10 things Hollywood learned this Oscar Season
Most important: It pays to stay humble
A memorable moment from the 82nd Oscars: stars Jeremy Renner, Brian Geraghty and Anthony Mackie hug while director and producer Kathryn Bigelow goes to speak after "The Hurt Locker" wins best picture with screenwriter and co-producer Mark Boal at her side.
Another awards season has come to a close and boy has it been a long one. As we soak in "The Hurt Locker's" David vs. Goliath win over "Avatar," one of the more disjointed award shows in recent memory and Sandra Bullock's ascension to Oscar-winning actress, it's time to circle back and review some of the major lessons learned over the past seven months on the awards circuit.
Awards bait movies can make money without a Best Picture nod or big wins
It's a rich tradition for studio heads to publicly complain about the expenses of an Oscar campaign and how unprofitable prestige pictures can be. Well, like NBA or MLB owners who are at fault for overpaying players within their sport's own rules, studio moguls have long had themselves to blame for overspending when a campaign is out of reach or indulging in extravagant budgets for pictures that could be made at half the price. With the new economic realities hitting Hollywood over the past two years, that's all starting to change. Now, Sony Pictures Classics has worked this successful model for years on a small scale, but this year five other contenders played the game and all came way with the green if not gold. Paramount's "Up in the Air" got snubbed at the Oscars, but the $25 million dramedy is already in the black with $153 million worldwide. Fox Searchlight's "Crazy Heart" was made for an amazing $7 million and should pass the $30 million mark this week. Lionsgate's "Precious" was picked up for around $10 million and has grossed $47 million before hitting DVD. Apparition had two profitable pick ups with both "Bright Star" and "The Young Victoria" which grossed $4 million and $10 million respectively. Now, there are always going to be some roadkill along the way ("Nine," "Invictus," "Amelia," "The Lovely Bones") but you can still succeed with prestige if you do it right.
Negative campaigning didn't work
Whether it was anti-Semitic criticisms of "A Serious Man," the Nicolas Chartier E-mail scandal or gossipy criticism of Mo'Nique's refusal to devote her life to an Oscar campaign, negative tactics didn't really work this year. In fact, they may have backfired across the board. As this year's Best Supporting Actress winner noted, "I want to thank the Academy for making it about the performance and not about the politics." Let's hope everyone -- including the media -- got the message.
The Foreign Language Film category needs to be overhauled
This year's Foreign Language Film winner "The Secret in their Eyes" is not a bad movie. It's a fine commercial thriller with some nice leading performances. That said, it is not anywhere in the same class of "The White Ribbon" or "A Prophet," two of the other nominees in the category (and this comes from a sever critic of Michael Haneke's Cannes winner). Another Awards commentator replied to my criticism of the Academy's choice with a response of "Why is this bad? The Academy responded to the film that spoke to them." The problem is that under the current rules members have to see every single nominee to vote in the category. That excludes a huge majority of the academy who just don't have the time in their schedules to see all five films. More ridiculous is that the Academy lets members vote for numerous other awards without "checking" to see if they saw all the potential nominees. Did every member see all the Make Up or Costume nominees? Not likely, but they still get to vote on all of them. So, because such a small and older membership with more free time on their hands (sorry, truth hurts) are determining an award the entire globe looks to as an important recognition. Worse, this is the second year in a row a film not worthy of winning has walked away with the statue after "Departures" stunner in 2009. Either the Academy needs to let all members vote or they need to require all films be released in the calendar year so more members can prove they have seen them in theaters and thereby increase the voting pool. If not, history will sadly repeat itself.
The extended season was way too extended
Another solution needs to be found around how to schedule the season around the Winter Olympics which disrupt TV schedules in February every four years. With the season already well underway by early October, pushing the nominees announcement to the first week of February and the show to March 7 resulted in a race that went in strange fits and starts and an awards show that would have been anti-climactic at the end if not for the ludicrous "Lockergate" E-mail affair. It also forced numerous companies to spend more in the last month than necessary for contenders that never had a chance (shine that spotlight on Harvey Weinstein and his push for "Inglourious Basterds").
Meryl Streep's losses are beginning to become an industry embarrassment
Hollywood, you have a problem. Everyone in this town loves Meryl Streep. She is one of our nation's greatest living artists and over the past five years has made a slew of money for almost every studio in town. However, something has to be done about this cycle of Academy Award losses over the past 25 years (and really Steve and Alec, did you need to rub it in her face again?). Unfortunately, this pundit has no magic solution. It appears Streep can withdraw her name from consideration in future years, but since we all know she more than deserves a third Oscar (or four) why should she? Luckily, for her sake, she has no films on the immediate agenda for 2010 which means a well-needed break from the Oscar game. But at some point, this town needs to stop taking Streep for granted and give her the third Academy Award she so justly deserves.
