The 411 Movies Top 5 07.10.09: Week 173 - Top 5 Other Oscar Changes We'd Like To See

Posted by Trevor Snyder on 07.10.2009

In the wake of the Academy expanding the Best Picture pool to 10, the 411 crew offers some other changes they think might help liven up the show.

The Academy's recent announcement that next year's Oscars will include 10 nominees for Best Picture is one of the biggest changes the awards show has gone through in years. And so I figured it gave us a perfect opportunity to offer our own suggestions to the Academy of other things they could do to bring back interest to the show.



THE TOP 5 OTHER OSCAR CHANGES WE'D LIKE TO SEE



Trevor Snyder

5. Add a Best Stunt award.

The stunt person's guild has been trying to get this done for years, but to no avail. Well, why the hell not? Stunt work is an incredibly important part of many films. I know they have their own awards each year, but why not give them some time to shine on the biggest stage, as well? It would be a good move in terms of upping audience interest, as well. C'mon, you're telling me Joe Average wouldn't rather watch this one than Best Sound Editing?

4. Less musical numbers.

If the host wants to do a musical number to kick things off, that's fine. And sure, you can still have the Best Song nominees performed (although I prefer seeing that kept to a montage – I mean, why do we get to hear the entire songs nominated, but not the entire scores nominated for Best Score? A double standard, if you ask me). But that's it. We don't need any more of those lame musical dance numbers that have cluttered up the show for years. Remember the one year where they had people dancing in silhouette behind a white screen? Yeah, cause that's what we tune into the Oscars to see – shadow puppets.

3. Split the Best Picture category in two.

Despite the popularity of the telecast, the Golden Globes are essentially worthless – voted on by a small group of reporters, most of whom you've never heard of, and who in the past have shown to be receptive to bribes and exclusives in exchange for their vote (find Richard Roeper's scathing article on the Golden Globes for the full scoop). But there is one thing they get right – having Best Drama and Best Comedy/Musical as separate categories. The truth is, most people find it pretty tough to judge a comedy against a drama, but in most cases the Academy is going to defer to the drama because it seems like the more "important" film. That means that over the years, a lot of critically-acclaimed comedies that could have been contenders (like Groundhog Day or 40-Year-Old Virgin) were ignored. Let's just split it up. I realize this gets complicated because people will start debating which category certain movies truly belong in. Plus, it might be moot now that the Best Picture category has been expanded to 10. But I'd still like to see it.

2. Mandatory silence during the "In Memoriam" tribute.

This has been a pet peeve of mine for years. Would it kill the audience to just stay quiet during the whole thing? OK…bad word choice, but my point stands. The rising and falling applause essentially turns what is supposed to be a respectful tribute into something of a popularity contest. I realize more people are familiar with the latest rising star to die than they are with some guy who worked as a cameraman on a production back in the ‘40s, but that doesn't make either death any more important than the other. If you can't applaud consistently through the whole thing (and who really wants to be clapping during the entire montage?), than just keep quiet for the entire time.

1. Keep the "past winners" thing from this year.

One of the best things about this year's show was the idea to have past winners in the Actor categories come out on stage and talk about the nominees. This should be made permanent. Let's face it, by the time we get to the Oscars, we've already seen the same clips of the nominees over and over, and don't really need to sit through them again. This is a much better idea. For one thing, you could tell from their expressions that it was genuinely touching to the nominees to hear their peers praising them. And I think the audience likes that kind of stuff, too. Most of the time, whenever you hear an actor speak they're out promoting their own movie, and so naturally they're talking primarily about themselves. It's nice to get to see them talk about their fellow actors and how impressed they are with them. It adds a nice bit of class to the event.



Len Archibald

I don't know if there's anything remotely controversial here; this list was created purely from the POV of a film-snob (myself – I'm running with "Arthouse Archibald") and balanced it out with a casual moviegoer (my wife). Here's what I came up with…

HONORABLE MENTIONS

No more red carpet specials - My wife will smack me for this, but I don't care. We as a society are WAY too hung up on appearance – and more specifically, the appearance of celebrities. When I used to dabble in fashion photography, it was interesting to hear who the stars were wearing, but even then it was just filler. I love Tim Gunn as much as the next heterosexual guy, but I only need to hear him congratulating people for "mak[ing] it work"…On Project Runway. Better still, if there is an insistence on interviewing actors/directors why don't you TALK ABOUT THE MOVIE THEY ARE A PART OF INSTEAD OF THEIR CLOTHES! No wonder some think Western culture is so shallow.

