Changeling, Gran Torino) Would nominating these movies really boost the legitimacy of the Academy?
Sure I would love to see deserving movies get nominated. The Class, Trouble the Water, The Dark Knight, Wall-E, Wan on Wire, Waltz with Bashir. We’re all hoping that these are the movies that benefit. But they won’t.
Let’s look at 2007 see what that would have looked like?
No Country For Old Men
Micheal Clayton
There Will Be Blood
Atonement
Juno
Ratatouille
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
American Gangster
Sweeney Todd
The Bourne Ultimatum
Actually that would be pretty cool. Do we really think that how it would have stacked up? I’ll post 2005:
The Departed
Babel
The Queen
Letters From Iwo Jima
Little Miss Sunshine
Pan’s Labyrinth
United 93
Blood Diamond
Dreamgirls
Children Of Men
That would also be really cool. maybe this could work out really well.
I wouldn’t be calling Up a lock yet. It is still an animated film. There is no way to really know where mainstream films like TDK or WALL-E fell in the final tallies last year. A lot of pandering and campaigning can happen between now and the end of the year.
Just for fun, here are the films that made all 3 big Top 10 lists last year (NBR, BFCA, and AFI)
Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Frost/Nixon
Milk
WALL-E
The Wrestler
I think that’s a BP lineup that quite a few could have gotten behind (maybe take out Button or F/N). Slumdog Millionaire, BTW, would have most likely made the AFI list had it been filmed in America.
And to those worried about films like “The Hangover” making it well…why not? Critics and audiences have affirmed that it is a good movie, so should the Academy be biased against a genuinely good film if its target audience also happens to cast a wider net then your typical The Readeresque film? Last year I thought Role Models was an excellent movie, and even had higher critics ratings than the likes of Ben Button, Doubt, and The Reader. Jane Lynch should have been in the running for Best Supporting Actress, but because of this cliche genre bias, I knew it had zilch chance. If this is the reason for this expansion, then bravo, Academy.
And for the heck of it, the films that made the 3 big lists in 2007:
No Country for Old Men
Into the Wild
Juno
Michael Clayton
2006:
Babel
Letters from Iwo Jima
Little Miss Sunshine
2005:
Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Good Night and Good Luck
Munich
2004:
Sideways
The Aviator
Collateral
Kinsey
Million Dollar Baby
As you an see, from 2004-2007, only two films (Kinsey, Into the Wild) had ever managed to make all three lists and not get nominated. In 2008 alone, that happened to three films (TDK, WALL-E, and The Wrestler)
HANS, YOU ARE MY HERO!!!!! I loved “Role Models” … Easily more memorable than F/N or the Reader. Jane lynch was amazing! Should have been in the running since she created one of the funniest characters in 2008.
Come on Sugar!
Dumbest fucking move the Academy has ever made…stupid…stupid…stupid…
5 spots are enough….just don’t squander them on crappy movies. this is so incredibly disappointing and stupid. infinitely stupid.
Just heard the news… My first thought was that this dilutes the worth of being a Best Picture nominee, because it will be a lot easier to be nominated. But there is a major plus: it will be a lot harder to win!
Nevertheless, I’m pretty shocked. I’m off to bed to sleep on it.
Best Picture Nominee My Big Fat Greek Wedding
Best Picture Nominee Mamma Mia
brian: Yes, but…Best Picture nominee Quantum of Solace would have made me smile!
You can watch the press conference here with some interesting question from the journalist
http://www.oscars.org/press/pressreleases/2009/20090624.html
It’s pretty damning that a loud majority of the opinions here suggest that there are barely, if at all, 10 great movies released in any given year.
Holy shit I just got home and read THIS? 127 Comments already?
Anyhow, W-T-F? This must be a joke.
InSneider: I don’t think it will either, but until something official drops, I’m keeping it in the mix.
And Biutiful needs a US distributor before I stick it on the charts. Nothing goes from the Contenders section to the charts unless it secures domestic release.
Ever since the announcement today, i think it’s safe to say that the majority of people and pundits have reacted negatively to this.
It’s not that there aren’t enough Best Picture nominees, the problem its that sometimes the WRONG FILM(s) ARE NOMINATED
“It’s pretty damning that a loud majority of the opinions here suggest that there are barely, if at all, 10 great movies released in any given year.”
Eh, everything’s so bloody subjective that you’re lucky if you can get the majority of people to agree on 10 “good” movies in any given year. Regardless, if a bit more attention is drawn to smaller, quality productions that would usually not make the Top 5 cut, we might get a more interesting list than usual. Of course, as I previously stated, we might just get a retread of the Top 10 AFI list.
So, Star Trek getting a BP nod? Won’t this category now become a consolidation prize with so many nominees? Could it be that Best Director now becomes the really coveted award?
Kris,what do you think that this will do to the individual acting categories? Especially a category like, “Best actor in a lead role.” Which is usually the most crowded-with just five films being nominated.
