Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday August 09 2018, @06:14AM   Printer-friendly
from the shark-jumping-awards dept.

Academy Adds Popular Film Oscar Category in Desperate Ratings Move

At the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Board of Governors meeting on Tuesday night, the 54 governors voted to add a new category to the Oscars. Per tradition, some 7,000 Academy voters, experts in their field, voted in by their colleagues, will weigh in on the best films of the year in 24 categories covering the crafts of moviemaking, from cinematography to sound, as well as the four acting categories, directing, writing, animation, foreign language, documentary, and fiction shorts and features.

But this year there will be one more: Best Popular Film. The Academy is bowing to pressure from ABC, which is anxious about historic low ratings for its telecast. The next Oscars will air on February 24, 2019 and, in 2020, will move up from February 23 to February 9, the earliest date ever, in a bid to jump ahead of multiple rival awards shows–which will, in turn, move ahead of the Oscars. (In the early days of its history, the Oscars were held in May, moved to April and March, then February.)

The Board also finally succumbed to building pressure to keep the show to three hours and not present live some of the less sexy craft categories, following the lead of other awards shows like the Tonys. (Sexy categories like Sound Mixing and Editing will be presented live during commercial breaks, then edited into the show.) This also serves to undermine the integrity of these annual global awards, which may be losing relevance as a mainstream shared event, but are still revered by cinephiles around the world.

Also at Vanity Fair, Vulture, Slate, Variety, and Collider.

See also: Oscars Slammed by Film Journalists for Creating 'Best Popular Film' Category, Especially in the Year of 'Black Panther'


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday August 09 2018, @05:18PM (4 children)

    by bob_super (1357) on Thursday August 09 2018, @05:18PM (#719475)

    If you want ratings, you need more sexual stuff, not less.
    "When the Oscars return, the bathing suit competition! Will Weinstein resist and stay in his chair, or will he invade the stage and drop his pants? Stay tuned!"

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday August 09 2018, @08:25PM (3 children)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday August 09 2018, @08:25PM (#719586) Journal

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Weinstein [wikipedia.org]

    In September 2009, Weinstein publicly voiced opposition to efforts to extradite Roman Polanski from Switzerland to the U.S. regarding a 1977 charge that he had drugged and raped a 13-year-old, to which Polanski had pleaded guilty before fleeing the country. Weinstein, whose company had distributed Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, a film about the Polanski case, questioned whether Polanski committed any crime, prompting Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley to insist that Polanski's guilty plea indicated that his action was a crime, and that several other serious charges were pending.

    [...] On May 25, 2018, Weinstein was charged by New York police with "rape, criminal sex act, sex abuse and sexual misconduct for incidents involving two separate women". On that day, he was arrested after surrendering to police.

    Weinstein was later released after a million dollars of bail was posted on his behalf. He later surrendered his passport and was required to wear an ankle monitor, with travel being restricted to New York and Connecticut. His lawyer Benjamin Brafman said Weinstein would plead not guilty.

    I'm a little confused why Weinstein has decided to hang around in the U.S. (he had several months during which he could have fled the country). I guess he thinks he can beat the charges, but at age 66, why take the risk of spending your retirement in a U.S. prison?

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 2) by Fluffeh on Thursday August 09 2018, @10:04PM (2 children)

      by Fluffeh (954) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 09 2018, @10:04PM (#719649) Journal

      I'm a little confused why Weinstein has decided to hang around in the U.S.

      Probably had something to do with the fact that he has a behemoth of a company out here and his life is basically tied to that no matter what.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lantern_Entertainment [wikipedia.org]

      Well... Had a company. Past tense now.

      • (Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday August 09 2018, @10:26PM (1 child)

        by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday August 09 2018, @10:26PM (#719655) Journal

        He was dismissed from his company in October 2017. Company declared bankruptcy in February and again in March. Acquisition process began on May 1, was finished by July. Weinstein was arrested on May 25, 2018.

        He should have pulled a Polanski and GTFO of the United States. Although Polanski fled after already being arrested, reaching a plea bargain, and just before sentencing. However, completely emulating his hero might be difficult or impossible given the amount of scrutiny on his case. Polanski also had French citizenship before he fled. Weinstein only holds American citizenship AFAIK. So he might have to really go far afield to escape justice.

        --
        [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
        • (Score: 2) by Fluffeh on Friday August 10 2018, @12:53AM

          by Fluffeh (954) Subscriber Badge on Friday August 10 2018, @12:53AM (#719709) Journal

          Yes, but it was my understanding that the multiple "we're broke, file for bankruptcy!" incidents were in actuality merely ways to try to protect the assets that remained in the company - so that any future lawsuits had nothing to assault? Also, being fired from the company doesn't mean he lost his share in it. I would assume that he would have also been quite central in the attempt to try to save any remaining value in IP and the like?