And Ernie and Pete could be the models that bring out the statues and escort the people off stage.
Harry Potter was also based on literature and it did not win a single award for any of its original eight films.
I'm not suggesting it won by default, but 2003 was not a stellar year for nominees and LOTR had a leg up with it being the third time to be nominated, a plus, so what else was going to win that year out of: Lost in Translation, Master and Commander, Mystic River, Seabiscuit. Was there even a second choice? Not even close. How often do any of those films enter the conversation since then?The Return of the King was the film that the Academy liked in 2003. The fact that it swept every single award for which it was nominated demonstrates that the Academy was serious about honoring its achievement. If it won Best Picture by default because there wasn't much else, it wouldn't have been able to sweep all the other categories as well.
Chloé Zhao just won at the Directors Guild for Nomadland. Following the Producers Guild and several other precursor awards, it looks like that film has Best Picture and Best Director lined up at the Oscars.
I didn't love Nomadland so I'm not particularly thrilled about this, but I can't deny that it is extremely well-put-together by Zhao. I just wish I found it more interesting and investible than I did.
Interestingly enough, Zhao's next movie is Eternals for Marvel. If she wins for Nomadland, I think it would make her the first Best Director winner who also made a film for Marvel. I wonder if their appreciation of her work will make the Academy pay attention to Eternals for the next race or if they will continue to ignore Marvel as is almost always the case.
I'm thinking Disney/Marvel are waiting till after the Oscars before releasing the first trailer for Eternals.
As such, the success or otherwise of these franchises speaks more to the the tastes of viewers than anything else.
Was there even a second choice? Not even close. How often do any of those films enter the conversation since then?
The Harry Potter books were new and many just thought of it as "for children".
I don't know if J.K. Rowling being a woman played into it, but is it out of the question?
Did you read any of the books? Well I did, all of them, and that Kirkus review is absurd Imo. The Potter books were all excellent and as much for adults as they were for children I thought.Some initial notable book reviewers were also less than impressed, like this one on Kirkus Reviews: "This isn't literature. These are one-dimensional children's books, Disney cartoons written in words, no more.”
Because Eternals isn't on the schedule until November, I don't think they need to start the marketing for a while. The natural fit for that would be to attach it to either Cruella in May or Black Widow in July. The MCU has never been something where they need to advertise the director in the marketing because the MCU is the brand. They certainly could drop Zhao's name in the marketing if they want to, but I don't think they have to in order to sell it.
That's the thing. What is going on here is a disconnect between what the Academy thinks is worthwhile and what audiences think is worthwhile. I have said many times before around the forum that if you nominate really good movie that audiences have seen and nominate some smaller films, then that would help the smaller films. People would be curious about the smaller films that are nominated alongside the smaller ones. People would look at the list and say, "Hey, I saw Avengers and Toy Story 4 . What is this Parasite movie that is also nominated?"
Instead, by choosing to routinely exclude nominees that a wide audience is familiar with, the Academy is greatly speeding up their own irrelevance. If an average moviegoer looks at the list of films that are nominated and doesn't see anything they already know, then the chances are they probably won't care about investing in the awards at all. Again, I'm not saying that a popular movie should win just because It is popular. But ignoring well-crafted popular entertainment because it's not somehow not sophisticated enough as a whole is not smart.
Yes, every once in a while you get something like Black Panther or Joker which does break through.. But those are anomalies which prove the rule that the majority of big blockbuster films are persona non grata at the awards.
Admittedly, this year, there were a smaller number of blockbusters available to the Academy to choose for inclusion because of the pandemic and prolonged theater closures. But this Is far from the only year in which the exclusion of big films has happened, so it is a pattern and not a result solely induced by the pandemic. They've been doing this over and over again for years and the process of doing so is eroding public interest in the Academy.
Yes, it is out of the question.
Did you read any of the books? Well I did, all of them, and that Kirkus review is absurd Imo. The Potter books were all excellent and as much for adults as they were for children I thought.
Frances McDormand is the clear favorite imo. Globe. Sag. BAFTA