Why can't the Oscars love themselves as much as we love the Oscars?
Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 5:15PM by Nathaniel R
"If you can't love yourself, how the hell you gonna love anybody else?" RuPaul's famous episode ending quote on RuPaul's Drag Race is profundity in silly soundbite form. "Amen!" How different might our current but lifelong Oscars obsession be if the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences took this fact to heart. How much more fun would the annual Oscar circus be if they just learned to love themselves again. For you see, the more they think poorly of themselves, the more we begin to question our own lifelong love for the event. Have we wasted decades of our lives obsessing over this annual holiday/event/ritual? If they no longer feel any love, perhaps we should consider a divorce?
As you may have heard the Oscars will not be airing 8 of their 23 categories LIVE this year, but instead do them an hour before the broadcast and then edit them into the evening...
The Unlucky Disrespected are:
- Live Action Short
- Animated Short
- Documentary Short
- Film Editing (*the* category Oscar-fanatics most look to annually as a bellwether early in the evening)
- Makeup and Hairstyling
- Production Design
- Original Score
- Sound
Never mind that this is disrespectful to those fine artisans though it is. The Academy learned from their aborted decision a few years back with the #PresentAll24 movement so this time they're PROMISING that all of these artists will get their moment during the show. But we weren't born yesterday. We see how these "earlier this evening" or "last week" edit-ins work into other awards shows and they instantly deem the wins LESSER THAN, giving us only a brief glimpse of the thank you and none of the drama or context surrounding the category.
Never mind that this decision goes against several decades of tradition, which it does. Tradition is a super-power that takes decades to earn. To give it away helplessly ---as if people didn't enjoy it -- is nonsense.
Never mind that it's completely antithetical to the "live" nature of suspense and drama at the Oscars. Theoretically "drama" and "suspense" are what people want when they watch live television -- as any fan knows you can start to feel the 'narrative' of the night and the mood of the room begin to take shape depending on which way the craft categories go. Sometimes that makes the final awards true nailbiters and/or shocks (think Cabaret vs The Godfather, Gravity vs 12 Years a Slave, Mad Max vs The Revenant vs Spotlight, La La Land vs Moonlight, etcetera). Shows that dont respect their own prizes instantly see those prizes devalued by the public (The Grammys, The Emmys, and the Tonys have all shunted prizes off their main evening and the deafening silence around most of those prizes is telling).
But anyway nevermind all that.
Me obsessing on the Oscars during 2005. With years of innocent Oscar love behind me and some rockier "love" to come. What all of this points to is a much larger problem within the Academy than any of the individual points of agony from this decision or last year's historically low ratings (COVID-influenced of course).
The sad truth is that the Academy has been listening to the click-chasing media, and the people who don't care about them as an institution (like ABC who only cares about ratings) for far too long. In short, they now believe their own anti-hype. They believe that "no one cares" (factually very much untrue given that the internet proves that people love to talk about the Oscars all year long). They have lost all confidence. For at least a handful of years now it is progressively feeling more and more like a slow motion suicide. Their constant fear and despair about 'not being what they once were' aka the most highly watched and most popular non-sports live event each year... masks the real but no longer seemingly believed truth that in the context of the right now they are exactly that still aka the most highly watched and most popular non-sports live event each year.
It's a perception game.
If the Academy boldly fell in love with themselves again we believe some audiences would come back and love them again, too. Not everyone mind you. The world has changed. They will never be as big as they once were but... that... is.... okay. Nothing is as big as it once was because instead of 3 tv channels and the local movie theater, there are now thousands of channels, multiplexes, youtube, tiktok, etcetera for people who like showbiz style entertainment. If the Academy still boldly loved themselves they could be as big as they could possibly be. The answer to the declining popularity is not to shrink but to get bigger. More events. More lead-up drama. Primetime nomination shows (so many people have suggested this) or mini-profiles of the artisans (like how the Olympics do profiles of all those athletes to bolster the 'narratives').
The Academy has fallen hard for Twitter (but still seems vaguely unaware of tiktok) and will waste time during the Ceremony on Amazon's Cinderella movie (or whatever surpasses it in the Twitter fan vote). The Oscars would have done themselves a HUGE favour if they had only thought, instead, to concentrate on popular things they did nominate or how to boost the profile of 'smaller' nominees that they could "introduce" to audiences who might end up loving those very same things (Hint: that's what the clips are for which they seem to think are expendable!)