Give everyone equal time - This was a suggestion from my wife, and it makes sense. If someone wins one of the "less important" awards, you can tell they are timed precisely – so much that if they go over their allotted speech time that they are instantly cut off. Compare that to one of the big stars: the music may silently start in the background, but they will shout, "NO IT'S MY TIME!" and will cut off the orchestra. Look, if we want to keep things short, NO ONE goes over the allotted speech time, whether it's Spielberg or Roberta Whatsherface who won Best Costume Design.

More emphasis on new filmmakers/talents - This one has always irked me. The Academy of Arts and Sciences sponsor the world's largest screenplay competition, The Nicholls Fellowship, which awards recipients a nice cash prize as well as future development deals with their scripts. I would think that they would honor those screenwriters/new filmmakers. Give the new guys some face time, and actually SHOW that The Oscars aren't just about patting each other on the backs. Give off the perception that you care about the future of cinema. Just how I feel.

THE TOP 5

5. Find a host and stick with it

For the longest time, The Oscars was synonymous with two hosts: Bob Hope and Johnny Carson. That was part of the tradition. For a while, it seemed as if Billy Crystal was going to pick up the slack. But lately, the telecast has been a revolving door of hosts, most being one-time experiments that work (Hugh Jackman) or fail horribly (Chris Rock – as much as he is my comedic Jesus, he was NOT good that year). I think the problem is the "idea" that a host can bring/deter ratings. No, the SHOW does that on its own. Pick a host, stick with it and ALLOW them to get a feel and find their own style. Keep Hugh Jackman, who gives an old school feeling, or go with Ellen Degeneres, who carries a MASSIVE fanbase or go with Ricky Gervais, who could give the show an edge, but STICK WITH THEM. Carson and Hope had to find their rhythm at one time, too.

4. Destroy the delay/Allow the speeches to be uncensored

I feel I understand why Samuel L. Jackson did not win Best Supporting Actor in 1994 or why Mickey Rourke did not win Best Actor this past year, despite giving arguably the best performances in their category: They would probably give terribly raw speeches, complete with profanity. I don't care. They are who they are and – especially with Samuel L. Jackson – it would be EXPECTED for them to just go for the jugular when giving a speech. I think a profanity-laden rant from Jackson or Rourke would be a shot in the arm to bring viewership up. Don't be so safe, guys. Most of the world has moved on from the "wardrobe malfunction".

3. Create genre awards

Truth: Most casual moviegoers don't watch the Oscars. They're boring and pretentious and they don't focus on films that they watch. The whole Dark Knight backlash was not just from the fanboys…TONS of people in the general public were put-off that it wasn't nominated for Best Picture. Expanding the nominations for Best Picture may not cut it…I think, essentially – The Oscars may need to go the way of The Golden Globes and actually split the Best Picture categories by genre. We already have Best Animated Feature, Best Documentary and Best Foreign-Language Film. Nine times out of 10, Best Picture goes to go to a drama that exposes some injustice or seeks answers to the psyche of the human condition, etc, etc, etc – so would it be so wrong to have Best Comedy or Best Musical? Best Action? Best Horror/Thriller/Suspense? (that's a stretch.) This may lead to expanding the telecast, but it could be solved with the next idea….

2. Cut the technical awards

CONTROVERSY! Here's the thing – every year, there's a segment where a random celebrity discuss how it was an "honor" to host the Science and Technical Academy Awards, where there is more emphasis on the technical achievements of the past year. I think the majority of the special effects, sound and editing awards could go here as well. Here's the truth of the matter: I am a (somewhat) independent filmmaker. I will find out the results no matter what because I am interested in what films push the boundaries of technology – but most (like my wife), only care about the BIG awards – outside of Best Director, and the screenplay awards, most casual viewers don't care about (or are even acutely aware) of the technical aspects of cinema. Acknowledge them in a short montage and move on with it. Hell, webcast the technical awards the night before.

1. End the "Catch-Up" Awards:

This is my own little nit-pick over the years; many times I have watched the Academy award a performance or a filmmaker with a "Best" award, only to realize it is more representative of a lifetime achievement or "catch-up" Oscar. While it was nice to see Martin Scorsese gain an Oscar for The Departed, it felt like he received it more for his complete body of work (look who presented the Oscar: Speilberg, Lucas and Coppola) than for actually being the BEST director that year. Not many people remember the 1980 winner for Best Picture, Ordinary People - and as great of a film that it is, it is NOT the cinematic iconic masterpiece that is Raging Bull, released the same year. Another example is in 1992, where Al Pacino won Best Actor for Scent of a Woman - a good performance, but (IMO) nowhere nearly as powerful as Denzel Washington's portrayal of Malcolm X. Truth is, Pacino (by most accounts) probably should have walked away with the Best Actor trophy for his role way back in 1974 for The Godfather: Part 2. Of course, Denzel would get his Oscar in 2002 for Training Day…At the expense of Tom Wilkinson (I think), who had the better performance from In The Bedroom. I just want the Academy to just acknowledge the BEST and not just check off who they felt they snubbed in the past and make up for it.



Shawn S. Lealos

HONORABLE MENTIONS

More Michael Bay!!!!!!!

THE TOP 5

5. Completely rethink the original song category

Wasn't Eminem winning this award supposed to change the way this award was looked at? However, the last few years have included some very questionable choices. They tried to eliminate "Falling Slowly" from Once, while allowing three songs from the Disney movie Enchanted in. They failed in keeping "Falling Slowly" out and it went on to win. However, last year they refused to allow Bruce Springsteen's "The Wrestler" because it was not good enough to qualify (they said it rated below an 8.25 rating, while allowing in Peter Gabriel's song from Wall-E). I'm not saying they should let in any old song, but they need to improve on their musical variety instead of only having show tunes and the random "world music."

4. The In Memory Of... Segment

This only happened last year but it pissed me off like you wouldn't believe. The camera floated around the room and never stopped moving as Queen Latifa sang while the departed were honored. Here is what needs to be done: no camera at all. Simply play the edited scenes and stills with their names on the screen. We don't need cool camera tricks or a musical star singing. We need music by the orchestra and a respectful memoriam. Last year's was a joke.

3. Keep many of last year's changes

I assume they were experimenting last year but they did a lot right and I want to take time to mention what I liked and should be kept about the broadcast. The first thing is combining awards in short bursts. First, Sarah Jessica Parker announced the winners for Art Direction, Costume Design and Makeup Design. Will Smith announced the winners for Visual Effects, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing and Editing. No one came up to accept the awards but they all received their just deserts. That is how you give out technical awards, not by omitting them but by condensing the time given to them. The other big change I loved was the legends coming out to introduce each acting nominee. It was classy and very cool to see the elders of Hollywood and recent award recipients pay tribute to the current nominees. They should also do that for Best Director by the way.

2. Be less short sighted on major categories

The Academy originally instituted the Animated category because Beauty and the Beast was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. I don't see how a movie should be considered less simply because it is animated. A movie (like Wall-E) should have as much of a chance to make the Best Picture category as a movie like The Reader. Likewise, a movie like The Dark Knight> should also be eligible despite the Academy's snobbery towards genre films. If a gangster film like The Departed can win then a super hero movie like The Dark Knight should at least be considered for a nomination. Likewise, a foreign film should have every chance to win major awards outside of the Foreign Film category. Waltz with Bashir should have been nominated in the Animated category last year, and maybe even the Documentary category. It has happened in the past, but the Academy likes to shoehorn movies into a specific bracket and ignore them everywhere else. This shortsightedness hurts the awards overall.

1. Give the winners time to make their acceptance speech

This award is for the men and women who make the movies and the entire purpose of any awards show is to honor those people. Nothing pisses me off more than to have someone say a few words only to find the music pushing them offstage. Make sure everyone understands they need to keep it short but don't cut them off in the middle of a sentence. It is just wrong. One way to accomplish this is by cutting down on the small talk with the presenters. This is not about the presenters, they should keep it short and sweet and then announce the nominees.



Steve Gustafson

HONORABLE MENTIONS

- For a movie to be nominated it needs to have a full wide theatrical release by the end of the year. No more of this "one-showing-in-South-Bend-IN-to-sneak-in-for-consideration" business!

- Take a page from the Super Bowl, work with the studios, and start introducing big time movie trailers during the commercials. Or gets some exclusive footage you can air during the breaks. Create some buzz for yourselves! C'mon, this should have been done long before now!

- Cut out the pointless Montages! Not the "In Memory..." or the honorary Oscar ones but the ones we can never remember. You know which ones I'm talking about. Best action scenes done during the winter time...things like that.

THE TOP 5

5. Politics? Not on THIS Stage!

Yes, make this a rule. No one wants to hear your thoughts on what's going on in the world. Just entertain us monkey! Plus, whoever broke this rule would be such a rebel. It could be used to get some lesser know actors over by "going against the machine" on the grandest stage of all! Yes, Sean Penn would break it, but that's to be expected.

4. Multiple Hosts

Why put that much pressure on one guy or girl? Spread it around! Mix the young and established with a mix of unpredictable. What kind of reaction would Tina Fey, Jack Nicholson, and Gary Busey get? I think you know the answer! That's pure gold right there!

