Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   The Academy's top picks are less and less likely to be box-office hits as well, but that's because most Americans aren't as smart about real life as people in Hollywood are   (news.yahoo.com) divider line
41
    More: Unlikely  
•       •       •

1214 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 16 Jan 2008 at 6:45 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



41 Comments     (+0 »)
 
mattbin
2008-01-16 3:12:33 PM  
most Americans aren't as smart about real life as people in Hollywood are

Come to think of it, most Americans can't seem to vote for the right presidential candidate, either. Why should they be trusted with identifying the best movies of the year?
 
Dogbeast
2008-01-16 3:28:04 PM  
most Americans aren't as smart about real life as people in Hollywood are
 
Two Dogs Farking [TotalFark]
2008-01-16 3:44:39 PM  
pics.livejournal.comView Full Size
 
Etchy333 [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2008-01-16 3:51:14 PM  
I'm guessing less movies came out in those bygone days, so all movies had a better shot at getting a nomination.

As for the disparity between America's choice and the Academy's choice, let's fix it. So the Best Picture of 2007 will be one of these:

Spider-Man 3
Shrek the Third
Transformers
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

So if the Academy wants to reward originality, then Transformers will be the obvious win for Best Picture.

Hollywood may be preachy and elitist, but depending on box office receipts is a joke. The Academy is an artistic organization, and if you don't like it, make up your own awards.
 
gotskott
2008-01-16 4:57:47 PM  
[image from images.orfay.com too old to be available]
 
tdyak [OhFark]
2008-01-16 5:03:44 PM  
Proof that movies were better twenty years ago.

I blame all of this on Patrick Duffy. It was ALL downhill after the "season was a dream".
 
sigdiamond2000
2008-01-16 6:37:36 PM  
You mean the same Hollywood that releases all those box office hits, submitter?
 
bronyaur1
2008-01-16 6:49:00 PM  
Or maybe it means that the biggest part of the cinema market is teenagers.

Hardy Boys books don't win Nobel Prizes, either.
 
don't understand
2008-01-16 6:59:06 PM  
Absolutely true! I, for one, can do nothing without the guidance of those geniuses in Hollywood. I don't think until I hear about what Barbra Streisand or George Clooney think---and THEN I make my decision. They're the ones who know; who am I to question?
 
TDUsGamer
2008-01-16 7:07:31 PM  
People like escapism, that's why films with explosions and special effects can do so well at the box office. (most of the time)

Think about it, art in museums is great, but most people would rather just watch stay home and watch CSI. Sure, the art gives you a better cultural viewpoint, but the CSI is easy to digest and requires much less thinking. Americans do too much thinking anyways, why should they have to think with their entertainment too? (with a twist of sarcasm and self-mockery)

Look here:

Possible Academy Films:

Juno, There Will Be Blood, No Country for Old Men, Sweeney Todd, Michael Clayton.

All incredibly well done and well written films. But how many have you seen?

High Grossing Films:

Norbit, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Wild Hogs, National Treasure:Book of Secrets, Bee Movie.

Money can't be used as a proper gauge anymore, simply because people know that kids and families are now the big moviegoers. Not every place has an awesome theater like the Landmark in Los Angeles, (with a wine bar, special 21+ screenings and a living room theater with couches) so movie dates are quickly becoming a thing of the past.

90% of the time, the Academy Awards recommends films you may not have seen otherwise, like Once or The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. So support these films, because it's getting harder and harder to find good films these days.

/hey Mark Cuban, where's my cash for the shameless Landmark plug?
//hey WGA, stop churning out crap and you'll get work again.
///hey AMPAS and Studios, stop screwing over the writers and treating them like garbage, forcing them to write crap to get work.
////hey fark...thanks for the extra slashies and the rant. :)
 
Phil Moskowitz
2008-01-16 7:28:38 PM  
The tipping point for me was Armageddon. That steaming bucket of piss let me know exactly how degraded the north american intellect had become. That should have been the low ebb of cinematic discourse. However that's only when the bottom fell out and Ron Schneider found his stride.

Charlie Wilson's War, I'm amazed it was even made. It's a generic political drama with a proletarian level script, but in this day and age it's a brilliant ground breaking drama.
 
bukketmaster
2008-01-16 7:34:16 PM  
Yeah...because that's what the oscars is all about: real life.

See, I thought that people who actually make movies might be entitled to decide which movies they like better than others, but apparently these decisions are better left to people who have never made a film or even been on the set of one, who only see one or two blockbusters a year and know nothing about directing, acting, lighting, editing, etc. After all, why trust a consensus of people who work in the industry an have years of experience when you could listen to the guy who saw all three spider-man movies and that chick who only sees PG-rated films with her kids? I'm sure they know quality when they see it.

