Home Forums Movies Jury system for the Oscars

Jury system for the Oscars

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
Created
5 years ago
Last Reply
5 years ago
7
replies
591
views
5
users
3
1
1
  • Jaycee
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 31st, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #89896

    I was surprised to learn that a majority of films are not viewed by Members of the Academy and therefore many nominees are overlooked. So in order for each nominee to have a fair shot, at least for the best picture and acting categories , the Academy should consider selecting a jury like they do for the film festivals. A 12 or 24 ( or even more) randomly selected panel from various branches should be allocated the task of watching the films over a short period of time (ie a week or two), have a discussion/ debate, then vote.

    Reply
    Junk
    Member
    Joined:
    Jul 2nd, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #89898

    No. Because frankly it would suck all the fun out of this love/hate relationship we have with how the Academy currently works.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Zooey the Dreamer
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 12th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #89899

    Actually it’s a very bad idea. Sorry. 

    1. A jury of 12 to 24 (or even more)? It’s the industry’s award and everybody who is a member of the Academy, should be allowed to vote.

    2. A small jury of 12 is just as subjective as the Academy as a whole. Take a look at the Cannes winners over the years. Plenty of bad choices as well.

    3. ABOVE ALL: Who do you think will participate in this jury? Who would take two or three weeks off (because one week is impossible) to participate? I can tell you who – the same voters in the foreign language film committee who are old and out of work. Is this your idea of a jury? It’s impossible practically.

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #89900

    It’s a nice idea, but it’s also a potential waste of time, and  money. It reminds me quite a bit of Groundhog Day, actually. I dont see, anyway out of it. Not unless we get rid of the groundhog. It has to go; the groundhog, being ‘critical mass herding’. Lol. Get rid of the critics, and everyone might be forced into thinking for themselves.

    And That, will never be allowed to happen. 

    jmho   

    ReplyCopy URL
    Scottferguson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #89901

    The Academy had a jury system for all tech categories until the mid 1970s. It led to such wonderful things like Bonnie and Clyde not making the list of finalists (10) in 1967, or The Godfather making the list of finalists for cinematography in 1972.

    If there were no critics, Terrence Malick would never have made Days of Heaven or any of his subsequent films. The King’s Speech would not have been made. Most worthy films of the last 40 days would never have seen the light of day. Wishing for no critics is hoping for nothing but Michael Bay and Adam Sandler movies.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    Scottferguson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #89902

    The Academy had a jury system for all tech categories until the mid 1970s. It led to such wonderful things like Bonnie and Clyde not making the list of finalists (10) in 1967, or The Godfather making the list of finalists for cinematography in 1972.

    If there were no critics, Terrence Malick would never have made Days of Heaven or any of his subsequent films. The King’s Speech would not have been made. Most worthy films of the last 40 days would never have seen the light of day. Wishing for no critics is hoping for nothing but Michael Bay and Adam Sandler movies.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    Scottferguson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #89903

    Jaycee – interesting suggestion. Most people don’t know it, but hte Academy had a jury system (coming up with 10 semi-finalists) for all tech categories until the mid 1970s. It led to such wonderful things like Bonnie and Clyde not making the list  in 1967, or The Godfather for cinematography in 1972.

    They currently have a jury system for visual effects and makeup (I might be forgetting another tech category or two).

    The reason for the preferential nominating system is to make up for the likelihood that most members can’t see all the real contenders. In that way, less seen films that have passion for them can compensate for possibly not being seen by many.     

    On preferring there be no film critics – I can imagine no suggestion that would do greater damage to the possibility of production of films that virtually all of us want to see made. Terrence Malick would never have made Days of Heaven or any of his subsequent films. The King’s Speech would not have been made.  Akira Kurosawa or Ingmar Bergman would be unknown in the US. Most worthy films of the last 50 years would never have seen the light of day. Wishing for no critics is hoping for nothing but Michael Bay and Adam Sandler movies. I can’t imagine any thinking person seriously wishing for such a thing.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Jaycee
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 31st, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #89904

    I think it’s just plain dumb that not all nominated films and especially performances are not being watched. I read that Nicole kidman has been urging members to watch ‘Amour’ – that suggests to me that Emmanuelle Riva’s extraordinary performance will be ignored and regrettably non-competitive with the other four performances which are no where near the calibre of Rivas.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
Reply To: Jury system for the Oscars

You can use BBCodes to format your content.
Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

Similar Topics
darthva... - Oct 21, 2017
Movies
SN - Oct 21, 2017
Movies