If you've ever felt that a movie got robbed of a Best Picture Oscar nomination, raise your hand.Oh, that's ... all of you? Well, you can breathe a sigh of relief -- and also brace yourself -- because the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences has just announced that for the 82nd Academy Awards in 2010, it'll be expanding the list of Best Picture nominees to include 10 candidates.
The expansion may come as a surprise, but it certainly isn't unprecedented. Ten Best Picture nominees was the norm from 1932 to 1943 (in 1934 and 1935, in fact, there were 12), but for the ceremony honoring 1944's best movies, the Academy switched that number to the current five.
The reason for this sudden change? "Having 10 best picture nominees is going [to] 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," Academy president Sid Ganis said.
It's hard not to wonder whether the Powers That Be listened to the clamor surrounding last year's nominations, when movies like 'The Dark Knight' and 'WALL-E' were snubbed in favor of more traditional (some might say conservative) Oscar fare like 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button' and 'The Reader.'
But could the expansion prove to be too much of a good thing? The most impressive extended list was probably 1939's, when 'Gone With the Wind,' the eventual winner, was nominated alongside heavyweights like 'Dark Victory,' 'Love Affair,' 'Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,' 'Of Mice and Men,' 'The Wizard of Oz' and 'Wuthering Heights.' But then there was a year like 1943, in which 'Casablanca' beat out not just 'For Whom the Bell Tolls' but also a number of films that have since been lost to history ('The More the Merrier'? 'In Which We Serve'?).
What do you think? Will the expanded nominee list be good for the Academy Awards, making the race more competitive and diverse; or will it reward mediocrity and clutter an already crowded field? Will the ceremony become livelier, featuring movies that people actually saw ... or will it now drag on even longer, past the point of watchability?
-- By Patricia Chui
And the Oscar Winners Are ...
Best Picture
'Slumdog Millionaire'
Fox Searchlight
Best Actor
Sean Penn, 'Milk'
Focus Features
Best Actress
Kate Winslet, 'The Reader'
Weinstein Co.
Best Supporting Actor
Heath Ledger, 'The Dark Knight'
Warner Bros.
Best Supporting Actress
Penelope Cruz, 'Vicky Cristina Barcelona'
Weinstein Co.
Best Director
Danny Boyle, 'Slumdog Millionaire'
Fox Searchlight
Best Animated Picture
'WALL-E'
Pixar
Reader Comments (25)
Roger at 3:37PM on Jun 24th 2009
I absolutely DISPISE this idea. I grew up admiring the Oscars and I've covered the awards as a red carpet reporter many times. All this does is give bragging rights to producers and unfavorably skew the outcome with perhaps only 15% of the vote by academy members. There were much higher quality films in the 30s when this was done. Ready for a "Land of the Lost" or "I Love You, Man" nomination? Yech!!
Ken Hoover at 3:57PM on Jun 24th 2009
I see bigger bucks for the movie industry as a result of this. The past several years it's basically been down to 2 pictures and the others are often overlooked. Adding more pictures could bring some more excitement. Now, how to handle the actual awards ceremony (that's a challenge!) Drop the songs! Drop the long introductions! Every other award show gets done on-time, why can't the Oscars?
taalibba at 4:40PM on Jun 24th 2009
Man the Academy must have gotten even more flak for ignoring WALL-E and The Dark Knight than I thought, and rightly so. But if it worked before it could work again and maybe this will let them actually recognize a (gasp) COMEDY!
Jon at 4:43PM on Jun 24th 2009
Let's be honest, no matter how many of the overlooked movies (Transformers, Iron Man, The Dark Knight, WALL-E) get nominated, they'll never get the award. The Oscars never award the awesome movies people actually watch, they only go to the traditional movies (that i'm sure are well made) that no one goes to see.