Why aren't they figuring out a way to celebrate Dune? It's made $400 million globally. It's very popular. It's up for 10 Oscars.
Everyone I have ever met loved the rare times the Oscars did something fun with Costume Design whether it was a mini-fashion parade on the stage or the host in costumes inspired by (thanks Whoopi!). There are many many many many many many ways to celebrate the craft of movies without being boring about it. In a town so full of creatives there are surely hundreds of ideas we might not even dream of in our fantasies. But the #1 prerequisite for producing or hosting or directing or writing for or even advising the Oscars should always be an intense love of the Oscars. These are the ONLY voices the powers that be in the Academy should be listening to. I repeat: the only voices.
People who "don't care" are not your target audience. People who do not love showbiz are also not your target. You want the people who love and obsess over the show and the people who are casually interested and might watch some years. And finally the people who might love it if they were introduced to it in a way that sparked their imagination. Those are the only people to court. If all three of those audiences tune in, the Oscars will be on the road back to heath. Some people only watch because culturally it's the thing to do (same with the Olympics and some sporting events) but you have to energize the people who'll watch it even if it isn't first to have critical mass.
There are ways of integrating the new digital social media world into the event and building up Oscar's fanbase with younger generations who consume media this way. Of course there are ways to do this! But jettisoning long held traditions and showing a lack of respect for yourself is not the way to win anyone over.
For as long as the Oscars have existed there have been people who've hated and complained about the "back-patting" nature of showbiz awards and who have said the show is too long. 'Watch as the most glamorous and wealthiest people in the world celebrate and congratulate each other!' they say disdainfully. To this we reply "Yes... please! THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE LIKE TO WATCH. Well that, and any and all clips or montage or presentations and speeches to illustrate what's being congratulated and why."
For many years now the Oscars have only listened to the negatives, and to people who cannot be pleased (who are legion as everyone who uses the internet is aware). For many years now they have been perpetually bullied by ABC -- if the behind the scenes scuttlebutt is accurate and we have no reason to believe that it isn't -- to make the show shorter and jettison some of the awards. The belief appears to be that this will improve ratings. Newsflash: it will not. Basic truths here: MAJOR EVENTS don't become events through timidity or smallness. The Superbowl is not the most watched live event because it's short or cheaply run. It's the most watched live event because it is really really big and a spectacle and a tradition and comes complete with those ever-escalating half-time shows for casual viewers who might not care that much about football but are there for the tradition part of it. The half-time show is a great analogy. For the Oscars that's the song performances. This year alone you have superstars like Beyoncé, Billie Eilish, and Lin-Manuel Miranda who can be worked into the show to please the casual viewer. All without changing the identity of the Oscars or turning off the base who are there to watch movies and movie stars being celebrated.
There is a way to reengage audiences who've tuned out, too, and to energize new audiences, but none of them will work without confidence. Confidence is a turn-on. Nothing the Oscars ever try will succeed until they learn to love themselves again. They should be parading their giant naked golden glamour about proudly and defiantly and very often. Keep the traditions (they're hard won and built on celebrating the artform and the stars) both because it pleases the obsessive fans (i.e. YOUR VERY BASE) and because its core to your very being. No one said you can't do that and also adapt to new technologies. Just think of all the creative ways little bits of the biggest night in Hollywood could be instantly repurposed on tiktok for example or memed on twitter. Adapt and evolve, yes, but never in ways that aren't reflective of your wonderful self.
But first things first. If the Academy learns to love itself again -- which includes loving all those craftsmen that make the movies so fascinating -- the show will be stronger than its been in years and years. We're rooting for them but we hope it's not wistfully from a distance, remembering them as a great past love that couldn't ever see their own true worth.
Oscar Ceremonies, Oscars (21)
Reader Comments (26)
People like Lady Gaga and Jessica Chastain should be vocally showing their disdain publicly for this considering their very close friends/counterparts in the Makeup&Hairstyling category are directly affected by this.
