Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) (1 Viewer)

[TravisR]

I hate this. It should go back to 5. Imo it dilutes the prestige of the award.

No doubt you know this but they don't care about that because they just want more people to tune in to the show because mainstream movies like Top Gun and Black Panther are going to be nominated if there's ten nominees.

 

[Tino]

No doubt you know this but they don't care about that because they just want more people to tune in to the show because mainstream movies like Top Gun and Black Panther are going to be nominated if there's ten nominees.

And it hasn’t worked since they expanded the nominees. Ratings have dropped pretty much every year so..so much for that theory.

 

[TravisR]

And it hasn’t worked since they expanded the nominees. Ratings have dropped pretty much every year so..so much for that theory.

No, no, it's going to work this time.

 

[Joe Wong]

The Academy has created a situation where there will always be Best Picture nominees whose director is not also nominated.

There are going to be ten nominations for Best Picture this year. We know this because they are going back to ten as a fixed number, rather than the sliding scale of anywhere from five to ten for the last several years (which usually seemed to generate eight or nine most years anyway.). However, there are only five nominees for Best Director in any given year. Therefore, it is literally impossible for every film with a Best Picture nomination to also receive a Best Director nomination. And yet every year when this happens there are stories that spring up about how the author of the piece doesn't understand how this could happen.

Most of the time, the winning Best Picture film also has at least a Director nomination. CODA, GREEN BOOK and ARGO are recent exceptions that prove the rule. You can normally tell what the "real" Best Picture nominees are based on the corresponding Director nominations.

Given the high degree of correlation between the two awards, I think that the Academy should expand the number of nominees in Best Director to ten in order to match the number of Best Picture nominees. This does not mean that all Best Picture nominees would automatically result in a Director nomination as well. But at least there would be enough slots for the directors of all the Best Picture films to be nominated if the directors branch wished to recognize them. This will also make it harder to tell which Best Picture nominees are "filler," if the directors are also recognized.

I do not expect them to make this change, but until they do, half of the Best Picture nominees will not have their director recognized because there is not enough space to do so. Unfortunately, that's just how the Academy's flawed math works.

Great point - I know that at least 5 of the 10 BP noms won’t have their director nom’d. My surprise at Variety’s ranking is due to the Daniels having won several Best Director awards (NY, Chicago, Washington DC, Dallas) already, as well as last night’s Critcs Choice.

So one would think they have some momentum as we head to Oscar noms.

 

[Jake Lipson]

No, no, it's going to work this time.

A key difference this year is that the three highest-grossing films of the year in North America (Maverick, The Way of Water and Wakanda Forever) are all in the conversation for Best Picture nominations..

If they actually get in and it appears the Academy is willing to recognize them, I think the ratings this year could very well enjoy a significant bounce. This would probably help to increase the exposure of some of the smaller films too because people are likely to be more invested in the race if movies they really like are involved. Even Everything Everywhere All At Once did significantly more business than the smaller size arthouse films they typically nominate often do.

Or the Academy could very well botch it again and only nominate small movies. We'll see what happens.

 

[Joe Wong]

I hate this. It should go back to 5. Imo it dilutes the prestige of the award.

Especially with regards to Beauty and the Beast being the first and only animated film to be nom’d for BP. As good as Up and Toy Story 3 are, with both nom’d for BP for 2009 and 2010, they did so in an era where more than 5 were allowed.

 

[Wayne_j]

Top Gun and Avatar 2 both being nominated would probably be good for ratings.

 

[Jake Lipson]

As good as Up and Toy Story 3 are, with both nom’d for BP for 2009 and 2010, they did so in an era where more than 5 were allowed.

Those two years are the two years prior to this one where the Academy had a fixed number of ten nominee. If it were up to me, I would have given Up and Toy Story 3 the award in both of those years. So I much prefer them being nominated versus not being nominated. I certainly return to those films more often than anything else released in those years. Given the wide variety of different movies being made every year, I don't think it is a problem to have ten nominees instead of five.

However, I do think your point regarding Up and Toy Story 3 demonstrates what I was saying before where you can tell what the Academy is just viewing as filler because the directors of those movies were not nominated in the directors category.

On another note, the last several posts are a legitimate discussion which grew out of Everything Everywhere's Oscar chances. But as we are getting into more broad discussion of the award season and the Academy's policies, I wonder if this last part of the discussion ought to be moved to a more general awards season/Academy Awards thread? I'm not trying to be a moderator here; that is not my job. But it is just a thought that crossed my mind because we are getting further away from the topic of this specific film. I just wanted to put that out there.

 

[TravisR]

Top Gun and Avatar 2 both being nominated would probably be good for ratings.