On a related note, I stopped listening to my doctor's opinion because I read half a textbook once. Obviously I know more than he does. Oh, and I don't eat out anymore, either. Why should I let some guy who cooks for a living tell me what good food tastes like? I made macaroni and cheese one time, I'm sure I know more than they do.

Actors are full of shiat about a lot of things, but I'll trust their opinions about other actors.
 
Washo_the_Gorilla
2008-01-16 7:45:27 PM  
I learned the Oscars were a joke the minute I saw both the English Patient and American Beauty. Two garbage movies that were a total waste of time.
 
AuralArgument
2008-01-16 7:49:12 PM  
TDUsGamer: All incredibly well done and well written films. But how many have you seen?

All of them.

And even though they are the among the best of this years crop i feel that they are not going to be remembered.

Juno: was does every other teenage "indie" movie have to have a comic book opening?

There Will Be Blood: Very interesting film, will not make a mainstream crossover.

No Country for Old Men: Excellent movie, the lack of a resolution hurts it within the mainstream audience.

Sweeney Todd: Depp's and Carter's singing hurts the film from being great.


Michael Clayton: Would have been better without Clooney, just too many people around me where talking about him the actor during the flick and ruined it for me.
 
Phil Moskowitz
2008-01-16 7:52:36 PM  
Washo_the_Gorilla: I learned the Oscars were a joke the minute I saw both the English Patient and American Beauty. Two garbage movies that were a total waste of time.

lol.
 
AuralArgument
2008-01-16 7:53:42 PM  
Washo_the_Gorilla: I learned the Oscars were a joke the minute I saw both the English Patient and American Beauty. Two garbage movies that were a total waste of time.

Still better then 99% of what they where up against that year.
 
jwhite33
2008-01-16 7:54:20 PM  
Here's an example of box officer vs. quality:

If you ask STAR WARS fans which of the six movies was the best, most will say THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK.

If you check the all-time box office list, you'll find that the STAR WARS movie with the LOWEST box office total was THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK.

Go figure.
 
super9v
2008-01-16 7:57:38 PM  
Some things I imagine could explain why this happens:
1. the number of movies that were produced way back when versus the kind of output there is now
2. the ability of smaller films to advertise and promote themselves (and get Academy votes)
3. the variety of distractions/entertainment that exist nowadays
4. all the ways you can see a movie now (cable, DVD, TV broadcast, iPod - are DVD sales/rentals accounted for in total box office?)
5. have the rules for what can qualify as an Oscar nominee changed over the years?

I don't know everything about the history of film but I would guess that it was all about the big studios back in the 40s. Little indie films probably weren't even being produced, much less able to get the kind of support to get on the ballot. Blah blah blah...
 
Bill Frist
2008-01-16 8:07:48 PM  
I never undrestand why people would even WANT awards and critics lists to be tied to box office ratings.

What would even be the point? Anyone can go look up what movies made the most money. Why do they need to give awards out for that?

Awards are SUPPOSED to be for the best films, not most popular or biggest money makers.

jebus...
 
cgraves67
2008-01-16 8:11:12 PM  
Maybe Hollywood award-giving is out of touch with common American preferences?
 
Bill Frist
2008-01-16 8:11:27 PM  
bronyaur1 [TotalFark] Quote 2008-01-16 06:49:00 PM
Or maybe it means that the biggest part of the cinema market is teenagers.

Hardy Boys books don't win Nobel Prizes, either.

That is the other point people often miss.

Even if you honestly though popularity was prove of quality... people never seem to remember that short-term popularity rarely coincides with long-term popularity.

If you go back and look at the top sellers of the early part of the 1900s in books, you aren't gonna see anything you recognize. Stuff was a flash in the pan. Higher quality books (like say the works of Faulkner or Woolf) LAST and in the end become more popular than whatever pot boiler topped the NYT list in whatever random year.


Same thing with films. Does anything hoenstly think that Transformers or Pirates of the Carribean part 3 are going to be watched and talked about 20 years from now (or even a year from now?)

Nope. But the likes of There Will be Blood or No Country For Old Men will be.
 
Bill Frist
2008-01-16 8:15:42 PM  

TDUsGamer [TotalFark] Quote 2008-01-16 07:07:31 PM
People like escapism, that's why films with explosions and special effects can do so well at the box office. (most of the time)


Another thign to keep in mind is that just because more people pay to see X than Y doesn't mean they LIKE it better.

People like watching dumb entertainment. Part of it is the marketing campaigns, part if it is the tie-ins to other things they knwo (remakes, sequels, etc.)

But that doesn't mean they necessarily think such films are the best ones out there. I HIGHLY doubt if you surveyed 100 people on the street and asked what they thought the BEST film of 2007 was, that Norbit or Transformers would win.
 
quizkid8279
2008-01-16 8:24:13 PM  
Bill Frist: Even if you honestly though popularity was prove of quality... people never seem to remember that short-term popularity rarely coincides with long-term popularity.

