By The Numbers | Are Best Picture Winners Getting WORSE?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 чер 2024
- The Oscars have become more and more polarizing every year and the question must be asked: are best picture winners getting worse? Everyone has opinions, but we have the stats and we're giving it to you by the numbers!
If you enjoyed this video and are looking for more surprising data insights about pop culture, sports, and more, subscribe to Stat Significant's free weekly newsletter at www.statsignificant.com
Check Out Our Other By The Numbers Episodes!!!
►►House of the Dragon vs Game of Thrones► • By The Numbers | House...
►►Tom Cruise► • By The Numbers | Tom C...
►►Best Jackass Cast Member► • By The Numbers | Best ...
►►The Best Spider-Man► • By The Numbers | The B...
►►Geralt of Rivia Witcher Stats► • By The Numbers | Geral...
►►Best Movie Archer► • By The Numbers | Best ...
►►Best Horror Slasher Of All Time► • By The Numbers | Best ...
►►The Joker vs Harley Quinn► • By The Numbers | The J...
►►The Crimes of Batman► • By The Numbers | The C...
►►Air Bud's Career Stats► • By The Numbers | Is Ai...
►►Is Die Hard a Xmas Movie?► • By the Numbers | Scien...
Adapted from the article "Are Best Picture Winners Getting Worse? A Statistical Analysis." by Daniel Parris
Script and VO: Spencer Gilbert
Editor: Randy Whitlock
Director of Video Production: Max Dionne
Senior Manager of Video Production: Billy A. Patterson
Post-Production Supervisor: Emin Bassavand
Post-Production Coordinator: Mikolaj Kossakowski
Assistant Editor: Rebecca Castaneda - Розваги
I think the real difference is that entertainment has diffused over the decades. We used to all have to watch the same couple hundred movies. Now everyone has enough content to cater to their own tastes.
Yes, gone were the days that you have to watch a movie or you would be left out of the conversations. Now those "dialogs" are on line with a bunch of strangers. And it is the same in music. I have never heard half of the grammy winners of this year.
This is absolutely an important point. Movies aren't the center of culture anymore, since we have so many other content options fighting for and, in some cases, manipulating our attention. So in some ways critical acclaim doesn't matter to casual moviegoers. There's also inflation and how much it costs to see one movie at theaters for a family of four vs. subscribing to streaming platforms at a fraction of the cost.
I don't. Haven't seen a film I wanted to watch for years.
There is little difference between movies and television. Also, Everything Everywhere all at Once made a lot of money at the box office.
Wrong. Its the rise of amateurism. Anyone can be an actor, and the business side of things makes it worse by making casting choices based on clout not talent. Etc.
I take great offense at the implication that Babe isn't a masterpiece deserving of Best Picture.
I take great offense at the implication that Casablanca is only loved by film nerds.
I take great offense at the inconsistency of saying Birdman wasn't critically acclaimed (and putting it in the Unworthy category) while Bridge on the River Kwai is in "Movies we all love", despite them having the exact same metacritic score.
I'd say there's two directors currently making big budget movies that appeal to large audiences while still trying to make art and push the medium, Denis Villeneuve and Christopher Nolan. They both have their detractors, and I personaly don't always enjoy their movies, but I can't deny that they always try to aristically elevate their movies and avoid being predictable and formulaic, which I really appreciate.
Agreed!
james cameron
@@nikhilrampal7488 Sadly, he's more of a tech-geek with cinematic aspirations nowadays and unlimited budget, who makes advancements in technology, not story-telling.
@@banest0 shut up. avatar 2 was story telling and cinematic immersion....
@@nikhilrampal7488 wink wink
To be fair, the big box office winners kinda win in their own way regardless of quality. They get the trophy of most money and if we took the top 10 biggest box office draws we wouldn't get an idea of these other movies nominated. Ideally, we should have a mix of both in the nominating pool.
One thing I think you are missing here is the changing nature of criticism itself, or at least the data you are using. Your data about how Sound of Music did with critics isn't based on newspaper reviews from 1965. It's based on reviews of the Blu-ray release from 2010 & several subsequent rereleases, mostly. For movies after the mid aughts, your critical data is mostly first wave stuff and anything older, it's mostly retrospective. This is going to affect it.
