Home Forums Movies We need preferential voting in every category

We need preferential voting in every category

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 46 total)
Created
7 months ago
Last Reply
7 months ago
45
( +4 hidden )
replies
4449
views
30
users
Teridax
8
Joe Burns
3
JustGuy89
3
  • Sagand
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 13th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202508167

    Preferential voting wouldn’t even lead to upsets. It would lead to bigger sweeps in the techs and smaller chances of actors upsetting.

    Let’s take some of the examples in the opening post. The theory on Marisa Tomei on why she won is that she was the only American in the field. So once transfers have taken place one of the British vets takes it.

    Again the theory for Adrien Brody is former winners split the vote so once one of them is eliminated in third place (probably Nicholson) the majority of their vote moves to Day-Lewis and the upset is eliminated.

    The techs would be even worse. We see every year how important it is to be a Best Picture nominee to give you the visibility to get to a plurality. If to win a tech you need to get to a majority it makes it harder for the upset not easier.

    i.e. take editing which came down to Dunkirk vs Baby Driver. If 100% of voters watched Dunkirk (as a BP nominee) and only 80% watched Baby Driver. That gives Dunkirk a 20% head start in the race to 50%. (In the plurality system some of the 20% would have voted for SoW and some 3B so it an easier deficit to overcome.)

    If you want more upsets you want to push for people to only to be able to vote on their own crafts.

    ReplyCopy URL
    aahoto
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202508185

    I have a better idea: the Oscars should just move their ceremony up to January. Nominations voting starts 3rd January. Closes 10th. Voting opens 17th January. Closes 24th. Ceremony between the 30th-31st. They should be the first awards group to present, although the Globes and Critics Choice would still make it in before them, but BAFTA and SAG would be later. And voting would be at similar times so we truly wouldn’t know who wins. Now that would be exciting.

    ReplyCopy URL
    rumor_crasher
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 20th, 2018
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202508189

    I still think this was the most long-awaited award ever.  No pun intended 😉

    LD

    ReplyCopy URL
    nicholas27
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 22nd, 2017
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202508587

    I have a better idea: the Oscars should just move their ceremony up to January. Nominations voting starts 3rd January. Closes 10th. Voting opens 17th January. Closes 24th. Ceremony between the 30th-31st. They should be the first awards group to present, although the Globes and Critics Choice would still make it in before them, but BAFTA and SAG would be later. And voting would be at similar times so we truly wouldn’t know who wins. Now that would be exciting.

    Bad idea for Oscars in January. Releases for multiple contenders across the country happen in January. I wasn’t able to see about 1/3 of the contenders until February. If the Oscars were in January, viewership would tank, and some movies would get unfairly snubbed because of lack of time to gain momentum and/or attention.

    ReplyCopy URL
    aahoto
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202508860

    I have a better idea: the Oscars should just move their ceremony up to January. Nominations voting starts 3rd January. Closes 10th. Voting opens 17th January. Closes 24th. Ceremony between the 30th-31st. They should be the first awards group to present, although the Globes and Critics Choice would still make it in before them, but BAFTA and SAG would be later. And voting would be at similar times so we truly wouldn’t know who wins. Now that would be exciting.

    Bad idea for Oscars in January. Releases for multiple contenders across the country happen in January. I wasn’t able to see about 1/3 of the contenders until February. If the Oscars were in January, viewership would tank, and some movies would get unfairly snubbed because of lack of time to gain momentum and/or attention.

    Viewership already has tanked. And as much as it’s great for the public to be able to see as many contenders as possible, it matters more that the voters do. This will force the voting body to be more involved and proactive in seeing films. I don’t think my idea will work exactly, but the Oscars need to find a way of being one of the first to present. It’s just too predictable now.

    ReplyCopy URL
    RobertPius
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 22nd, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509322

    I think if you had preferential voting in Supporting Actress this year you could have seen Lesly Manville win. The Janney fans would put her first and Metcalf fifth and vice versa. Manville would probably been everyone’s number 2 vote and could have won.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Teridax
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 12th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509358

    @aahoto Predictably is not a bad thing if the winners are deserving. Your idea won’t work, the Oscars should move to early April, if anything, in order for there to be more time to let the contenders process and resonante better. It will not force any voting body to do anything, it will just lead to many worthy contenders at the end of the year getting unfairly snubbed.

    For your Goldderby Film Awards consideration: Isle of Dogs for every category, especially Music Score for Alexandre Desplat!

    ReplyCopy URL
    HotNerdLover
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 9th, 2018
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509514

    A THIRD of the year has passed and it’s the right time to recognise exceptional films from the past year?

    I don’t think so.

    The Oscars definitely need to happen earlier…mid- February at the latest. As it is, there is NO RACE in the categories people want to see (Acting, Director, Picture). My favourite wins will always be in the tech and writing categories, but the main contenders – what’s considered best – has become a bit stale.

    The nominated films everyone was talking about this season were unconventional for the Oscars – and that’s the problem. The Academy Awards have become safe, and as everyone knows – safe is boring.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Zooey the Dreamer
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 12th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509516

    Oscars in mid-February will be a catastrophe. The Oscars need to move back to March. Why? Because right now, every major precursor has lost its personality. They’re turning into a line of precursors copying each other. And this is only happening because voters don’t have enough time to actually watch the films and have their own favorites.

    Take 2003 for example, the last year of late-March Oscars.

    Adrien Brody, Nicole Kidman, Chris Cooper and Catherine Zeta-Jones won the Oscars. Polanski won Directing. Of these five, not a single nominee swept. Daniel Day-Lewis and Jack Nicholson split the best actor victories. Kidman, Zellweger, Moore and Lane each won multiple awards. Cooper had plenty of wins, but once he won the Globe, Christopher Walken took speed, winning SAG and BAFTA. And Zeta-Jones has SAG and BAFTA. Polanski won on the strength of his BAFTA victory, but the Globes picked Scorsese while DGA voted for Marshall.

    And even if not every year is like 2003, the mid-March Oscars had at least two categories, in which precursors did not agree. Just take a look.

    1999 (for movies in 1998) — SAG and Globes disagreed on actor, supporting actor and supporting actress.
    2000 — SAG and Globes disagreed on actress and supporting actor.
    2001 — SAG and Globes disagreed on actor/supporting actor*, supporting actress.
    2002 — SAG and Globes disagreed on actress, supporting actress*, supporting actor.
    2003 — SAG and Globes disagreed on actor, supporting actor and supporting actress.

    Right now, they agree nearly all the time. With one exception per year, and that’s not every year.

    And that’s because SAG voters are submitting their ballots right after the Globes. And yes, they’re copying votes, as they have not seen enough films.

    And in the past, Oscar winners had a fair shot at winning even without winning Globe or SAG. Nearly every year, there was such a case. Not anymore. Right now, an actor wins with BAFTA only once in 6-7 years. This is simply crazy. If the Academy wants a fun and less predictable awards season, move to March and get a preferential ballot in every category.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Teridax
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 12th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509557

    A THIRD of the year has passed and it’s the right time to recognise exceptional films from the past year?

    I don’t think so.

    The Oscars definitely need to happen earlier…mid- February at the latest. As it is, there is NO RACE in the categories people want to see (Acting, Director, Picture). My favourite wins will always be in the tech and writing categories, but the main contenders – what’s considered best – has become a bit stale.

    The nominated films everyone was talking about this season were unconventional for the Oscars – and that’s the problem. The Academy Awards have become safe, and as everyone knows – safe is boring.

    Moonlight was NOT “safe.” The Shape of Water was not “safe.” You are living on another planet if you believe that Get Out is considered “safe.” I know we can all have our own opinions, but the Oscars actually used to be held closer to the end of March and early April. I think that was a lot smarter, since it gave the movies more time to resonate with people, thus making it clearer which films and performances actually were the most significant and memorable.

    Personally, since I mostly (minus Kobe’s win and Dunkirk in general) loved the Oscar winners so much this year, I don’t want them to change anything, except for these things:

    1. Add category for Casting.

    2. Add category for Voice-Over Performance.

    3. Add category for Stunt Coordination.

    4. To expand the number of nominees in Makeup and Hairstyling from 3 to 5.

    Those are literally the ONLY changes the Oscars legitimately need to make. Otherwise, they are doing pretty damn amazing, even if I don’t agree with all of their winners. You can’t demand perfection from anything humans do, including the Oscars, since human beings aren’t perfect.