You don't need the traditional trades to wage an effective campaign
In yet another sign the town's trade papers like Variety and The Hollywood Reporter are in big trouble, awards campaigners proved you didn't have to spend millions in print to get the word out. Who benefited? Online outlets, TV, outdoor and old fashioned publicity. On a side note, today's departure of longtime critic Todd McCarthy is evidence of how poorly Variety fared during what is usually its most lucrative time of the year.
Summit is now a true awards season player...if it want to be
Like Lionsgate's improbable run for "Crash" in 2006, Summit Entertainment has gone from the "Twilight" studio to Academy Award winning distributor in an incredibly short time span. The question is whether the studio wants to continue down this road. It's a huge boost to their creative reputation with films such as "Locker" and "Ghost Writer" in the fold, but unlike other companies they haven't perfected the profitability formula for limited releases (although "Writer's" fate is yet to be determined). Moreover, while they have worked hard to try and acquire acclaimed features (most notably "The Kids Are All Right" at this year's Sundance Film Festival), they have been mostly passed over for the Focus Features, Fox Searchlights and even Weintstein Company's of the industry. After "Locker's" big win that should change considerably.
The ten nominee system worked - big time
While ratings were actually down 3% among 18-34 year olds (which might have more to do with the older-skewing Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin as hosts than anything else), the ten nominee innovation proved it could recognize the best Hollywood has to offer by including both critical and audience favorites. And after a year where the studios who were still fighting off the effects of the 2008 Writer's Guild strike, the chances are much more likely that next year's studio crop will provide more true contenders. That doesn't mean flicks like "Star Trek" will break through anytime soon, but certainly more hits along the line of "District 9" and "Avatar" which is only a good thing.
Festivals matter more than ever
Hollywood has always used the Venice, Telluride and/or Toronto Film Festivals in the early fall to launch the campaigns of potential Oscar players, but this year proved that with a ten nominee Best Picture protocol, the Sundance and Cannes Film Festival are as possibly just as crucial. Out of the nominees for best picture only "Avatar," "The Blind Side," "Up" and "District 9" didn't premiere at one of the world's major festivals. And that doesn't count a slew of other players including "The Messenger," "The Cove," "The White Ribbon," "A Prophet," "A Single Man" and "The Last Station" that all debuted on the festival circuit.
It's all about the work, but you better be humble
The industry has a long tradition of rewarding the "good" guys (or gals) in this town. There are many talented "jerks" (and they know who they are) both in front of and behind the camera, but unless they create some sort of masterpiece they'll need to do some serious public rehabilitation before the Academy throws them any love (Anyone remember how friendly Tommy Lee Jones and Philip Seymour Hoffman were for short periods of time?). That's one of the main reasons Sandra Bullock's Best Actress win for the commercial melodrama "The Blind Side" was so easy for the Academy to swallow. However, the last thing this town likes is anyone who thinks they are entitled to anything let alone become increasingly arrogant of their success. So, with no disrespect to "Precious" screenwriter Geoffrey Fletcher, the Academy made a point by turning their nose up at expected winner Jason Reitman of "Up in the Air" fame for Best Adapted Screenplay (and sadly, his classy co-nominee Sheldon Turner suffered because of it). Reitman's loss is one of the main talking points in everyone's post-Oscar chatter Monday. Personally, I always thought Reitman came off a bit like a jerk, but was stunned by the venom I've heard second hand from people in the studio, production and media fields who are overjoyed he lost (and most aren't fans of his father either). Mr. Reitman is a talented guy, but he may need to take a good look in the mirror before making his next move.
Look for more post-Oscar and Indie Spirit Awards analysis in the days to come before we start to focus on good old fashioned summer movie season. Are you looking forward to the prestige break? This pundit certainly is.
News From Our Partners
-
Hear This: “Second Best” reflects a pivotal moment all serious bands face
Watch This: The wages and the fear remain high in William Friedkin’s Sorcerer
Cannes Film Festival: Cannes 2013, Day Nine: James Gray and Joaquin Phoenix reteam for a compelling period drama
-
Weekly Ketchup: Fox and Marvel Both Courting Quicksilver for Comic Blockbusters
Critics Consensus: Fast & Furious 6 is Certified Fresh
Red Carpet Photos with Vin Diesel, Michelle Rodriguez, Gina Carano and More
-
'Star Wars: Episode VI': What's Its Legacy... And Its Future?
'Arrested Development' Season Four: Eight Things To Remember
'Fast & Furious 6': The Reviews Are In!
-
The Telefile - The Most Heinous Person on Reality TV This Week
The Telefile - Does Someone Have to Go?: Work Sucks.... If You Are On This Show
The Telefile - Save Me: Lightning Strikes NBC
-
'Avengers 2′ — Joss Whedon Talks Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch
Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney Trilogy HD Will Let You Hold It on Your Mobile Device
Will Smith Raps 'Fresh Prince' Theme with Jaden, Dances "Carlton" and "Apache" with Alfonso Ribiero
-
Baz Luhrmann Passed on Directing 'Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone'
Someone Just Paid $1.5 Million to Sit Next to Leonardo DiCaprio in Space
Tim Curry Is Fine After Suffering a Massive Stroke: Report
-
What to Watch This Weekend: Orphan Black, Behind the Candelabra, and Arrested Development's Netflix Debut
Do These Four New Arrested Development Clips Get You Excited for the Show's Return? (VIDEO)
Arrested Development Q&A: Alia Shawkat on Maeby, the Return of the Show, and the Canonization of Mitch Hurwitz
-
One Direction's Niall Horan Spends the Night With UK TV Star Louise Thompson
Kelly Clarkson Denies 'American Idol' Judging Gig
Did Justin Bieber Get a Kitten? [Pics]
Get Instant Alerts on Awards Campaign
Latest Posts
-
Working on already infamous 'Gun' is 'so much fun'Wednesday, May 22, 2013
-
But will you care at the end?Wednesday, May 22, 2013
-
J.T. on a 'mission to be continually inspired'Tuesday, May 21, 2013
-
T Bone Burnett spills the beans...a bit earlyMonday, May 20, 2013


Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login Signupnyguy2046
March 9, 2010 at 12:12AM EST Reply to CommentMeryl Streep hasn't won in years because she hasn't had a great role or given a performance worthy of an Oscar, did you ever think of that?
xixi that is not true. Since her last win in 1983, Streep has given many performances that would be considered career best for any other actress: Silkwood, Out of Africa, A Cry in the Dark, Bridges of Madison County, Adaptation, Devil Wears Prada...just to name a few.
March 9, 2010 at 3:56AM EST
March 9, 2010 at 12:21AM EST Reply to Comment"It also forced numerous companies to spend more in the last month than necessary for contenders that never had a chance."
C'mon now, nobody forced anyone to spend any money for a campaign. They did it of their own free will.
I love the extended season. As long as there are nominees, the movie theaters that show smaller films are busy. As soon as the winners are announced, business drops off until next awards season.
Chase
March 9, 2010 at 2:03AM EST Reply to CommentThe Oscars are a joke. It's never about the actor/actress performance or how good a movie is, it's all about politics and about who kissed the proper asses or who shares the same political views.
I stopped watching this crap many years ago... it's all bs.
Carl
March 9, 2010 at 2:27AM EST Reply to CommentWhat's with all the White Ribbon love? Come on... "Power corrupts." That theme was so unoriginal it made the movie dull and the fake black and white was as pretentious as they come. It was clearly designed to be in color and he removed the color in post leaving a lifeless, dull image on a likewise film. I'd bet the other four movies in this category were all better and more deserving the love. And don't get me wrong, I like Haneke, just not this one.
Also it doesn't matter how much Streep has made that town, if she doesn't win, she doesn't win. What happened to being honored for the nomination? You know what no one else in the world has? An Oscar nomination.
Adam
March 9, 2010 at 2:38AM EST Reply to CommentNYguy hit it on the head - Streep hasn't won because the competition has been BETTER than her. I'm sick of hearing people bleat on about how she's 'due' another one, when there are consistently better people nominated on the night (Carey Mulligan, for instance, deserved that award more for what is an outstanding performance). Good for Streep, she's one of Hollywood's most powerful actresses - that doesn't mean the Academy is 'obliged' to give her an Oscar. The Academy isn't 'obliged' to give anyone an Oscar.
Here's the thing with Streep - she should have hands down beaten "Chicago's" Catherine Zeta-Jones in 2003 for "Adaptation." You could also argue she should have won for "Silkwood" and "Out of Africa" which were amazingly competitive years. And collectively, with "Ironweed," "A Cry in the Dark," "The Devil Wears Prada," "Doubt" and "The Bridges of Madison County" she hands down should have won at least another two.
March 9, 2010 at 3:17AM ESTxixi If we were to look at the past decade, it would be inaccurate to say that Streep has lost to better performances. She lost to actresses who campaigned harder: Catherine Zeta Jones in 2003, Kate Winslet in 2009 and Sandra Bullock in 2010.