High box office doesn't necessarily mean that the audience actually liked it. There are movies that everybody wants to see even if they think it sucks. Take the Star Wars sequels, for example. They did very well, but even the target audience doesn't think they're very good.
I agree with you on that. In fact, there are two movies I went to in the past few months that I saw SOLELY because I get sick of UA-cam channels spoiling every aspect of a movie the morning it comes out 🤬. So I went to see them the day before opening day just to not get it spoiled. One was excellent. The other...well, I'm trying to stop cursing so let's just say I was disappointed. 😐
What was the good one?
It’s not just that but the sequels did not create a good foundation for continuing the series. Otherwise we would be at least at episode 11 by now.
My all-time favorite movie is Return of the King. I don't know why the Oscars picked a fantasy movie instead of a drama that year, but I have absolutely no reason to complain. There is not a goddamn thing wrong with that masterpiece.
Other than its deus ex machina ending, sure. I don't care how faithful it is to the books, ghost armies are cheating and it ruins the stakes.
Most people agree that rewarding ROTK was more of a "congrats for making this trilogy". Most people would agree that Fellowship and Two Towers are better.
@@baseballfrk89 I preferred ROTK when I was younger, but in restrospect years later, the Fellowship was indeed the superior movie.
@@baseballfrk89 I think people forget that it won ELEVEN Oscars, tying the record set by Ben-Hur and Titanic for most ever. It wasn’t just a big thank you, it was an indisputable. Besides, would YOU give the Oscar to Seabiscuit?
Apart from the 15 endings you have to sit through 😛
The trouble is that due to a combination of streaming, cost of living and lack of awareness; people aren’t going to the cinema like they used to.
If cinemas price themselves where people can only afford to see 1 or 2 films a month then it’s likely they won’t go to see an indie flick or something unfamiliar.
also, and this may sound like an "Ok Boomer" take (but I honestly think there is something to that) A LOT of people (at in my perception: especially on the younger side) either have been or have become (Hello Covid!) increasingly socially awkward.
(e.g. I can understand the home office upside of not having to meet some of your colleagues due to their personalities, views etc. But being able to deal with people that have (sometimes vastly) different ideas than yourself is or at least should be part of a working democracy)
@@xxxaragon AND poor.
@@xxxaragonAs an introvert, I think going to the theatre is the perfect activity for socially awkward people. You spend 2 hours not having to make small talk, and the you automatically have a topic to talk about afterwards. “So, what do you think of the movie?” Chat for 15 minutes and go home because everyone is busy, better than a noisy party where you stay for hours, making awkward conversations with strangers.
There’s also the matter of movies competing with all the other forms of entertainment now available.
xxxaragon, you put a parenthesis within a parenthesis 😆 Parentheception!
I’ve really enjoyed all the Oscar movies I watched this year… Everything Everywhere All at Once, Banshees, Triangle of Sadness, Babylon, TAR, even Top Gun. It was a great year for movies. Much better than last year. Also Parasite winning a few years ago was totally deserved. That was a fantastic film.
I totally agree. I think we’re entering an era where critically acclaimed movies are not your boring Oscar baits nor epic commercial blockbusters, but also creative and entertaining. Love to see it
@@mhawang8204 It’s just in time, too. I think the tables will turn because the Hollywood blockbuster is becoming overdone fast. I think people will start looking for original ideas and movies with more craft put in them than cgi and fight scenes.
I'll be curious to see how this trend moves going forward. Parasite and Moonlight felt like films with great appeal, and Nomadland, Green Book, and CODA just feel chaotic. I think if EEAAO has a big night it may indicate a good direction. This also generally feels like a better slate of nominations than we've been used to. Top Gun, Avatar, Black Panther all have big nominations, and long time entertainers like Yeoh and Curtis are getting recognition. I'm not sure if I'll sit through the show, but this is the most interested I've been in the nominated films since Parasite's year
That is funny. I have not seen Parasite and I turned Moonlight off halfway through the movie. Green Book was good and CODA was awesome. I also did not get EEAAO.