I agree with that but I don't think that people really care about award shows that much anymore so if high grossing movies get nominations, the ratings will likely be higher than in recent years but I still don't think it'll suddenly rekindle widespread interest in the Oscars. I don't think the lack of interest in award shows can really be 'fixed' either because it's just another example of the fractured media landscape where you can happily be into what you like and what others think or like is basically irrelevant. Personally, I think the Academy should focus on appealing to movie fans and people interested in the Oscars (or any award show) rather than chasing an audience that doesn't care anymore.

 

[Malcolm R]

Personally, I think the Academy should focus on appealing to movie fans and people interested in the Oscars (or any award show) rather than chasing an audience that doesn't care anymore.

I'm sure the Academy would love to do that, too, but they have to appease their television network partner that wants big ratings and eyeballs glued to the screen. In all the kerfuffle last year about presenting awards off air, they said the money from TV broadcast rights to the Oscars fund much of the Academy's annual budget.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I hate this. It should go back to 5. Imo it dilutes the prestige of the award.

Disagree. # of noms isn't an issue, IMO.

Now if they did a Golden Globes and offered multiple BP winners, that'd be different.

But as you know, 10 noms goes back to the Oscars' early days.

Was "Gone with the Wind" "diluted" because it was 1 of 10 noms?

 

[Tino]

Disagree. # of noms isn't an issue, IMO.

Now if they did a Golden Globes and offered multiple BP winners, that'd be different.

But as you know, 10 noms goes back to the Oscars' early days.

Was "Gone with the Wind" "diluted" because it was 1 of 10 noms?

True back in the 30’s and 40’s there were 8-12 nominees.

I’m speaking of modern day Oscars. It just seemed to me to be more prestigious being 1 of 5 than 1 of 10. It was more special in my opinion.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

True back in the 30’s and 40’s there were 8-12 nominees.

I’m speaking of modern day Oscars. It just seemed to me to be more prestigious being 1 of 5 than 1 of 10. It was more special in my opinion.

I think the 5-movie limit made a nomination more prestigious - if that's what you meant, I'd agree.

But I don't think a 10-movie limit makes the winner any more prestigious.

The BP winner still needs to beat every other movie from that year, so the # of noms doesn't matter.

But yeah - "BP nominee" is more valuable with 5 noms vs. 10.

 

[Tino]

I think the 5-movie limit made a nomination more prestigious - if that's what you meant, I'd agree.

Yes. That’s what I meant.

 

[Tino]

‘Everything Everywhere All At Once’s Michelle Yeoh, Stephanie Hsu & Ke Huy Quan On Making Oscar History: Now Asian Actors “Know That They Have A Seat At The Table”​

When 11 Oscar nominations came in for Everything Everywhere All at Once on Tuesday morning, putting it at the head of the pack, the film’s lead, Michelle Yeoh, was on a Zoom watching together with directors The Daniels and her co-star Ke Huy Quan.

In that moment, Yeoh made history as the first self-identifying Asian lead actress nominee in Academy history (Merle Oberon was nominated in 1939, but her heritage was concealed).

RELATED STORY​

Oscar Nominations: The Complete List Of Nominees​

Speaking with Deadline following the news, Yeoh said: “I think what I, “What it means to me, is all those Asians out there go, ‘You see, it’s possible. If she can do it, I can freaking well do it as well.’ That is the most important thing. I’m very ordinary. I just work very hard. There are so many brilliant actresses, actors out there who know that they have a seat at the table. All they have to do is find an opportunity and get there.”

‘Everything Everywhere All At Once’s Michelle Yeoh, Stephanie Hsu & Ke Huy Quan On Making Oscar History: Now Asian Actors “Know That They Have A Seat At The Table”

When 11 Oscar nominations came in for Everything Everywhere All at Once on Tuesday morning, putting it at the head of the pack, the film’s lead, Michelle Yeoh, was on a Zoom watching together…

deadline.com

 

[SamT]

Wow, is this movie really good? I dismissed it after having seen some scenes and said this is crazy nonsense, I can't show this to family members! Now I'm having second thoughts! I still don't know if casual viewers can enjoy this. I might have to see it alone.

 

[Citizen87645]

It is rated R, so there is that consideration that has kept us from watching it with our kids (8 years and under). One article I read yesterday acknowledged it was cool it was nominated but is ultimately too "wild" to have the mass appeal to support a best picture win. Personally I thought it was good but not amazing and agree that it will leave most people sort of befuddled. I love that it, and especially the stars, are getting the accolades, but my biggest concern now is the hype backlash making people who have yet to see it dislike it more than they would have otherwise, when they eventually see it for themselves.

 

[Wayne_j]

This is A24's top grossing picture of all time so it does have appeal.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

This is A24's top grossing picture of all time so it does have appeal.

A24 doesn't exactly crank out blockbusters, so it doesn't take a lotta $$$ to be their top grossing movie.

"EEAAO" made $70m US, $104m WW.

That was good enough for 26th place in the US 2022, between "Morbius" and "Ticket to Paradise".

 

[Alex...]

Nominated for original screenplay via WGA Awards