If no one but us film lovers on twitter are outraged then the Academy & ABC think they can just do whatever they want.
I have to say... I have been sort of surprised by the universal howling against this change. I'm sort of curious to see how it works? I think if the following are true:
1) The awards are presented with real fanfare in the auditorium so the nominees / winners' experience in the room are not meaningfully different
2) The show edits the announcements and speeches in fully and just cuts out long walks from the back of the auditorium
and most importantly
3) The producers find something fun and useful to do with the freed up time
then it could be a worthwhile experiment.
Most likely they will screw it up (especially #3) and not do it again but I think it's a better idea than giving out awards in the aisles.
Honestly maybe I'm a heretic but I think they should do away with the short categories altogether (and add best first time film, best casting/ensemble, best stunts...). Change can be ok!
Man, this is some fucking bullshit. This is a fucking insult to these nominees. For them to win an award should be something of a celebration for their hard work and yet they have their stupid thing on Twitter where a movie featuring fucking James Corden is winning in the poll. Man, fuck this shit.
I'll be watching the Razzies! Fuck these millennials and their stupid-ass taste. They're just... FICKLE!!!!
Amen.
How can Academy really think that editing which is one of the most crucial part in movie making is delegated to be not part of the show?
Even though I enjoy the shorts, I can understand if they move them out of the show. They can present them as part of governor award ceremony or something but please give them the appropriate spotlight. It's bad enough that honorary Oscar is not part of the ceremony especially when considering one of this year recipient is a very famous actor that's adored by the public.
I bet custome design might be included as no part of the show if Cruella is not the frontrunner and Disney own Cruella. It's pretty obvious that Academy let ABC bully them.
The frustrating thing is they will add more jokes and montages so it will still be long ceremony but with less live award presentation and more joking banters and montages. Seriously, we get enough montages all the time; who in their right mind will add more?? Such a boneheaded decision.
Great piece Nathaniel. Love the idea of a prime time nomination announcement show.. I do miss the oohs and gasps when they used to let reporters in.
Contrast to Sasha’s piece yesterday — woke Twitter is making people tune out the Oscars, so let’s give in and shuttle those awards to the pre-show to show the rubes that Hollywood can come out of its bubble.
Anyone remember the ceremony from like 12 years ago where they explained how each of the crafts worked before the award.. I think they had a nominee explain what went into editing an individual scene, for example? That was great. Bring that back. And they must include the acting clips!!!
By the way, I think this situation is reversed once Spielberg/Lucas/Scorsese and big actors like Will Smith/Julia Roberts/Denzel etc and maybe some Marvel person write a joint letter denouncing it “or else.”
Nathaniel, thank you. This article is an excellent and insightful plea for keeping our beloved event relevant and vital. Every word should be etched in granite and respected. To quote Cedric Hardwicke in The Ten Commandments, "So let it be written. So let it be done."
Please, may Hollywood legends stand up and see that this announcement about the eight categories is reversed. It's disgusting.
Why am I suspecting that when these 8 ‘non-essential’ categories are edited into the telecast, they’ll be quickly edited (editing is important!) whereas they’ll just show the 5 nominees, then make sure that the ‘45 second orchestra rule’ applies quickly to these ‘winners.’ That’ll leave more time later on for the ‘important winners’ to give acceptance speeches/political statements/shout outs for 3-4 minutes.
And since none of the Original Songs are even hummable, must we endure through these live acts?
If this leave any time in the program, hopefully the Academy will include acting clips for the nominated performances and include film stills for the ‘In Memory’ sequence.
What I find so odd about this decision is the categories that were chosen. While it makes sense to show everything, I think it's especially egregious to cut editing, make-up and hairstyling, production design, and score. Those are elements that the general public walks away from movies with a lasting impression. Years later people remember the editing of Moulin Rouge, the costumes of Priscilla, and the production design of Crouching Tiger. Those are the categories that people think of when they think of how movies take us into different worlds, and they always spark conversations among even the least interested viewers.
Also, makeup and hairstyling seems to be where populists nominees are and typically have great clips. It's fun to think "oh wow, look what they did to Glenn Close." And the presenters are usually fun and funny for those categories!