@Tony Geckler - EEAO is densely packed full of philosophies & themes that are packaged in a crazy blend of different genres (comedy, romance, scifi, action, drama, etc), so it's normal for folks to not get it. I didn't understand much of it the first time I watched it, and had to watch it a second time and then watch analysis videos to more fully understand its philosophies about nihilism, absurdism, existentialism, Daoism, Buddhism, etc, and its themes about depression, ADHD, the internet, etc.
I want Jamie Lee Curtis to win because she is a Hollywood legend and she gave an excellent performance in EEAAO...but her costar Stephanie Hsu also gave an amazing performance and is a contender for best supporting actress. So it'll be tough competition.
@@tonyg76 CODA was okay, and okay movies don't usually win best picture, especially when a masterpiece like Power of the dog was nominated. CODA felt like a TV movie, the kind you watch on a sunday morning, emotional family drama, an OK script, mediocre cinematography and sloppy direction. No artistry in any way, just a feel good movie, good but not great you know? The kind who you're surprised to even see nominated, not the one that wins.
Just my opinion (and of anyone I've talked to about it so far) but I'm glad you enjoyed it.
yeah EEAAO was ok for me and so was Green book, loved Parasite and haven't seen Moonlight- its just hard to keep up with movies that aren't streaming honestly
Calling Casablanca - one of the most beloved American films - a “film nerd favorite” seems ridiculous.
Yes, that bothered me, too. An all time classic being called "nerd favorite"?
Ditto for All About Eve. It was the #4 grossing movie of the year in 1950 in the US. It sold about 16 million tickets which equates to about $160 million if that number of tix were sold in the US today. But, of course, the US had less than half its current population back in 1950. 16 million tickets sold to the US pop *then* equates to 10% of the pop. seeing it, so a better measure of Eve having a comparable impact now is imagining it selling *35 million* tix now, i.e., twice the number of tix that Black Adam sold in 2022 and only a little less than what Thor:Love and Thunder sold. I'm sorry, but both Eve and Casablanca were solid box office all over the world in their time and didn't cost that much so were enormously profitable: 30 or 40 times more profitable domestically than things like Black Adam and Thor:Love and Thunder *for sure*. Fandom's vid. is interesting but some of its numbers are misleading at best. At worst they stink.
Same. Casablanca is enjoyed by everyone, whether they are a film nerd or not, also one of the most quotable movie.
I like the idea of switching back to having both an Outstanding Movie category and Unique and Artistic Picture.
i think the Dark Knight not winning best picture in 2008 was the real pivot point where the Oscars started losing the general public but i can't disagree that recently there have been few big budget/popular films that are worthy of being best picture.
That never was deserving of winning a Best Picture Oscar. To be nominated for one, maybe.
@@RocStarr913 Much more deserving than Slumdog
The darknight is overrated
I blame the preferential ballot. Best Picture is now most agreeable picture.
Coda felt like a made for TV movie.
CODA winning was so odd, given that aside from it, every Best Picture winner since 1950’s All About Eve has been nominated for at least five Oscars, including Best Picture and at minimum two of these three categories; Director, Original/Adapted Screenplay, and Film Editing. For some reason CODA won with only three nominations, including Best Picture and Adapted Screenplay. Conversely, The Power of the Dog, Belfast, Dune, and King Richard all met that criteria (and all would make more sense to win).
I think CODA won only because 1. They didn’t want to give Best Picture to The Power of the Dog (the Academy allegedly HATES Netflix films, even if I think Power of the Dog was significantly better than CODA) 2. CODA is a crowd pleaser, and 3. CODA had an aggressive post nomination campaign.
But CODA aside, I actually don’t think Best Picture winners are getting better or worse. For me, it’s a bunch of peaks and valleys. For example, Parasite was one of the absolute best wins the Academy has ever done, Nomadland was a pretty solid win (even if The Father easily should have won), and Green Book was a mediocre win. All of these happened within three years.
Another perspective about CODA:
It didn't have a slate of nominations it won because it was the best overall package IMHO. If you didn't notice how beautiful the cinematography was, how every detail in the production design told a story, or how the sound design showed perspective, then they all did their job to support the story. I laughed and cried and it wasn't painful to slog through.
Keep in mind that the Best Picture category is on a preferential ballot (ranked choice voting). CODA may have been overwhelmingly second, but not first, choice.