I’m very curious as to how this affects UP and AVATAR’s chances. Also makes me wonder about all the famous snubs, SOME LIKE IT HOT, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, DREAMGIRLS, and how they might have affected the outcome in years past.
Hopefully the films doing well at Cannes, Edingburgh, Sundance will get more of a chance,
Best example so far Jury prize winner at Cannes and contender at Edingburgh at the moment, Fish Tank by Andrea Arnold, raw naturalistic and full of established and new talent. Hopefully the US audiance gets to see it too.
I don’t know what, if anything, will happen with the acting categories. My knee jerk expectation is that they won’t be affected.
Molly Digby, wsually Tapley’s year-in-advance predictions catch the obvious bait and only miss festival darlings. So fest hits already have good chances at Oscar noms.
Plus even before the announcement of 10, fest darlings Precious & Bright Star, and to an extent Hurt Locker, were bandied about as possible Pic noms.
That Lovely Bones poster was shown at CineExpo in Europe and it says 2010 on it because thats when it’ll be released there.
wow.
“I would not be telling you the truth if I said the words ‘The Dark Knight’ did not come up in the discussion.”
-Sid Ganis at the press conference http://www.oscars.org/press/pressreleases/2009/20090624.html
Actually acknowledges several questions popped up here. Perhaps not satisfyingly, but still interesting to watch.
Before I post: Whoops, just noticed that the same link as at the top, but I guess this is for those groveling near the bottom of the comment pile.
FYI, just verified it, The Lovely Bones is indeed December 2009. That poster is for the international release.
We thought we got crap before… I will just have to wait to see what movies show up this time. It just annoys me that most of the movies nominated will lose that prestige sheen of being 1 of the 5.
What list would I rather represent 2008 cinema? This one:
Slumdog Millionaire
Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Or this one:
Slumdog Millionaire
The Dark Knight
Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Wall E
Gran Torino
Doubt
Milk
The Reader
Revolutionary Road (if we were lucky)
The answer: Stop hurting my head and leave it at 5
This definitely shakes up a few things, a year too late, I agree. The only problem so far is that there is almost nothing with a chance of making this Top 10 from the first half of the year, even with critical favorites like “Sugar” and “Sin Nombre,” etc.
“Up” looks very, very, very likely. Though I wouldn’t have wanted the first Pixar Best Picture nominee to make it to the Top 10. Some years they deserved to be in that Top 5.
As much as I loved “Star Trek,” right now, I really wouldn’t want to see it in that list. Should the quality of releases pan out later this year, then maybe. But right now? It’s like we’re talking “Iron Man,” last year. It was a good movie but not Best Picture material.
I think this will make the category even more competitive because more films that would never before have stood a chance at a nomination will be throwing their names into the fold and fighting for a nod. Theres never been any complaining when critics groups put out a top ten and then announce a winner, just think of it the same way.
These ten films are the ten best of the year according to this group the Oscars, and then the members of this group will vote for what they believe to be the best. I guarantee you that with this rule in place, votes will be split and there will be suprising winners as a result. With more possobilities to chose from, the likelyhood that Academy members will vote on their own personal favorite will skyrocket which is a good thing, rather than have members vote on the more popular movie when their favorite is not a choice on the ballot. I guarrantee that had this been in place last year with say The Dark Knight, Wall-e, The Wrestler, Doubt and Gran Torino as the other five, Slumdog Millionaire would not have been as much of a sure thing to win, especially since the older members could have gotten behind Gran Torino, while the Actors may have put their weight behind The Wrestler and all other groups could have came behind Wall-e or The Dark Knight.
With 10 nominees in place, voters would probably be more inclined to vote based on their own oppinion rather than succumb to a Slumdog like sheep mentality. And by doing this, the odds of a better movie or a more unique film winning would be exponentially greater.
Over at my blog The Oscar Hut, the first part of my State of The Race: Best Picture 2009 article is up detailing in alphabetical order the ten movies I think will be nominated, from Avatar to Up. Along with this article there are polls, reviews, predictions, site links and much more. So come check it out and let me know what you think wheter it be a sentence or a three page e-mail positive or negative, whatever it may be, only at The Oscar Hut
http://www.theoscarhut.blogspot.com
tjpratt@bellsouth.net
But, see, isn’t that the question that the Academy is making us ask now with this new shakeup, Joaquin? What exactly IS “Best Picture material”? Is it the genre? Did genre make The Reader deserve a BP nod over The Dark Knight? Is it critical consensus? Commercial consensus? The general “mood” of a picture?
If a film like Star Trek or The Hangover is truly one of the ten best pictures of the year, then why not?
I don’t see why everyone is complaining. I mean didn’t the Reader get a best pic nod over pics like The Wrestler and Wall-E. So it happens every year. I think I would like to see how it turns out before having a tantrum.
Star Trek was fun, but I agree not best pic material. But Maybe smaller films like The Hurt Locker will benefit.
I think a lot of smaller films will benefit just as much as ‘genre’ films and in the end, more great films will get honored. And in the end, its not without precedent.
I just hope Precious has an even bigger shot now.