It seems like the producers and ABC just don't have any imagination about how to have fun. They could bounce back from last year by leaning into the all the things that makes the academy feel A-list and like a real celebration of movies. Instead they aren't.
I absolutely loved when they had five previous winners come out and discuss the year’s nominated performers.
How about that? Instead of montages and what not, how about more interesting ways of presenting each category. Above mentioned about how they would explain how to edit a scene before presenting the Editing award. Or the year they had costume design be a fashion show.
Things like this make it more interesting and more memorable. Yes the winners are talked about after the show, but the way the categories are presented could be just as much talked about.
Just an idea :)
And do they really think with this voted for popular movie thing is gonna make people watch the ENTIRE show to see what wins? No, they will just check twitter and see what won. Doing this award thing isn’t going to make more people watch that never did before. The hardcore fans will always watch, no matter what they change (for better or worse) and it is what it is.
People get enraged when blockbusters don’t get nominated for Best Film. But these people that get angry - do you see them watching the full show because Spider-Man got nominated for Best Picture? I don’t see that happening.
How long do they have to stay with ABC?
Preach on it! Nodded my head in agreement while reading every word. Thank you for saying what needs to be said.
I'm so tired of hearing the "The ceremony is too long" comments. It's 3-3.5 hours. That is not substantially different than a football or baseball game, which people have no problem with. It makes no sense to me. Yet, it seems to be a constant refrain, even from people I know who watch the Oscars every year and largely enjoy them. I'm left thinking that they do need to address it in some way.
All the same, I am fully in agreement that this doesn't mean you have to cut time. You especially don't have to gut categories to cut time. Make better use of the allocated time, using many of the suggestions you give above to make those 3 hours more engaging. I'd add: perhaps consider/address whether some of the branches-- music comes to mind-- have some biases that are making for less popular or even less noteworthy nominees? We don't need blockbusters nominated in all categories for the Oscars to be popular, but I do think there may be some branches that are willingly overlooking them.
But most of all, I'm just exhausted. Every year, the Academy capitulates to the naysayers and makes silly changes that seem frivolous and go against decades' worth of tradition, all under the expectation that "this will fix everything." And every year, they're proven wrong as ratings continue to decline. How long will they keep making the same mistakes expecting different results?
Personally, I'm feeling a low sense of outrage here.
When the telecast has presented highlights of technical awards and honorary winners, I get the gist of what happened, and at worst I feel like I missed out of a fun event to have attended in person. But I don't live in Los Angeles, and I wouldn't get invited even if I did, so the highlights are fine.
So I'll keep an open mind. Maybe it fails to streamline the show in any meaningful way, and they go back to presenting all awards live in 2023. The telecast has tried things before, no matter how stupid. Just last year Steven Soderbergh and his co-producers asked that vital question, "What if we demoted Best Picture and presented Best Actor last, which would, AT BEST, pin all our professional hopes on a widow who is not a performer to single-handedly make the ending hopeful rather than depressing?" I think it's safe to say that they won't make that mistake again.
People are particularly enraged by the editing snub but, for me, the fact that they're willing to leave best score out scares the shit out of me. At this point, they'll stop at nothing. Mancini, Jarre, Rota, Morricone, they were all mainstream not so long ago.
What's really sad is that, given that there's pretty much nowhere for the ratings to go but up after last year, the ratings will probably marginally improve this year and this will embolden the Academy to cut things even more next year, and more the year after that, and it won't be long before the craft categories are just a title card before the commercial breaks.
I agree with every word of your article, Nathaniel.
Why do the Academy seem to find it so difficult to understand what makes the Oscars so beloved?
They should be leaning into everything that makes the Oscars ceremony special and at the same time adding really creative engagement across social media to the mix to bring in the next generation. And for starters, they should give out all the awards live.
Amen !
I do wonder how much of this decision was the Academy’s and how much was pressure from ABC. If it was more so the latter, then there’s no two ways around it: the best thing for the Oscars moving forward would be to not re-sign with ABC once their current contract expires. Unfortunately that’s still six years away, but ABC clearly doesn’t care about the Oscars as an institution and only cares about maximizing ratings even if it means going against what the Oscars are about in the first place. I honestly don’t even think it would be the worst thing for the Oscars to consider moving to a non-network TV home. It’s not like that sort of thing is even relevant anymore. Would it really be the worst thing for the Oscars to air on HBO Max, for instance?