Unfortunately, CODA was only in theaters briefly so we didn't get a chance to enjoy it on the big screen and with an audience. It's also only on Apple+ which means it doesn't play on regular TV.
@@GretchenVaughn I would agree with your first paragraph had it been nominated for more. If the Academy truly thought that the cinematography was that beautiful, why didn’t they nominate it for that? Or Film Editing, Song, or another Acting nomination for that matter?
Although, now that I think about it, your second paragraph makes total sense.
For the record, I liked CODA, and I’m glad it won over Belfast or King Richard at least (not to mention Don’t Look Up… I hated that one). Troy Kotsur was a well-deserved nomination and win, and I look forward to seeing him present at the 2023 ceremony tonight. Should it have won Best Picture or Adapted Screenplay? No, not in my opinion. I would have easily given Best Picture to The Power of the Dog and Adapted Screenplay to Drive My Car.
@@andrewheaney4874 We are on the same page about Don't Look Up. Not Adam McKay's best work. The music was especially annoying (and nominated!).
I loved The Big Short, though. Vice was also brilliant.
For me, The Power of the Dog is the kind of movie that I watch because it's nominated. I appreciate its quality and art, but not my favorite films to watch.
Honestly I think it's a good thing that low-money-making "artistic" movies are more and more nominated. Big box office movies already make a lot of money, so it's a kind of redistribution of wealth
You're what's wrong here. That type of thinking is destroying the awards ceremony.
@@colliric can you explain why?
@colliric You are right dude. Transformers 4 should be nominated for Best picture.
In what universe does low box office equal bad movie? What a pointless conclusion.
My favorite by the numbers yet! Really dug how you offered actual explanations and trends, good stuff!
If I’m not mistaken the clip at 5:50 is from a tiny indie film called “Shallow Grave.” It was a British thriller from 1995 and was the first major role for Ewan McGregor (at least, the first time I’d ever seen him - it came out the year before Trainspotting). I saw it in the theater and I remember thinking, “Wow, that guy is really good and really charismatic, I bet he’s going to be a star!” I was right!
The movie is dark delicious fun and I recommend it. Pleasantly surprised to see it included here - glad to know other people remember it.
I felt the same thing when I watched Shallow Grave. Ewan's performance was star-making. He had so much charisma.
Braveheart came out in 95, there was a lot of strong competition that year. Heat, Se7en, Twelve Monkeys, Crimson Tide, Casino, Desperado and yes Sense and Sensibility.
but they weren't nominated. (S &S aside)
@@expectationlost Oh OK I understand now, thanks for explaining.
watched twelve monkeys for the first time recently. Loved it!
Wow. Good on ya' for checking. Heat, Se7en, Twelve Monkeys and Casino are all great movies.
Apollo 13 was nominated though and is a far superior film just on attention to historical accuracy.
After gladiator I remember thinking every Oscar winner was some sort of fluke year.
If EEAAO wins, it may be a step in the right direction
Top Gun Maverick would be a LEAP in the right direction.
I think there's overlap in those 4 categories that wasn't really considered. I honestly don't consider myself a film nerd, I mean I love a good, fun blockbuster, and I was pretty devoted Marvelite through the first few phases but there are plenty of small, indie films that I'd like to see. I think for instance that you underestimated or discounted "simple" films and how meaningful they can feel to the human experience. Movies, media and entertainment aren't just about what is put into them, but what we take out of them. Or in otherwords, everybody is basic and anybody that thinks they're not is deluding themselves.
Sense and Sensibility is an amazing movie. I will smack those words right out of your mouth.
Hey guys,
Didnt't think I'd be interested in this, but loved it by the end! Thanks for this one.
I wish you showed the movie titles every time you show us the clips
To everyone who thinks The Academy used to have better taste, I challenge you to watch "How Green Was My Valley"
Came from Honest Trailers. Stayed for the informative and entertaining clip. (Liked and subscribed.)
Birdman placed in the "Unworthy" category is weird and incorrect considering most critics adored that movie
I didn’t like it, but, yes, most critics did.
It was pretty much unwatchable
HARDLY ANYONE WATCHED IT!
Critics also like Bros lol
I didn't liked that movie at all. Whiplash should have won the 'Best Picture' that year.
I saw both The Green Book and The Artist weeks before each won Best Picture. I liked both of them but was astonished that they actually were awarded Best Picture. By contrast, I think Terminator 2: Judgment Day, The Fugitive, Saving Private Ryan, The Matrix, Children of Men, and Edge of Tomorrow were the best picture of the year in which they were each released.
Babe was F'n ROBBED!
Thanks Crash. It crashed the Oscars.
This is genuinely insightful. Well done!
8:01 Black Adam didn't really make a lot of money, did it?
no
I will take absolutely NO Babe slander.
There should be SOME skew towards film nerd movies. The people who aren't watching the movies winning BP nowadays probably aren't watching the classics that you postulate "were so much better" either. They're just watching like 5 giant budget sequel movies a year, so Oscars is never for them anyway. The indies aren't completely inaccessible and movie fans are still getting good movies and some of them win (Moonlight, Parasite, soon to be EEAAO)
Doesn’t the success (both box office and critical) of EEAAO disprove this premise?
If the total box office is on a downturn (for example, due to the rise of streaming), than that would explain why highly reviewed movies have lower box office numbers. You should have taken that into account in your chart.
I bet if you added in video sales and streaming, movies like Casablanca would change to universally beloved category in a hurry.
Hollywood really needs the return of the big budget epic films like Titanic or Gone with the Wind. Something that can really draw the masses to the cinema, while also having an artistic edge.
These days you have the choice between big budget CG movies or low budget dramas. Since the dramas are low budget, you end up watching them at home.
Every year there is a movie that does that. Joker, Top Gun Maverick, Dune etc.. I don’t see a lack of that at all.
@@pb.j.1753 Those movies are genre movies. They need big budget 4 quadrant movies
I'm tired of people having the Oscars be the end all decider of best picture, one person's opinion isn't objective so no matter what not everyone will be happy
but that is not one person opinion, rather than thousands of film industry professionals, the process works out like general election, it's still a human process which cannot be fully objective but there is some degree of aggregation within the process.
Uh...the Academy consists of 8000+ voting members from the industry. It's not just one person. lol
Actually, Braveheart was up against Apollo 13, which won all the guild awards and all the acclaim, up until the Academy rejected it.
What a waste of time. Rambled on about the different categories, only to just say "yes, it's worse."
I have never watched the Oscar's, and usually don't agree with the winners, but I love for hey here is a list of movies you may not have seen, but you're a dork who likes Oscar bait, so you'll probably love them.
On the bright side, at least this year is a little better with Avatar, Top Gun: Maverick, and EEAOO having both critical and box office success.
Avatar was alright,Top Gun was fine and EEAOO was amazing but i think All Quiet on the western front will win
Yeah this year feels like baby steps toward blockbusters being something good again, not just something to babysit you for a couple of hours.
@@TheLivingThanos I agree. Everything everywhere was my favorite movie of the year by a pretty wide margin, and I think it has the critical scores to win but ive always felt like war movies win when it's a split decision.
Avatar 2 has 76% on Rotten and 67% on Metacritic. How is that a critical success? Or is everything above 50% ratings a critical success cause that will be a shitload of films.
If EEAOO doesn’t win, I will eat my fingers.
Thank you for the video. It was great putting some science into the art of it. My opinion of the relevance of the Oscars to the viewers and the whole point of going to the cinema,is this: the plot and the love of filmmaking. My point is when TG's trailer was released, the love for the project, was brimming out of the screen. Fair enough, you can love a theme and unfortunately don't be able to technically convert it into a final result. The plot of the movie will always be objective but this is where the love the crew put into the project will probably outshine your scope of interest. Nowadays it seems that everyone are doing the bare minimum and it shows. The love isn't there and the viewers are reacting to it.
What's the music called that starts playing at 4:01?
The problem is the divide between the audience itself. It's so hard to see small movies in the proper venue, the theater.
Fantastic video, great work guys
Green Book gets way more hate than it deserves. I thought it was better than The Favourite. That movie could have been so much more interesting if the rivalry between the women was more about their divergent politics than just vanity.