    For your Goldderby Film Awards consideration: Isle of Dogs for every category, especially Music Score for Alexandre Desplat!

    ReplyCopy URL
    Teridax
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 12th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509566

    Oscars in mid-February will be a catastrophe. The Oscars need to move back to March. Why? Because right now, every major precursor has lost its personality. They’re turning into a line of precursors copying each other. And this is only happening because voters don’t have enough time to actually watch the films and have their own favorites.

    Take 2003 for example, the last year of late-March Oscars.

    Adrien Brody, Nicole Kidman, Chris Cooper and Catherine Zeta-Jones won the Oscars. Polanski won Directing. Of these five, not a single nominee swept. Daniel Day-Lewis and Jack Nicholson split the best actor victories. Kidman, Zellweger, Moore and Lane each won multiple awards. Cooper had plenty of wins, but once he won the Globe, Christopher Walken took speed, winning SAG and BAFTA. And Zeta-Jones has SAG and BAFTA. Polanski won on the strength of his BAFTA victory, but the Globes picked Scorsese while DGA voted for Marshall.

    And even if not every year is like 2003, the mid-March Oscars had at least two categories, in which precursors did not agree. Just take a look.

    1999 (for movies in 1998) — SAG and Globes disagreed on actor, supporting actor and supporting actress.
    2000 — SAG and Globes disagreed on actress and supporting actor.
    2001 — SAG and Globes disagreed on actor/supporting actor*, supporting actress.
    2002 — SAG and Globes disagreed on actress, supporting actress*, supporting actor.
    2003 — SAG and Globes disagreed on actor, supporting actor and supporting actress.

    Right now, they agree nearly all the time. With one exception per year, and that’s not every year.

    And that’s because SAG voters are submitting their ballots right after the Globes. And yes, they’re copying votes, as they have not seen enough films.

    And in the past, Oscar winners had a fair shot at winning even without winning Globe or SAG. Nearly every year, there was such a case. Not anymore. Right now, an actor wins with BAFTA only once in 6-7 years. This is simply crazy. If the Academy wants a fun and less predictable awards season, move to March and get a preferential ballot in every category.

    That year you are mentioning also happens to be one of my least favorite in Oscar history. Day-Lewis got robbed for Gangs of New York. Child rapist and fugitive from justice Polanski won an Oscar and just as tragically received a standing ovation from the Oscars crowd when he won. The Two Towers (my personal favorite Lord of the Rings film) wasn’t even nominated for Director. Kidman won because of her divorce from Cruise, there was controversy she was more supporting in her film anywhere, I think a lot of people objecting to her win for The Hours. Catch Me If You Can only got 2 nominations. What many now would argue was the real best picture of 2002, Spirited Away, only received 1 nomination for Animated Feature which it won. So much shit I hate about that Oscars year! Preferential ballots would totally ruin the Oscars credibility with confusing, irrelevant, and even in some cases outright undeserving winners like they did with the Emmys. I know these things are all subjective, but is anyone going to argue James Spader deserved 3 freaking Emmys, even over James Gandolfini and Hugh Laurie? The Emmys still aren’t perfect now (see the Martindale cameos) but usually their winners at least make more sense on a level of cultural impact like Big Little Lies, The Handmaid’s Tale, and Game of Thrones, whether you like them or not, largely because that stupid preferential ballot isn’t there to prop up undeserving merit-wise but popular industry-wise candidates. Don’t turn the Oscars into another pre-plurality vote Emmys, because while they will have surprises, they will generally be of the worst and most credibility crushing kind.

    Thank you for convincing me that moving the Oscars the end of March might actually be a bad idea. Judging by the solid picks the Oscars have made the past few years, I think they’ve hit a sweet spot in what time of the year their awards are held and would do best to keep it as it is. Ever since The Artist won Picture I feel like they have been gradually growing more open and inclusive to films that tell stories with people and subject matter they are unfamiliar or even maybe uncomfortable with. Some examples include CMBYN winning Adapted Screenplay, 12 Years a Slave and Moonlight winning Picture, the surreal arthouse satire Birdman winning Picture, Director, and even Original Screenplay, Life of Pi winning Director, the fantasy romance The Shape of Water winning Picture and Director, and Get Out winning Original Screenplay. The Oscars have been growing up so fast that to nitpick “predictability” feels like a kind of blasphemy. Film lovers can appreciate the Oscars believable and unique choices while those who want “surprises” regardless of how worthy some sweeps may be (like Ledger for The Dark Knight, Simmons for Whiplash, Day-Lewis for There Will Be Blood, and I would passionately argue Janney for I, Tonya) can go re-watch election night footage of Trump beating Hillary. That nightmare sure was unpredictable for most people. The thing is, just because something is unpredictable doesn’t make it a good thing and just because something is completely predictable does NOT make it a bad thing.

    For your Goldderby Film Awards consideration: Isle of Dogs for every category, especially Music Score for Alexandre Desplat!

    ReplyCopy URL
    I'm New Here, You Don't Know Me
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 22nd, 2015
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509569

    The Two Towers (my personal favorite Lord of the Rings film) wasn’t even nominated for Director.

    The most disgusting directing snub in Oscar’s history. This was his best directorial effort of the three films. he should have flat-out won. The fact that a child rapist won instead is beyond shitty, it’s hypocritical and illogical.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Teridax
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 12th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509586

    The Two Towers (my personal favorite Lord of the Rings film) wasn’t even nominated for Director.

    The most disgusting directing snub in Oscar’s history. This was his best directorial effort of the three films. he should have flat-out won. The fact that a child rapist won instead is beyond shitty, it’s hypocritical and illogical.

    YES!!! The first Lord of the Rings film was bogged down for me by a dull and slightly too corny 1st hour while the final film in the trilogy was hurt by too much over-the-top CGI action with those giant elephants (as well done as the CGI was) and the characters seemed to be having too much fun at times and not in any real danger, like with Gimli and Legolas counting Orcs they killed during the battle of Gondor. Also, the whole Merry (or Pippin, I could never tell the 2 apart) singing to the King who is eating like a pig while his soldiers are getting slaughtered on the battlefield being a commentary for the Iraq War felt so heavy-handed I still roll my eyes every time I see it. Even before I was old enough to realize the social commentary aspect of the scene, just the total lack of nuance of shove-it-in-your-face the leader is a careless douchebag nature of the scene felt really weird. Also, the strawberries and cream line makes me laugh every damn time. I’m going to sound crazy to a lot of people, but I don’t think the 1st or 3rd Lord of the Rings movies hold up that spectacularly. There is still a ton to love in each of them, like special effects, Gollum of course, and Sam saving Frodo from that Spider being a notable scene of mine in RotK that really worked for me as a kid and still does to this day. The Two Towers just has the best balance of everything in my opinion, from the pacing of the story, to the character development (You feel sorry for Gollum even as he finally, completely turns to the dark side at the end), to the grand special effects not overwhelming all the humanity and layers of the characters in the story. Pippin and Merry were even at their least annoying and most useful to the actual plot with that cool tree guy Treebeard. Plus, Brad Dourif gave what is still his best performance since his Oscar-nominated breakout debut in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest as the creepy Grima Wormtongue.

    For your Goldderby Film Awards consideration: Isle of Dogs for every category, especially Music Score for Alexandre Desplat!

    ReplyCopy URL
    WaltEagle
    Participant
    Joined:
    Aug 10th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509750

    No thanks. Consensus already rules the biggest category, focused passion should rule the others, that’s what gets Jordan Peele an Oscar. If the winners across the board are consensus things like Spotlight that so few people are even wild about, the Oscars become more disconnected from relevance than ever.

    ReplyCopy URL
    MultipleOscarWinner
    Participant
    Joined:
    Mar 3rd, 2017
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202509951

    Passion votes is what gets people like Nicholson, Streep, Washington and Day-Lewis nominated. They’ll get multiple Oscars in a small couple of years if preferential voting applies (not opposed to Washington though). Voters do not reflect audiences (not even if the movies have outstanding reviews), critics (even if the movies have great box office) and especially people like us who discuss movies on Internet forums. Just this year even when we weren’t expecting it, Darkest Hour got six nominations, checking male Oscar winner in a best picture nominee, moderate acclaim in period biography about a politician/monarchy, make-up acting transformation and some other Oscar-y qualities in one film.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 46 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
Chris B... - Sep 22, 2018
Movies
Canadia... - Sep 21, 2018
Movies
estrela... - Sep 21, 2018
Movies