Amen. I love how critics (or FARKers) always rake "the moviegoing public" over the coals for making hits out of stuff like "Transformers" or "National Treasure," when the reasons those movies become hits are obvious:

A) They're big-budget spectacles best seen in a movie theater
B) They're obvious choices for families who take all the kids from 4 to 17 to the movies on the weekend
C) Teenagers need something to do on Friday night
D) Nerds need something to do every night

People like going to the movies to have fun, and that's fine. Let it be. The success of "Pirates of the Caribbean 42" won't spell doom for PT Anderson, the Coens, Guillermo Del Toro or any other awesome filmmaker that you think should be seen by more people.

Besides, if people did make a hit out of, say, "There Will Be Blood," then the same people who complain that people go see "Transformers" will be whining about how their art film has gone mainstream, and will start calling PTA a sell-out.
 
Phil Moskowitz
2008-01-16 8:26:33 PM  
Bill Frist: I never undrestand why people would even WANT awards and critics lists to be tied to box office ratings.

What would even be the point? Anyone can go look up what movies made the most money. Why do they need to give awards out for that?

Awards are SUPPOSED to be for the best films, not most popular or biggest money makers.

jebus...

Sometimes film critics understand the more nuanced brilliance of some stories better than the public since they've likely had a smidge of schooling with regards to english lit and dramatic arts. They might be able to direct the less literate into an area that might stimulate them. Understand?
 
AlanSmithee
2008-01-16 8:31:48 PM  
Bill Frist: But the likes of There Will be Blood or No Country For Old Men will be

Exactly. Quality movies have 'legs'.
Eg: The least of the Coen bros oeuvres (critically speaking) is Intolerable Cruelty, Yet it was also their biggest commercial hit, whose box office almost beat all of their other movies combined.

Ten years from now, box sets of, say, Coen noirs (Blood Simple, Fargo, No Country) will rake in revenue, but the Clooney vehicle will be close to forgotten.
 
ElTaco
2008-01-16 9:03:01 PM  
I wouldn't say people in Hollywood are smarter, but they do know movies. It's kind of their thing. I mean, No Country For Old Men or the latest Waynes Bros. movie.....
 
MooseUpNorth
2008-01-16 9:16:14 PM  
subby: but that's because most Americans aren't as smart about real life as people in Hollywood are

Judging by most of the stories that get greenlit, this is both absolutely true and very, very frightening.
 
WFern
2008-01-16 9:56:12 PM  
Etchy333: ...Hollywood may be preachy and elitist, but depending on box office receipts is a joke. The Academy is an artistic organization, and if you don't like it, make up your own awards.

This. There is a difference between "Hollywood" and the Academy.

The simple truth is that, when Alvin & the Chipmunks beats There Will be Blood or First Sunday trumps Juno, it's an example of bad taste overall.

I believe Delta Farce beat No Country for Old Men in terms of box-office gross. Really think about that for a minute. Honestly. Stop and really consider that.
 
Eirik
2008-01-16 10:34:51 PM  
I always hear this stuff about the U.S. Does that mean that the top grossing movies in France are things like "The Red Balloon"? From the tone of the article and the comments I have to assume that only Academy Award quality pictures gross highly outside the States.
 
quizkid8279
2008-01-16 11:02:22 PM  
WFern: The simple truth is that, when Alvin & the Chipmunks beats There Will be Blood or First Sunday trumps Juno, it's an example of bad taste overall.

Teenagers, children and families are not going to go see "There Will Be Blood." They're just not. And I don't want them to, because they'll just say it's long, boring and deep. They are not the audience for that picture, and that audience is the one that goes to the movies more than any other.

As for "First Sunday," that outgrossed "Juno" this past week on its opening weekend, and films specifically aimed at black audiences always do well for one or two weekends (see any Tyler Perry movie as an example); "Juno" will undoubtedly end up with a higher gross in the long run thanks to its quality and its constant media buzz.
 
flyinmonky
2008-01-16 11:42:04 PM  
Anyone else surprised Letters from Iwo Jima ranked so low at the box office?
 
Heroic Poser
2008-01-16 11:42:33 PM  
TDUsGamer: People like escapism, that's why films with explosions and special effects can do so well at the box office.

Juno, There Will Be Blood, No Country for Old Men, Sweeney Todd, Michael Clayton.

All incredibly well done and well written films. But how many have you seen?

High Grossing Films:

Norbit, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Wild Hogs, National Treasure:Book of Secrets, Bee Movie.



I see top grossing movies in the theater because I like to have fun.

If it's serious movie or something I want to really pay attention too, like JUNO, I wait for the DVD and watch it at home, so Hollywood sees my money on movies they don't pick right away.
 
Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu
2008-01-16 11:42:42 PM  
I really don't understand the love for Juno at all. It was terribly disappointing.

The acting somewhat saved the film, but the screenplay and direction simply sucked.
 
RobThomas PowerHour
2008-01-17 12:07:27 AM  
You know what other movie didn't make big bucks at the box office?
A: Citizen Kane

Years from now people will have forgotten Transformers. But I know when I have children and send them off to college, they will be watching No Country for Old Men in their film classes.

/I just returned from the theaters tonight, which was playing Blade Runner:Final Cut
//Anyone remember Blade Runner making a lot of money?
///I find this article quite refreshing
 
Erik_Emune
2008-01-17 12:46:13 AM  
Etchy333: I'm guessing less movies came out in those bygone days, so all movies had a better shot at getting a nomination.

On the contrary - the studios cranked out more movies back when, sometimes as many as 1 full-length feature per week. Time has mercifully consigned 95% of them to history's dustbin.
 
Gangway Fathead
2008-01-17 2:24:07 AM  
WFern: Etchy333: ...Hollywood may be preachy and elitist, but depending on box office receipts is a joke. The Academy is an artistic organization, and if you don't like it, make up your own awards.

This. There is a difference between "Hollywood" and the Academy.

The simple truth is that, when Alvin & the Chipmunks beats There Will be Blood or First Sunday trumps Juno, it's an example of bad taste overall.

I believe Delta Farce beat No Country for Old Men in terms of box-office gross. Really think about that for a minute. Honestly. Stop and really consider that.

Your point is well taken, but for the record No Country has made considerably more than Delta Farce.

/I don't think the success of Alvin is an indictment of "taste." It's just the only kids' movie out right now.
 
tdyak [OhFark]
2008-01-17 9:21:08 AM  
MooseUpNorth: subby: but that's because most Americans aren't as smart about real life as people in Hollywood are

Judging by most of the stories that get greenlit, this is both absolutely true and very, very frightening.

You should see the redlit stories.
 
gunga galunga [TotalFark]
2008-01-17 10:24:01 AM  
RobThomas PowerHour: You know what other movie didn't make big bucks at the box office?
A: Citizen Kane

Years from now people will have forgotten Transformers. But I know when I have children and send them off to college, they will be watching No Country for Old Men in their film classes.

/I just returned from the theaters tonight, which was playing Blade Runner:Final Cut
//Anyone remember Blade Runner making a lot of money?
///I find this article quite refreshing

I remember when Blade Runner tanked in theaters and critics called it a blemish on Harrison Ford's career.

Going on a tangent here, but that movie was released the summer on 1982. Here are some other movies released during that summer.

E.T.
Fast Times at Ridgemont High
Rocky III
Star Trek II: the Wrath of Kahn
Poltergeist
John Carpenter's The Thing
Porky's
Conan the Barbarian
Tron
The Dark Crystal
The Secret of NIMH

They knew how to make summer blockbusters make then.
 
gunga galunga [TotalFark]
2008-01-17 10:25:16 AM  
They knew how to make summer blockbusters make back then.

/slaps forehead
 
tdyak [OhFark]
2008-01-17 11:46:54 AM  
gunga galunga: They knew how to make summer blockbusters make back then.

/slaps forehead

It's ok. If only there were a way to preview a post.

Snarking aside, I agree with you, that was a great year for movies. Most of the early 80's were great for the blockbusters.
 
teke184
2008-01-17 4:41:26 PM  
tdyak: Snarking aside, I agree with you, that was a great year for movies. Most of the early 80's were great for the blockbusters.

Unfortunately, it was also the drizzling shiats for Academy Award winning movies compared to other decades.


The 70s and the 90s had better Academy Award winning movies, both in quality and quantity.

70s- Patton, French Connection, Godfather, The Sting, Godfather 2, One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, Rocky, Annie Hall, Deer Hunter, Kramer Vs. Kramer

80s- Ordinary People, Chariots Of Fire, Ghandi, Terms Of Endearment, Amadeus, Out Of Africa, Platoon, Last Emperor, Rain Man, Driving Miss Daisy

90s- Dances With Wolves, Silence of the Lambs, Unforgiven, Schindler's List, Forrest Gump, Braveheart, English Patient, Titanic, Shakespeare In Love, American Beauty

The only winners from the 80s I can even sit through are Platoon, Amadeus, and Rain Man, while the 70s winners are pretty much classics and the 90s winners are very solid for the most part.

I blame Michael Cimino and Francis Ford Coppola screwing it up for everyone via Heaven's Gate and One From The Heart.
 
Displayed 41 of 41 comments


Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

Want more stories with less ads? Try

TotalFark

It's what the cool kids are doing.
It also helps us pay the bills.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.