Submitted by dvalpat t3_zwhz9v in movies

The amount of films and performances that get passed over in the release year is insane. Many of the Oscar winning films and performances don’t age nearly as well as what is passed over.

Every year, should they look back both 5 and 10 years to award Oscars for Best Picture, Best Actor/Actress, and Best Supporting Actor/Actress?

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Jerrymoviefan3 t1_j1vqfm3 wrote

An insult previous winners Oscar seems really petty.

7

LeeF1179 t1_j1uqijn wrote

No. It is what it is.

6

chadisdangerous t1_j1upx7r wrote

A big reason for the Oscars to exist in the first place is to promote the nominated films and boost the careers of the cast and crew who made them. It doesn't make business sense to go back and re-promote films that are 5-10 years old.

Also this would be tantamount to the academy publicly admitting that they made bad choices, and if they're trying to promote the Oscars as something prestigious and meaningful why the hell would they do that? And what would be the point of having the current-year Oscars if there's a chance they'd just write over the winners in 5-10 years time?

Just look at it with the healthy and realistic attitude that the Oscars are a snapshot of industry sentiment at a specific point in time and not some eternal indicator of the objectively best films of that year. These things are evaluated subjectively and no one is ever going to agree anyway, so it's a fool's errand to try and make them more objective or "right" or whatever.

5

stumpcity t1_j1vd7hm wrote

>A big reason for the Oscars to exist in the first place is to promote the nominated films and boost the careers of the cast and crew who made them

The Academy Awards were invented as a labor management tool.

Studio heads figured if you turned acting into a legitimate competition and could set the talent against each other in competition for recognition and awards, it would minimize their attempts to come together against their miserly, predatory labor practices.

which absolutely worked.

Later on, it became extra useful to them as an advertisement for their product (much in the same way the Game Awards are now).

The Oscars have never primarily been about properly recognizing good work in the industry, which is why they're frequently terrible at that part.

3

RyzenRaider t1_j1uqm14 wrote

Perhaps a possible one would be the 5 best films/performances/screenplays/etc of the decade, decided at the end of each decade, narrowed down to the nominees (and hey, since it's fantasy, 1-5 wildcard entries of films later deemed classics after release).

But yeah, they wouldn't do that.

2

Content-From-Reddit t1_j1uvhbe wrote

It's a good idea, but it would probably be better if it was kept separate from the Academy Awards altogether. I don't think they want to correct themselves, and even if they were willing to, I still not entirely sure they'd get it right.

1

Brentan1984 t1_j1ys8e1 wrote

Personally, if it were to happen, I think this is the way.

Keep the Oscar's separate. Do some other ego boosting event for older movies.

1

sadmep t1_j1vsx3l wrote

Why? Oscars are meaningless anyway.

1

NorthEastNobility t1_j1vvrs1 wrote

This further dilutes the value of a win, like expanding the field a while back.

I’d much prefer to see them move back to five nominees.

1

Illustrious_Win951 t1_j1w37x5 wrote

No. But it's a tragedy that Do the Right Thing didn't even get nominated

1

dreburden89 t1_j1y1vf3 wrote

Why stop there? Why not have re-do's for the Olympics? Hell, the presidential election?

1

AnHeroicHippo99 t1_j1urie0 wrote

Yes, absolutely this should exist. And amazingly you're not the first person to think so. This video explains why, better than I could anyway.

https://youtu.be/BhHeTl-M-qQ

−1

Camp_Coffee t1_j1uunw5 wrote

I choose to read this as "Should the Oscars and other meaningless navel-gazing awards be dissolved?"

Yes.

−3