Really I just watched this video to hear good things about Return of the King
In terms of crowd-pleasing blockbusters, there's nothing stopping blockbusters from having the same qualities that made older blockbusters both beloved and adorned with critical praise. Most older blockbusters never received nods come awards time, and the ones that did were often the ones that had something special that made them worthy of praise. The original superman won big at the box office but didn't even get a Best Picture nomination, while the modest box-office success The Deer Hunter (deservedly) won best picture.
Since trends in actually going to the movies changes over time, I would be curious how expected gross would change for those midrange films that critics (and film nerds) lavish praise on. If people were more inclined to go see an indie film in the 90s on the big screen, but now are more likely to see those same films on DVD / or streaming, would box office grosses really capture audience? The English Patient made $232m in 1996 money, but if it came out 20 years later, would we expect to see it make anywhere near that amount given audience preferences for home media?
Looking back at some of the winners, I'm more inclined to say that Oscar winners are getting better in quality. Guess that puts me squarely in the "film nerd" category...
Technically Gone with the Wind and many other Oscar winning were based on what was established IPs at the time, i.e. best selling books.
There are way too many factors that go into this to make such a claim. Using just critics and box office is not enough.
Consider marketing, world events, advent of tv and the decline of tv, technology advances, streaming, and also look at things like IMDb rating and the number of ratings… and seriously so many more factors.
The chart you have only tells a part of the story.
Exactly! One big factor that everyone sort of understands (but maybe doesn't want to admit to) is the, "Let's give it to them because they've never won" scenario.
Khm khm. "Babe" would have been a stellar win! :-)
"That'll do pig, that'll do" is one of the most heartfelt moments in an American (correction: Australian) movie. Ever. No joke!
@@abalister6661 oh, my bad 🙂
There's a lot of marketing and big bucks spent on getting those Oscar nominations and getting those wins.
And also if something is created by big companies the ads will be everywhere, while an indie might not have much promotions compared to the counter so lot of people take the risk of watching a bad movie made by a well know big corporations than by other.
There are only two pictures this year that deserve to contend for Best Picture, and only one of them was nominated in that category. EEAAO and The Last Wish.
yeah I guess this happens when you don't watch a lot of films
Reading the comments, I really wonder if I'm the only one on Earth who wasn't impressed by EEAAO. I mean I liked it. The story is cute, the cinematography is interesting. But for me it feels more like a Spy kids movie, but for adults, rather than a, let's say, Schindler's list/The Green Mile/No country for old men level of winner
The Green Mile didn't win for 1999. For that year, it went to American Beauty.
@@Spiqaro same thing. That just confirms what I mean about some movies looking more "like BP winners"
@@moemoeanisong What movie do you think should have won instead of EEAAO?
Personally, I wanted Top Gun: Maverick to win.
Well that was depressing. I think best picture should be voted on a year after that oscars. To see which film has the longevity to be strong and memorable the following year. That will truly be the best picture.
what might be an interesting comparison is to look at the chart of the best animated pictures since that started around the time of the divide.
I now wish that there was an additional requirement to be nominated for Best Picture where a film, along with critical acclaim, must have a relatively high domestic box office (like at least $50-100 Million). I do feel that nowadays the Best Picture winners are movies meant only for critics & arthouse filmmakers but really no one else. Not only that, they are frequently forgotten in a year or two since they fail to stay in the public or even film conscious.
Best Picture winners should be based on artistic merit no matter how they do, not box office results. The Best Picture award should go to the actual best picture (though they get it wrong sometimes) regardless of commercial success.
@@leoprince691 the problem is that many of those films that do win or are nominated based on artistic merit often do not stand the test of time or are fondly remembered even a year later. That is why I stated that the winning film should be successful at the box office AND receive acclaim. And I’m sorry, but just of the winning movies just don’t really have the most widespread cultural relevance when they release. IMO, Neither Moonlight or Parasite were deserving of the award. Those movies came practically out of nowhere and won. I’m still pissed that Parasite beat out 1917, which I still argue is a better film in every capacity, and it had better box office returns. I am grateful that Oppenheimer won best picture, since it appeased both viewers and critics alike; though i still don’t get why Barbie was nominated at all (it was good, but not great).
Nice nerdy review. Consider layering the quadrants with viewed on streaming #'s and/or box office next time
So many charts, but no Dan Murrell?