Sheila at 9:19PM on Jun 24th 2009
I have been watching the academy awards for many years and have appreciated seeing great performances being honored. But alas as someone has commented, Comedy does not seem to get their fare share of recognition. Doesn't the academy realize that most of us go to the movies to be Entertained, to Laugh, to leave our ho hum drum lives behind and come out of a theater smiling. In these economic times when people are at their lowest in morale a movie that places smiles on people's faces should be acknowledge.
Sheila at 6:39AM on Jun 25th 2009
Roger - If you have been a red carpet reporter, I think by now you would have learned to spell D-E-S-P-I-S-E. Don't you?
J.D. Kramer at 6:56AM on Jun 25th 2009
This is a terrible idea. What most people forget is the catagory for Best Picture is for ATRISTIC MERIT, not for how much money it made at the Box Office. Yes there are the odd years that there are more pictures worthy than nominations, but that is not that often.
J.D. Kramer
luigitoma at 7:20AM on Jun 25th 2009
What a dumb idea, you can't find 5 great movies made in one year in this day and age never mind 10. The crap that hollywood produces in general is not worthy of an academy award. I guess even the hype of that is fading.
Kitsa at 7:40AM on Jun 25th 2009
I recently went to AMC's best picture showcase where all 5 of the best picture nominated films were shown in one day. It was a fun day, but sitting through 10 (TEN!!!!!) in one day?
BTW couldn't understand how CCofBB even got in with that group.
Tom at 7:46AM on Jun 25th 2009
It's seems to me the Academy has a hard time choosing five movies that are any good, in any year lately. Cut it to three .
Uncle Tommy Shales at 8:50AM on Jun 25th 2009
Noel Coward's IN WHICH WE SERVE and George Stevens' THE MORE THE MERRIER have not been "lost to history." What kind of ridiculous statement is that? The movie reporter doesn't know much 'bout movies.
august at 8:07AM on Jun 25th 2009
Oscar just jumped the shark!
john at 8:16AM on Jun 25th 2009
Oscars:
I don't mind10 Nominees but would have like to see more best picture Categories, such as
comedy, horror, ect. and 5 over all Nominees.
jmwallace3 at 8:28AM on Jun 25th 2009
Next it will be 25 nominees for each category and no movie will be without at least one Oscar nomination to publicize -- at which point and Oscar means nothng, just like the Golden Gloves boxing awards every kid who participates ges.
Participation is not the same as actual achievement.
spartinis at 8:31AM on Jun 25th 2009
Great idea, no maybe they''l be enough choices we won't see idiotic movies like scumbag millionaires win , when there are so masny more deserving pictures. What a piece of sh*t that was.
jb at 8:33AM on Jun 25th 2009
It will be difficult to find 10 pictures worthy of an award of any kind. It's been slim pickin's for many years and "just ok" movies are winning oscars.
It would be easier to shimmy the nominations down to just two of the best pictures.....if there are any, and the best of the two "just ok" movies will win.
Robert at 8:32AM on Jun 25th 2009
There hasn't been an Oscar-worthy epic movie for over 10 years. Yes, it does seem to be rewarding mediocrity. Movies certainly do not have the quality writing (OR ACTING) that they had many years ago. I guess that's to be expected when they put them out so fast (it used to take a LOT longer to put out good movies)...now it's all for the $$$ and DVD sales.
Also, maybe it's because nepotism has taken over Hollywood with talentless kids of overrated actors (e.g. Rumour, Scout & Tallulah Willis)...
eric at 8:34AM on Jun 25th 2009
Who actually gives a s*** about the phony oscars and the best this or that. This is just like the actors and actresses themselves--worthless self stimulation and satisfation. They could just as well all go into a bathroom stall and either play with themselves like most of them do anyway, or do each other like many are already doing or look for one of their so-called same sex perversion.....is't just a large CIRCLE JERK anyway.
dave at 8:42AM on Jun 25th 2009
like it makes a big difference, last year a movie was nominated that hadn't been released in all area's of the country. How can anybody truly vote for a movie,when the release date is after the awards show.
sean at 8:52AM on Jun 25th 2009
O' goody,five more bad films.