March 9, 2010 at 4:00AM ESTJonnybon In agreement with Greg and xixi.
March 9, 2010 at 6:26AM ESTTrekscribbler Amen, Adam. I can't tell you how sick I am of elite snobs like most internet writers and/or media critics taking the position that Meryl Streep DESERVES another Oscar. They act like it's an up-or-down vote against every other performance of the year AND Meryl Streep. If everyone doesn't measure up to what Meryl did this year, then this year's class of female artist must be dismissed.
March 9, 2010 at 1:12PM ESTI'll be the first to side with anyone who says some ladies who've received best acting Oscars weren't demonstrative of the class of talent that deserved to win in any given year, but, at the end of the day, it comes down to a majority vote. If these so-called ubersmart intellectuals like gregel can come up with a better system that can also be fair, then let's have a look at it. Otherwise, quit your bitching about how Meryl deserves this, that, and the other.
As I said elsewhere in this talkback, this is HOLLYWOOD, after all. It's all about image. Meryl's constantly recognized as 'the best' ... what more does she need from her peers? If it's more gold, then she'd better get out and campaign more and not take her own reputation for granted next year.
lazygarfield
March 9, 2010 at 7:29AM EST Reply to CommentPhew, so so tired of reading so much about the Oscars and Awards and all that. Come on Greg, lets look forward to just the non-pretentious popcorn flicks coming right up. No more talk of prestige / campaigning / awards potential for atleast 3-4 months.
Also, didn't Up have its premiere at the Cannes film festival?
Koutchboom Yeah thats what I was going to say, since when did up NOT preemiere at Cannes? I guess IMDB is too hard to use these days. In fact that movie had best animated film already in the bag after the first screening at Cannes.
March 9, 2010 at 12:34PM ESTano
March 9, 2010 at 7:48AM EST Reply to Comment"departures" is one of the best movie ever. just because you don't like it doesn't mean that members of the academy got it wrong and 'didn't see the all movies and vote'. uckf fof!
...
March 9, 2010 at 8:07AM EST Reply to CommentThis dude is just full of shit...
Juliana
March 9, 2010 at 10:27AM EST Reply to CommentI've seen The White Ribbon, it's an amazing movie, but The Secret in Their Eyes is just pure astonishment. It's perfect in every single level it should and it's much more captivating than The White Ribbon.That's enough reasons for a film to win the Best Foreign Language category.
And about Streep,she surely deserves more Oscars. But I'd bet that will be hard for her. She's achieved a level of greatness that we've became used to. It isn't likely that she will surprise the audiences, everyone knows she puts on a good performance every single time. That makes it harder for her to get recognized for her talent. Performances that surprise us with their quality are the ones more likely to win, such as Sandra Bullock's, Carey Mulligan's and even Gabourey Sidibe's.
Trekscribbler
March 9, 2010 at 10:32AM EST Reply to CommentI'd have to agree, to some extent, with the dude being full of crap. Festivals only matter to Hollywood. They've never mattered at the box office, and they certainly don't matter to the average movie-goer. Get real.
March 9, 2010 at 10:35AM EST Reply to CommentNot bad, but a few points of contention: how does anyone *deserve* a third Oscar? Sixteen nominations isn't proof enough that she's the best? What would a third win prove? And do we think ten Best Picture nominees really made a difference, when it just came down to Hurt Locker and Avatar which would've been the case with five nominees?
That being said, hear hear for Mo'Nique's politicking comment. Hope they were in fact listening.
dude!!!
March 9, 2010 at 10:42AM EST Reply to Commentwtf??? shitty article as Usual!
J
March 9, 2010 at 10:48AM EST Reply to CommentIn my personal opinion, The Secret of Their Eyes is even better than this year's 10 nominees. I really think you should take a second look and appreciate the 10 minute continuous soccer game shot, the depth of every single character, the mix of genres, and the undeniable pathos handled by the director.
Maybe you just don't like spanish speaking movies, or fail to understand the values of true filmmaking.
Lassie
March 9, 2010 at 11:12AM EST Reply to CommentAdd another - when you go up there, make sure your dress fits. Kathryn Begelow's dress looked like it was sewn on her and no, it didn't make her look slim and pretty, it made her look like she threw that thing in the dryer, it shrank 2 sizes, and she said, oh what the hell and wore it anyway.
lauriemann
March 9, 2010 at 11:27AM EST Reply to CommentI'm a little fascinated by the Jason Reitman-bashing I've been reading since the Academy Awards came out. Pre-Oscars, he'd frequently won Best Adapated Screenplay and you rarely read that he was a problem. So what happened? Is this one of those cases of a pleasant persona covering a jerk? Doesn't the quality of the work matter?