Everything Everywhere All At Once is our only hope.
Nah... America wants to see Tom Cruise get his moment at the podium, anything else and the ratings are gone forever....
@@colliric That would damage the credibility of the Motion Picture Academy forever. The Oscars should not be a popularity contest or an overt ratings chaser, it should be about what movie of the past year truly was good for the medium. Top Gun: Maverick was nothing more than an extremely well-made, formulaic Star Wars retread that completely sanitizes and glorifies war.
There are still fantastic movies that do a lot with what they have. I just don't think they get the same kind of budgets they may have in the past.
I would support the academy looking into splitting Best Picture into two awards, low budget and high budget. Especially since the mid budget film has pretty much been moved and reformatted into the tv miniseries.
How was Birdman not critically successful with 87%, but Bridge on the River Kwai was, also with 87% on metacritic?
It's called "viewers are morons" and we don't respect them.
Cable? How quaint.
Are the movies getting worse? Try sitting through "Cavalcade" sometime, just TRY!
Hurt Locker and 12 Years a Slave are for film nerds?
Two real problems exist in cinema today. One is simply too much content. There are only so-many viewers but way more content to view, it inevitably dilutes any metric.
Two (and I think this will not be popular) but so much emphasis today is given over to repetitive crap like Disney/Marvel output that a lot of genuinely interesting cinema gets overlooked.
wonder if 10 nomination slots has changed things?
I saw another video essay and it found the the reason for the big separation nowadays is the death of mid budget movies. Mid budget movies are the types (usually dramas) where they can have good production, good actors and good scripts. Nowadays all that gets made is the massive budget movies that make a billion dollars and aren't the highest quality or the indie films that nobody has ever heard of. Without midgudget movies there will rarely be a connect between critics and audiences.
Well this was depressing.
This could be a series. I really wanna see the math on the rolling averages; just spent 20 minutes tracking the graph and the winners/nominees. The year after 'Crash,' was 'The Departed'. But the year 'Avatar' came out is the year they went from 5 nominees (noms) to 10 noms. I love math and seeing years why something won, or in hindsight, shouldn't have. There is a show in that, what were the big movies ALSO nominated, but not Best Picture? If there were 10 noms every year, what would have been nomed, and would it had won?
If I were to rank the Best Picture Nominees this year it'll be...
1. Top Gun: Maverick (A)
2. All Quiet on The Western Front(A-)
3. Everything Everywhere All At Once (B+)
4. The Fablemans(B+)
5. Avatar: The Way of Water(B)
6. Elvis(B-)
The Rest I haven't seen yet, and probably will not.
Your taste lacks depth.
@RocStarr913 what do you mean? The list consists of action, drama, and war. That is all of the nominees genres.
that split is the point at which the film industry began its death spiral. :(
I like how you spent half the video explaining the quadrant then ignored it for a graph
What was the point of putting movies in quadrants when your conclusion was just a two line graph?
Wasted potential. 8 minutes of fluff to show one chart quickly and draw all conclusions.
Should have expanded the data with nominees. Not only winners.
What would happen?
Is the chart even worst because rarely in the 10 years there was a big movie in the best category? Or maybe it evened out?
What would the chart look if you could predict the winner based on the trend? For example: year X, to maintain the chart trend before the paradigm shift, the winner would be movie X... And so on.. Each year...
Imagine seen the list of "possible" best movie winners if the shift did not occurred?
Wasted potential.... So much potential....
This is great.
Shouldn't the question be: Are blockbusters getting worse? (because the money-makers are not scoring high with critics, cause they all bland, samey, safe and sexless?)
Nope. Access media is the problem. Not representative at all of the general population anymore. They use to vote more for generally popular films.
@@colliric To be fair, it was the 2nd Top Gun, the 2nd Avatar, the 2nd Wakanda, the however many Batman movie.
So far there are two sides of people really want best picture. It’s Top Gun Maverick or EEAO. It’s definitely going to be a historical moment this year.
I think it has more to do with people can't watch a movie without staring at their phones. They can follow blockbusters with simple plots and stare at their phone.
4.2 billions? the heck
We are still surprised that on the waterfront won the best picture oscat
What's Fanda's take on 1998?
