The Envelope Please: The winner is irrelevant

A rather damning article over at the NY Times website about the growing irrelevance of the Oscars.

I love me a good Oscars show, but, despite that, this article does point to a glaring problem: winning – and often nominated – films have been seen by very few people. Everyone now knows that Oscars are seemingly decided through a combination of lobbying (i.e. buying) and elitism.

Now, I’m very interested in the movie business and perhaps I look for more interesting pictures (but still ‘commercial’), so I was surprised to read that both ‘Whiplash’ and ‘Birdman’ were not exactly box office successes.

I am not saying that the Oscars should simply be a reflection of box office results. But they were supposed to reflect the ‘best’ pictures of the year. In fairness, the Oscars have always made questionable choices. I think the reason for the NY Times article is as much the poor viewership of the Oscars this year as it is for a growing problem with the whole she-bang.

Published by

Phil Smy

I am currently a student in the Raindance Film Degree Masters program. This site comes from the research I am doing as I learn more about film production and distribution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *