- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Why Audiences and the Oscars Drifted Apart (Video Essay)
Posted on 2/14/25 at 7:40 pm
Posted on 2/14/25 at 7:40 pm
This isn't a bad 10-minute watch.
It explains (or at least theorizes) why the Oscars and audiences have been drifting apart over the last three our four decades. The video points out that they used to go hand in hand.
1950s: 9/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
1960s: 9/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
1970s: 10/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
1980s: 7/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
1990s: 5/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
2000s: 3/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
2010s: 0/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
2020s: 1/4 Best Picture winners have finished in the box office Top 10
Last year's Oppenheimer became the first film since 2003's The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King to win Best Picture while also finishing in the Top 10 at the box office.
It explains (or at least theorizes) why the Oscars and audiences have been drifting apart over the last three our four decades. The video points out that they used to go hand in hand.
1950s: 9/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
1960s: 9/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
1970s: 10/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
1980s: 7/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
1990s: 5/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
2000s: 3/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
2010s: 0/10 Best Picture winners finished in the box office Top 10
2020s: 1/4 Best Picture winners have finished in the box office Top 10
Last year's Oppenheimer became the first film since 2003's The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King to win Best Picture while also finishing in the Top 10 at the box office.
6
Posted on 2/14/25 at 7:46 pm to RollTide1987
what are the main reasons?
although i suspect the fact that only effects driven movies and family movies make money because the international market isn’t as into dramas is up there
although i suspect the fact that only effects driven movies and family movies make money because the international market isn’t as into dramas is up there
Posted on 2/14/25 at 10:09 pm to RollTide1987
Considering the preview screenshot has a best picture winner from "Then" (a film that was considered both a pinnacle of its genre and a bad choice for best picture) and a movie that hasn't won (and has very little shot) for "Now", this looks like a non-watch.
In my opinion, this drift has more to do with what 21st century movie-going audiences have decided is worth paying to go to the theater for than Oscar tastes changing, though what the academy has voted for has evolved especially in the last 10 years. For most years in the 2010s, you have to go outside the top 10 highest grossers before you get to a non-sequel or movie that isn't based on established IP. At what point in Oscars history were they regularly awarding Best Picture to such films? At what point were they regularly awarding best picture to movies targeted at teens? That's what's been making the most money.
Moonlight was by far the smallest ever best picture winner, and it has remained so outside of Nomadland and Coda, which did not have opportunities to generate box office. Every other winner the past decade has been a financial hit, just not on the billion dollar scale that the biggest films now reach.
The academy is also now younger and more international, but we still get winners like Green Book. The greatly increased international membership of the academy seems to have altered the list of best picture nominees more so than the actual winners.
I enjoy thinking and talking about the Oscars, though I also recognize awards are inherently silly. I don't understand actively wanting such shows to award only the most popular movies. Everyone here complains constantly about how crummy current popular movies are. Why should those deserve acheivement awards?
In my opinion, this drift has more to do with what 21st century movie-going audiences have decided is worth paying to go to the theater for than Oscar tastes changing, though what the academy has voted for has evolved especially in the last 10 years. For most years in the 2010s, you have to go outside the top 10 highest grossers before you get to a non-sequel or movie that isn't based on established IP. At what point in Oscars history were they regularly awarding Best Picture to such films? At what point were they regularly awarding best picture to movies targeted at teens? That's what's been making the most money.
Moonlight was by far the smallest ever best picture winner, and it has remained so outside of Nomadland and Coda, which did not have opportunities to generate box office. Every other winner the past decade has been a financial hit, just not on the billion dollar scale that the biggest films now reach.
The academy is also now younger and more international, but we still get winners like Green Book. The greatly increased international membership of the academy seems to have altered the list of best picture nominees more so than the actual winners.
I enjoy thinking and talking about the Oscars, though I also recognize awards are inherently silly. I don't understand actively wanting such shows to award only the most popular movies. Everyone here complains constantly about how crummy current popular movies are. Why should those deserve acheivement awards?
Posted on 2/14/25 at 10:21 pm to Jay Are
I agree that the 2010s were a horrible decade for the Oscars including two years where the film that won the most awards won Best Director and a slew of others, many more than the BP winner (2014 & 2017). Those years seemed to signal that the Academy liked those films better than the BP winner, but chose the BP winner for political reasons.
BUT
Starting in the mid to late 1980s, folks didn’t have to go to a movie theater to see the Best Picture winner because they would just rent it or stream it later. Those statistics don’t account for the fact that many of those films opened late in the year. Most of their gross was made the following year after they were nominated. The Deer Hunter began that strategy in the late 70s which is why the box office rankings begin to taper off.
BUT
Starting in the mid to late 1980s, folks didn’t have to go to a movie theater to see the Best Picture winner because they would just rent it or stream it later. Those statistics don’t account for the fact that many of those films opened late in the year. Most of their gross was made the following year after they were nominated. The Deer Hunter began that strategy in the late 70s which is why the box office rankings begin to taper off.
This post was edited on 2/14/25 at 10:26 pm
Posted on 2/15/25 at 10:29 am to Jay Are
quote:
Every other winner the past decade has been a financial hit, just not on the billion dollar scale that the biggest films now reach.
Has it been? Maybe based on the budgets allotted to the individual films, but definitely not based on box office success:
2014: Birdman - $42.3 million at the domestic box office (#104)
2015: Spotlight - $45.05 million at the domestic box office (#94)
2016: Moonlight - $27.8 million at the domestic box office (#135)
2017: The Shape of Water - $63.8 million at the domestic box office (#118)
2018: Green Book - $85.08 million at the domestic box office (#88)
2019: Parasite - $53.8 million at the domestic box office (#98)
2020: Nomadland - $3.7 million at the domestic box office* (#42)
2021: CODA - $0 at the domestic box office**
2022: Everything Everywhere All at Once - $77.1 million at the domestic box office (#25)
2023: Oppenheimer - $329.8 million at the domestic box office (#5)
*Covid year
**No theatrical release in the United States
Posted on 2/15/25 at 10:50 am to bluestem75
quote:
Those statistics don’t account for the fact that many of those films opened late in the year. Most of their gross was made the following year after they were nominated. The Deer Hunter began that strategy in the late 70s which is why the box office rankings begin to taper off.
This is a good point, I think it had to open in LA to be considered for Oscars. I just googled Platoon and it was released 12/21/86 in 6 theaters. It made 241K opening weekend but went on to make $138M and was the #2 movie of 1987.
Posted on 2/15/25 at 11:01 am to RollTide1987
This is a mystery all of the sudden? Left wing politics and greed destroyed the Oscars the same way it destroys everything else it touches.
Posted on 2/15/25 at 11:05 am to Madking
quote:
Left wing politics
Yeah there was zero of this in entertainment prior to 2015 or so
Posted on 2/15/25 at 11:13 am to H-Town Tiger
I didn’t say there wasn’t
Posted on 2/15/25 at 11:15 am to Madking
quote:
Left wing politics and greed destroyed the Oscars the same way it destroys everything else it touches.
Don’t republicans and “right wing politics” typically supportive a capitalist economy which often results in greed?
Posted on 2/15/25 at 11:23 am to MikeTheTiger11
Why are you guys assuming such extreme positions? The extreme or overloading of either side is bad.
This post was edited on 2/15/25 at 2:49 pm
Posted on 2/15/25 at 11:41 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
This is a good point
No, it's not.
Box office factors in calendar-year releases. For instance, Titanic released on December 19, 1997, and made the majority of its $600+ million at the domestic box office in calendar year 1998. However, all of that counts toward 1997 as that was the year it was released in.
ETA: I don't know why I got downvoted. It's the truth. If you go to Boxoffice Mojo and check out the domestic box office releases for calendar year 1986, you will see that Platoon was the #3 film that year behind only Top Gun (#1) and Crocodile Dundee (#2).
This post was edited on 2/15/25 at 11:47 am
Posted on 2/15/25 at 11:47 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Box office factors in calendar-year releases. For instance, Titanic released on December 19, 1997
They may count it that way for this topic of box office hits to win Oscar’s but Titanic is listed as the top box office movie for 1998 not 1997 LINK
So Platoon must count as one of the 80s best picture winners to finish top 10 at the box office
Posted on 2/15/25 at 11:58 am to RollTide1987
General audiences used to be more interested in seeing "good" movies so Hollywood made a lot more general audience appeal good movies.
Audiences slowly lost interest in them, so Hollywood stopped making them.
Feedback loop.
Audiences slowly lost interest in them, so Hollywood stopped making them.
Feedback loop.
Posted on 2/15/25 at 12:06 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
They may count it that way for this topic of box office hits to win Oscar’s but Titanic is listed as the top box office movie for 1998 not 1997 LINK
For "calendar grosses." If you hit the drop down button on that same website, you'll get this:
LINK
Saving Private Ryan becomes the highest grossing box office film of 1998.
If the film was released between January 1-December 31 of a given year, it counts towards THAT year's box office. Titanic is the highest grossing film to be released in 1997; Saving Private Ryan is the highest grossing film to be released in 1998.
Platoon was awarded the Best Picture Oscar for all films released in 1986, not 1987. The same thing goes for Titanic. It won Best Picture for calendar-year 1997, not 1998.
This post was edited on 2/15/25 at 12:10 pm
Posted on 2/15/25 at 12:07 pm to Jay Are
quote:"I don't like the thumbnail, so I will formulate my entire opinion on that alone"
Considering the preview screenshot has a best picture winner from "Then" (a film that was considered both a pinnacle of its genre and a bad choice for best picture) and a movie that hasn't won (and has very little shot) for "Now", this looks like a non-watch.
You are basically woke SEK
Posted on 2/15/25 at 12:12 pm to MikeTheTiger11
quote:Don't Democrats and left wing politics typically support gays which often results in Monkey Pox and HIV?
Don’t republicans and “right wing politics” typically supportive a capitalist economy which often results in greed?
So you should be pro-HIV regardless
That is how you sound, bruh
Posted on 2/15/25 at 12:24 pm to RollTide1987
That was a great analysis. I think the only thing he missed was the success of children’s movies.
2024’s Domestic Top 10 includes Inside Out 2, Moana 2, Despicable Me 4, Mufasa, and Sonic 3. That’s 6 out of the top 10 that are just tools to distract little iPad hellions.
2024’s Domestic Top 10 includes Inside Out 2, Moana 2, Despicable Me 4, Mufasa, and Sonic 3. That’s 6 out of the top 10 that are just tools to distract little iPad hellions.
Posted on 2/15/25 at 2:13 pm to Roaad
quote:
Don't Democrats and left wing politics typically support gays which often results in Monkey Pox and HIV?
Wow you seem triggered. He interjected politics which is to be expected on this board when it comes to Hollywood.
I guess I shouldn’t bring up all the death and devastation caused over the last several centuries by Christians spreading the good word and disease either.
Posted on 2/15/25 at 2:43 pm to MikeTheTiger11
Lmao, what a clown
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News