3. Embrace the Internet!

Promote the official Oscar site! Have extended footage online, promote a longer "In Memory...", exclusive content, polls & opinions, interviews, interact with live Oscar parties. All this DURING the show. Update it so people feel like they are a part of the big event and dump some of the filler from the telecast onto the site.

2. Best Song Montage

When showcasing Best Film they don't show the whole movie, so why sing the whole song? Give us a montage combining the nominees and then continue on with the show.

1. Combine and Cut Awards

I'm not saying get rid of some awards all together, but with the new "10 nominees" thing; you can do away with the Best Animated Feature. They deserve consideration with the big boys. Stop animated segregation! Also, the Best Short Documentary, Animated Short...things like that can be at a separate event. I'm even game to move the full Lifetime Achievement Award to the other event to give it some shine. Yes, I know this is THE big event that comes once a year, but keep it moving, keep it fresh.



Bryan Kristopowitz

HONORABLE MENTIONS

Add a "Best Acting Ensemble" Category - I'm kind of surprised this hasn't been done, especially after Lord of the Rings: Return of the Kings got shut out of every acting category. The Academy could model it after the Ensemble award that the Screen Actors Guild gives out.

Better build up to the awards show - Why not have Academy members appear on news shows and talk shows to talk about who is the front runner for this and that. It's done for politics and sports, so why not the Oscars? Who wouldn't want to watch Tom Hanks explain the Oscar scuttlebutt on Larry King?

Put the nominated short subjects on TV a week before the awards show - Why not have them on HBO and Showtime and Starz so the public can actually see these goddamn things? Unless someone comes up with a way to distribute these short subjects (and I mean all of the short subjects) to movie theatres across the country , TV is the best way to get them out there ahead of time. Why not create some word of mouth for these categories?

THE TOP 5

5. To ban forever the 2008 "In Memoriam" presentation

One of the big stories going into the last Oscars was the expected "change up" in how the show would flow, mostly because of Bill Condon's direction and Hugh Jackman as host. They were going to bring "showbiz" back to the show. And while they did a pretty okay job, the "In Memoriam" presentation was a disaster. Queen Latifah singing live and in front of a bank of video screens that showed the picture of a dead Academy member. You could barely see who died. That's the whole point of the segment, isn't it, to see who died? Just go back to having a video presentation with full screen photos of who died. They want to have Latifah or someone else record a song to play over the photos, fine, but the focus should be on who died.

4. A more organized red carpet show

I'm talking about the official red carpet show on ABC. I don't give a flying hoot what Ryan Seacrest does over on the E! Channel. For the past few years the ABC show has been plagued by sound issues (the interviewers can't hear the actors, and the actors can't hear the interviewers) and just a general sense of "We have no idea who we're going to talk to!" from the interviewers. That, to me, is just stupid. Everything should be planned, at least in terms of who gets interviewed and when. I mean, for all I know the red carpet show is planned down to the last detail right now and it just doesn't show, but I'd like to get a sense while watching that someone is directing traffic and the people being interviewed can actually hear the questions they're being asked. It just makes for a much more pleasant viewing experience.

3. Have unedited "Best original song" performances

I like it when the show has the nominees for Best Original Song perform those songs on the show. Not in medleys, not in lame ass montages, and not as a big ass group. Each song should get its own segment. And the nominated song should be played in its entirety. There's nothing worse than hearing half a song. And more often than not these segments are entertaining, and what the heck is so wrong with that?

2. Add a "Best Stunt Coordinator" award

There was talk about someone petitioning the academy to do this (I remember reading something about the stunt person's guild putting on a big street stunt performance to gain public support for the idea or something), and I think it's a great idea. If you can have awards for best makeup, sound design, editing, and cinematography, why can't you have an award for the best guy behind the stunts? Stunts are a big part of the movies and moviemaking and there are plenty of cool people out there who deserve to be recognized. Who wouldn't want to see Jeff Imada win an Oscar?

1. Just schedule the ceremony for four hours

When was the last time the Oscars ever ended on time in a consistent fashion? Damned if I know. The show is always scheduled for three hours, which doesn't seem like long enough to get everything in (ever notice how sometimes the last hour feels rushed because there are ten awards to give out in that time?). And since the Oscar producers know ahead of time they're not going to come close to three hours, just schedule the show for four hours and be done with it. What's the point of rushing if you don't have to? And why keep up the illusion that you're somehow going to finish on time when you know you're not? If you end up finishing early, do an impromptu post awards show. People would watch that.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *