January 22, 2013 at 8:58 pm #541709
For 2013 should the Academy go back to five nominees for Best Picture, keep the rule that it could be between five and ten but the film must receive 10 percent as the number one choice or should they just do ten?January 23, 2013 at 1:45 am #541711
Obviously.January 23, 2013 at 4:00 am #541712
They should go back to ten. A lot of deserving movies would have been snubbed if it had just been 5. (I mean, imagine if Beasts and Amour had been there for ZDT and Argo…all 4 of these movies are great, but a lot people would be pissed nonetheless).
If there had been 10 nominees this year, I’m pretty confident something cool like Skyfall or Moonrise Kingdom would have gotten in.January 23, 2013 at 5:49 am #541713
Yes, especially this year. Of the nine BP nominees this year, I haven’t seen ZD30 and Beasts. So of the seven, I only found Amour, Argo to be BP worthy, and Django and Life of Pi to be okish nominees. All the rest (Les Mis, SLP, Lincoln) have no business really being called the best pictures of the year.January 23, 2013 at 6:05 am #541714
Should never been changed from five…..
Plenty of great films in past years were left off……that’s the way it should be…having nominated more films has cheapened the oscars….remember the blind side, DJANGO unchained and tree of life….never should be in same breath as the actual best films of the year. ImoJanuary 23, 2013 at 8:29 am #541716
The expansion to more than 5 cheapens it for me. I personally don’t care if people get pissed off that this film or that film didn’t make the cut…actually I do care, that’s one fo the reasons why the whole thing is so interesting.January 23, 2013 at 11:41 am #541717
Yes they should go back to 5. When you make it 10 it sort of cheapens it. With 5 it’s more ELITEJanuary 23, 2013 at 3:33 pm #541718
While I understand why the top category shouldn’t be easier to get into than the Best Director category, I personally am glad that there are allowed to be up to 10 nominees. This welcomes more films that otherwise wouldn’t have been nominated (Up, District 9, Toy Story 3, Django Unchained), and some that would have been on the verge of either just making it in, or just missing out (127 Hours, Inception, Moneyball, The Help, Argo, Zero Dark Thirty). Of course there have been a few head-scratching inclusions (The Blind Side), even with the 5% cutoff rule (Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close), but there have always been and always will be head-scratching nominations in any category, no matter how many nominees there are.January 23, 2013 at 4:11 pm #541719
This five percent rule seems like a way for them to cherry pick. Either a solid five or a solid ten. I’m not accusing them, just saying that’s the way it feels.January 23, 2013 at 8:51 pm #541720
Keep it at up to ten. More leeway, and so much better.January 24, 2013 at 1:39 pm #541721
People will complain either way. I’m fine with whatever.
I’d like to see a film I actually like win for a change though. 😉May 26, 2014 at 7:55 pm #541722
Ten. Since they changed it, 2011 could have had Bridesmaids, Harry Potter 7.2, or Drive; 2012 could have had Moonrise Kingdom, Dark Kinght Rises, or Skyfall; and 2013 could have had Saving Mr. Banks or Inside Llewyn Davis. I think that it’s better that way because 5 is just “lets push the smallest indie possible to push out The Dark Knight”. It shows more of a variety and it gets people out to see more amazing movies they might have never gone to see.May 26, 2014 at 7:55 pm #541723
Ten. Since they changed it, 2011 could have had Bridesmaids, Harry Potter 7.2, or Drive; 2012 could have had Moonrise Kingdom, Dark Kinght Rises, or Skyfall; and 2013 could have had Saving Mr. Banks or Inside Llewyn Davis. I think that it’s better that way because 5 is just “lets push the smallest indie possible to push out The Dark Knight”. It shows more of a variety and it gets people out to see more amazing movies they might have never gone to see.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.