If, however, this was a decision made mostly by the Academy themselves, then it’s time to start questioning the leadership and maybe form an initiative to recall David Rubin and vote on a new president.
This whole thing is a mess. Yet as others already pointed out, the fact that this year’s Oscars is likely to do better in the ratings than last year’s will probably only encourage them to do more stupid shit like this next year and going forward. I keep saying that this Twitter vote thing might be testing the grounds for a new rule whereby one of the actual Best Picture nominees is decided by a Twitter vote. Tell me you don’t think it’s possible they’re at least considering it. For me, that would be the straw that broke the camel’s back. The true jumping the shark moment for the Oscars. And at the current rate, it’s where we’re headed.
You tell 'em, Nathaniel. 100%
As if to underscore your points, here's the link to a similar piece on Vulture that just went up
yesterday:
https://www.vulture.com/2022/02/please-stop-trying-to-fix-the-oscars.html
I think the workaround really in the future (once the contract with ABC expires) is to have the Oscars stream live and uninterrupted on a platform (NETFLIX is the natural answer since who doesn't have a subscription these days and without ad breaks the event can conceivably clock in at 2 1/2 hours) and then you do a 'highlights show' on a network channel one night later. Similar to how in the UK they broadcast the Oscars at 2am on Sunday night and then they broadcast a truncated evening the following night..
That said I thought last years Oscars didn't feel too long , my main issue with them was that they didn't show clips of any of the nominees, that is the remedy that needs to happen. Its supposed to be an advertisement for the movies as much as it is to award filmmakers, make the movies the star of the show!
Wow! So much written here in response to your thoughtful essay, Nathaniel. For now, I'll just say that I 100% agree about nominations reading. Why in the world do they do it at 5am in CA?
Edwin—couldn't agree more about HBO, I've been saying this for years. HBO Max is the perfect platform for this.
ABC is lucky to have the Oscars, not the other way around. I'm sure they pay the Academy a lot to air the telecast—but I have no doubt one of the major streaming services could match their price. None of the ad revenue benefits the Academy—but the Academy's program is completely beholden to generating ad revenue for Disney/ABC.
The incentives to remain on network TV just aren't there. They're held against impossible ratings expectations so each year is a "flop." The broadcast is cheapened by attempts to get more people watching on ABC.
You'd have no less interest in the Oscars if they moved to HBO Max, you'd just have a much better show.
As with almost everyone, I agree with everything you said. A couple of things I'd add...
A host who genuinely loves movies. Billy Crystal seemed like an odd choice for host, but he actually celebrated the films being nominated. The Oscars chose three talented comediennes, but I have seen no evidence they love film. Hope to be proven wrong.
Message movies will always get nominated, but where are the fun movies? "Ghost," "Pretty Woman," and "E.T." were all nominated for best picture. They all lost, most egregiously"E.T." to "Ghandi.". So, popular movies have been nominated in the past. Nowadays, the pressure is that a movie HAS to be about something. Or be pretty ("Dune" and "Nightmare Alley.". The film that gave me the most joy last year was "tick, tick, boom..." No nomination. Hoping for a Garfield win to redeem that
Finally, look at the theme this year... celebrating movie lovers. Yawn. Back to the point of the article, why can't we just celebrate movies? Movie lovers will watch even a mediocre Tom Holland film just for the escape. The reason the Oscars got big ratings for years was because they loved themselves.
Big case in point. "Shakespeare in Love" over "Saving Private Ryan.". People were enraged because the more enjoyable movie won. Why should voters feel guilty about voting for what they love? I'm sorry, but did anyone LOVE "Nomadland"?
Bottom line:. Stand up for what you love. We all love movies. The Oscars need to quit begging to be loved and just be an awards ceremony for the millions of fans who love film.
let's say that this way, they speed up the ceremony. No excuse to not expand now the Oscars with the long awaited categories as "Casting", "Stunt ensemble", "Voice/Motion Capture performance" and the like.
Just make TWO ceremonies. One for the technicals and shorts, another one for the big ones, on consecutive days (Saturday and Sunday)