Trekscribbler LOL. This is HOLLYWOOD you're talking about, you know? Image is everything.
March 9, 2010 at 1:04PM ESTWilloghby
March 9, 2010 at 12:12PM EST Reply to CommentOscar this year was a huge freaking joke. The Hurt Locker was just another war movie, one that, for all its "realism", actual soldiers are incredibly critical of. Avatar changed the game entirely - now every studio is rushing to make 3D pictures, and Alice in Wonderland, despite being not that good, opened with $116M, thanks to the good will Avatar built up. The Hurt Locker is going to be the new "How Green Was My Valley".
That said, I do agree - Meryl Streep's losses ARE an industry embarassment. La dee da - we gave Sandra Bullock the "Julia Roberts Memorial Erin Brockavich Award". It would be nice to see Hollywood stop giving Meryl Streep shout-outs (Oprah: "Now you're in a category with Meryl Streep") and actually give her an award.
For all the talk of the ten nominee system making the Oscars more populist, to have a movie that almost no one saw in the theaters take down best picture is a freaking joke. This was a great year for Oscar to get a ton of token gifts out of the way (best director to a woman, best picture to a modern war movie, best actress to Sandra Bullock), but how about it gives out awards to the BEST next year - lest the Oscars start to go the way of the Emmys and give out awards that no one thinks are relevant anymore.
disi The 3D game has been on for a while. How many movies were released in 3D in 2009 before Avatar? How many were already in production? People are talking like Avatar somehow invented the 3D game when that's not the case. Everyone is jumping into that gimmick because it makes movies more profitable, not because Avatar came and showed how it's done.
March 9, 2010 at 1:13PM ESTCameron did create his stereoscopic camera and everything, but were the results really better and easier on the eye than the typical Real-D or whatever process? Was there any significant difference?
OTheHumanity Avatar was a great technical achievement - no question. But was it a great movie? Not even close. Having tired old 1-D characters in a 3-D movie doesn't make it meaningful. It was very pretty, and had some exciting action set-pieces, but that was about it.
March 9, 2010 at 3:02PM ESTDon't however take this as an endorsement of Hurt Locker, though. I can't comment on that as I have not yet seen it.
fishbone_buba
March 9, 2010 at 12:50PM EST Reply to CommentI must respectfully disagree with your assessment of The Secret of Their Eyes. You call it a "commercial thriller" which indicates that you missed the point of the film. As a commercial thriller, it is nothing special. Apprehending the suspect is really just a step in the plot. The purpose of the movie is an examination of passion, sacrifice, and the regret that can arise from both. I recommend you give it another chance with a more open mind. It's a remarkable achievement in my book.
Honestly, I found it to be a much more accomplished film on every level than the 7 Best Picture Nominees I was able to catch so far.
I have yet to see The White Ribbon or A Prophet, and am eager to make the comparison. But, given the hype behind The White Ribbon and its win at Cannes, is there any doubt that it would have won going away if people were not required to see all the entries? Your point is that people shouldn't have to see the movies to vote. That hardly seems fair. They're not voting on the costumes, something that can frequently be assessed via the trailer. They're voting on the entire film. How can this requirement possibly be considered unfair?
Brett I completely agree with you fishbone_buba. Both El Secreto de Sus Ojos and Okuribito were brilliant, brilliant films!
March 10, 2010 at 3:17AM ESTjimmy
March 9, 2010 at 1:13PM EST Reply to Commentok, lets JUST GIVE IT TO MERYL. God you sound like an idiot. If you are going to participate in the BS butt licking that the Oscars have become, The In STyles, then you play it as it goes. Do you suggest affirmative action, like when Cuba Gooding won the year after Jesse decried lack of black nominees? Whoopie and Cher have damn Oscars. Lets not equivocate them with artistiic merit. They lost that long ago. The fact that anyone actively "campaigns " for the award , immediately destroys its creative value.
Gregory, go shine your free DVD case from the Academy.
max
March 9, 2010 at 1:43PM EST Reply to CommentAlways stuns me how a guy like Gregory Elwood is a movie"expert".
Everything you have said is raw innuendo and shameless proselytizing. Get on your knees and thank Al Gore for inventing the internet. No blogs= no life for you my sad sack friend.
Evil_bob
March 9, 2010 at 2:46PM EST Reply to CommentJust a quick comment to correct you on a point. "UP" did premiere at a major festival. It was the opening film at Cannes three days before it opened in the states.
Trekscribbler Don't let facts confuse the fine folks at Hitfux!
March 9, 2010 at 8:21PM EST