Chipotle burritos are getting expensive
There are films that flopped when they came out, for ex. Night of the Hunter, but later have become cult classics. One of the greats. Personally I'm glad that the Oscars are going more and more to innovative, quirky or unusual films that the masses might not care for. Hooray!
What is your favorite Best Picture winner?
mine's are Midnight Cowboy, Annie Hall, and Moonlight
Return of the King or Lawrence of Arabia.
The Godfather movies (I & II)
Ben-Hur: A Tale Of The Christ
It's simply my FAVOURITE movie of all time. 4hr Epic religious masterpiece! Heston is a legend!
What I like best about videos like this is when they turn out to be wrong in their predictions.
way too short. Way too little data and comparison.
Films aren't getting "worse" - society is just getting dumber and less willing to watch anything that requires some thought.
projecting the typical snobbish attitude the oscars is known for. nicely done. Also you're wrong on that
@@MoonstompingMike1985 I liked Dude Where's My Car... I'm no snob.
Wait, but where’s the meat?? That was 75% intro-overview and 25% “Welp, there you have it” - with zero actual breakdown of current titles and how they fare.
I think that one thing people seem to forget about the Oscars is that it’s a industry award voted on by the people who work in it not by fans or viewers. It would be like an award association for Culinary arts going to be McDonald’s because they sell a lot more food and people like to eat it all over the world!! Even though it’s not “good food” it simply wins because of widespread locations and money spent on marketing globally! It’s not too dissimilar from Marvel or other major IP properties. It’s the junk food of Hollywood, and let’s be honest here it’s not good! But that won’t stop the masses from consuming it.
Why is Birdman with an Metacritic of 87 at "Low Critical Acclaim" but The Bridge on the River Kwai with an Metacritic of 87 at "High Critical Acclaim"?
All I know is that I'll never get over the fact that Power of the dog lose best picture to CODA
Power of the dog was cold, intellectually while CODA was a warm feel good. Also with more representation with disabilities, it was a more important movie than Power of the Dog. Also, would take the better story over technical achievements all day.
@@tonyg76 yeah, but the award is not supposed to be about the most important movie but about the best one, it should be about the technical aspects, the artistry, the quality. The director, the screenwriter, cinematographer, producers, visual effects team, everyone worked so hard to make the movie a work of art, but then it gets beaten by a movie just because it gives a good message? What's the trick then? Choose a good topic, make people care and then do whatever? Is that the Oscars now? Look I'm not saying is a bad movie, I'm just saying it didn't deserved the award. There are a lot of crappy movies out there with good messages. If they don't even considered to nominate the movie for best direction, how can they think it deserves best picture? And the Power of the dog did had a great story, relevant in maybe not so obvious ways, but a great message to give.
Same. CODA is a Disney Channel film and a terrible Best Picture winner.
@@pb.j.1753 For me CODA is a better best picture winner than Nomadland, Birdman, 12 Years a Slave. Very emotional and very relevant to me. I do not care about the directing and lack of artistry in it. I would rather see a good story win and that is what CODA is.
@@tonyg76 CODA is not better than 12 years of Slave, agreed on Nomadland and Birdman
all the good writers are dying or quiting :(
in a few decades AI will make everything :p
I agree
i am a film nerd: I am alienated by this video. I watched Triangle of Sadness but no Ant Man movie
They give stats in chipotle burritos. They truly are people of culture.
Seems like a flawed assumption to say that box office is an indicator of how much the audience liked the movie. If that was the case, no studio would ever spend any money on marketing.
I think there are a lot of movies on your list that were actually really loved by audiences (including unsophisticated audiences), but which did not attract too many people to see them for some other reason. And conversely, lots of movies that everyone went out to see weren't actually that well-liked.
It's not the only indicator but also it's the most integral part of a movie's success.
If box office wasn't a thing then actors and directors would not even look for payday.
Oscars have become a thing for mostly the elitist and for them to not even consider why a movie was well acclaimed by the general audience.
No movie is perfect but that doesn't mean they aren't exceptional.
@@SumitKumar-ni5iq Sure, it's the most important indicator of a movie's financial success. Hollywood is a business after all. But it really doesn't tell us much about how much audiences liked the movie.
Why not look at audience reviews on rottentomatoes, or something like that?