9 Pros About Having a 10 Best Picture Oscar Nom System

What do films such as Avatar, Goodbye Solo and Where the Wild Things Are have in common? Short answer: Nothing. But on February 2nd, 2010 when the Best Picture nominations are announced, they could all very well find themselves nominated in the same category. The Best Picture section just got bumped up from 5 to 10 and will be implemented for the 82nd edition of the Academy Awards making Oscar night look something more like the Kentucky Derby. I always thought that horse racing is stupid, but the concept of having a larger playing field means the “narrative” of gets selected for a ten spot and the potential for a photo finish all that more possible. Basically the whole discussion beforehand the post March 7th, 2010 might have gotten a hell of a lot more interesting. 

Last year the French got it right, and I think with a better number – the César Award for Best Film went from 5 noms to 7. For the time being, the only negatives I see with ten nomination system is that the evening might get longer and Clint Eastwood could have a 2 nominations in the same year. Here are ten reasons why this change could be a productive, profitable and pleasurable one.

1. Studios no longer need to get behind just one film.
The former five nom system meant that studios had a dilemma on their hands every-time they wound up with a pair of pictures worth pushing. The best example to cite is last year’s dilemma at the Fox Searchlight camp. With a pair of sentimental favorites in Slumdog Millionaire and the far superior The Wrestler, the question became which film to push till the end? They curtailed or specified their campaigns leaving The Wrestler to chart best Actor waters only. In years where a studio has a trio of noms, then they can test earlier and know well in advance which pair to promote. Look for the folks at Focus Features and The Weinstein Company to benefit from today’s news.

2. No more Fall/Winter schedule cluster f*ck type of situations.
Studios generally wait until the the final 12 weeks to push their Oscar bait, quite possibly, they’ll start re-considering the Summer and even Spring as times to release their fair and build long term campaigns with end of season reminders. With everything sprawled out, it might mean less traffic during the late season, it means more Oscar noms already available on DVD, which in turn means regular moviegoers might feel less detached the moment the noms are announced. It’s especially frustrating when Best Year End Lists (which are the precursors to the Oscar noms) discuss films that only receive a wide release in mid January. Keep December 25th for family fair and films of wider appeal.

3. Art-house films are favored.
An April (Goodbye Solo) or June release (The Hurt Locker) would have normally been an automatic death blow. That may no longer be the case. Now mini majors and strictly indie studios like the Sony Pictures Classics, IFC Films, Roadside Attractions, Samuel Goldwyns, Summits, Magnolia Pictures and the Overtures can extend tux rentals after the Independent Spirit Awards.

4. Hooray for the Comedy and the Animated genres.
It’s such a shame that Best Film was only a category reserved for the most part, darker moments in the human condition. Last year may not be a good example, but generally the rule of thumb was it better be dep in drama and/or a Holocaust movie to make a bid for Best Film – and we can forget about animation films which never got any respect from the Academy. While a wider category would not have given Pixar’s Wall-E a chance for a win, it still would have been given the respect it deserves. The new formula also has a direct consequence on the Academy Awards’ rival awards. The Golden Globes have become slightly less relevant.

5. No more “Rocky” type scenarios.
In 1976, Taxi Driver and three other films lost to Stallone’s Rocky. Everyone likes a rags-to-riches, come-from-behind tales and this applies to Oscar nominated films as well. It will be easier for a Shakespeare in Love, Chicago or Crash to get nominated, but much harder for them to actually win. Here is my theory. Every year there’ll be more than one “Dark horse” contender to vote for. Voters love pulling for the underdog and there is nothing wrong with that except when it is unmerited – a smart Oscar campaign combined with poor judgement sometimes reflect poorly on Oscar’s history and its voters. A 10 choice system will likely split the dark horse votes – meaning that “accidents” will occur less frequently.

6. Theater owners win.
When I wasn’t a critic and not seeing 200 plus films a year, it was when the nominations were announced that I would look forward to book several dates at the movie theater. I imagine that owners who go through a “dry” period prior to Spring break might make an extra buck – either buy extending a film’s run (the words “Oscar Nom” must contain some kind of clout) or by introducing a program of sorts like the AMC and local art-house theaters do now every year.

7. No more easy predictions.
There is always a doubt when the one you think might win is going up against 4 others, change that number to 9 others. I stopped going to Oscar pool parties because the guessing work was taken out of the equation – I think i might have become interesting again.

8. Average moviegoers win.
The average moviegoer sees about five or six films per year, and of course feels totally alienated when The Dark Knight is not in the final nominations. By feeling somewhat invested in the final outcome, viewers championing their films until the end might get curious about the other titles mentioned in all the press beforehand and on the night itself.

9. Academy Award show night.
If the short film category thought they were sitting far away from the action, their seats will be pushed back even further. More “stars” to represent more films means more dresses on the red carpet, more material for the writers to make jokes on, and folks will be invested in the show until the very end. No more pulling the plug midway thru.