Later this month (February 28th, to be precise), the 88th Academy Awards ceremony, presented by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, will honour the best films of 2015.
The Oscars Ceremony is where a panel of judges select the best feature, from a number of categories, and will ultimately name The Best Film of 2015.
The people who vote on the Oscars are the members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.
There are just under 6,500 members of this society.
Except there’s a problem with this, that I learned during my brief flirtation with a certain studio, during the 2007/8 Writers Guild of America strike.
The problem is that no voting member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is under any obligation to watch even one single film that has been put forward as a nomination.
They can just vote for whoever, or whatever they like. No questions ever asked. They don’t even have to leave the comfort of their own Jacuzzi.
The notion that, for example, Rupert Murdoch has watched the 2015 foreign language film nominations, being films made in Belgium, Colombia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, and Jordan, is risible, and beyond belief.
In fact, not wishing to single out Rupert Murdoch, because I’m sure he’s a really lovely guy, the notion that all voting members have watched every single film that is up for an award is equally ridiculous.
Of course, the current situation throws up some serious anomalies at times.
For example, Argo contrived to win Best Film, when the significantly better Zero Dark Thirty failed.
Shakespeare in Love won Best Film, when it was pitted against the massively better Saving Private Ryan.
And here’s a point for consideration; no animated film has ever been put forward for the title of Best Film.
What does that mean?
That there’s some kind of film industry glass ceiling, that stops any animated feature from competing against non-animated films?
I feel sorry for everyone who had a hand in the brilliant animation ‘Inside Out’.
For me, these voting facts diminish the currency – the value – of the Oscars.
A film won three Oscars?
So what?
It probably means that two 95-year-old, half-senile SoCal residents voted for it, while nobody else even bothered to put the film in the DVD player.
So don’t tell me how well a film did because it won any amount of Oscars.
That’s not a performance indicator of any worth.
How do we fix the Oscars?
Oh, that’s really simple, here’s my five point plan:
- Take vested interests off the voting panel (Rupert Murdoch, for example, owns TV stations across the world, owns Internet pay per view film channels, and also owns a major film studio. You think vested interests aren’t aware of which films are theirs, and aren’t aware of how their company could benefit from one of their films doing really well at the Oscars?)
- Make viewing compulsory (have nominated theatres show short-listed features exclusively to voting panel members)
- Make voting transparent (if you haven’t seen all films in any category, you can not vote in that category)
- Publish the results (remove secrecy, because secrecy breeds complacency or, worse, corruption)
- In the voting, take in to account screen receipts (this has to be mathematically factored/balanced, so that a film that opened in every single multiplex in the US isn’t advantaged over an independent film released in Australia)
There you have it.
We’ve fixed the Oscars.
Another Bourbon, Gerry?
You don’t even have to watch the film?
Are you sure? That doesn’t sound right.
I mean, you have to watch the film or how else will you know what to vote for?
This is madness.
It is madness. The Oscars has grown from a small gang of people who had few rules, to a huge gang of international people who have exactly the same rules.