The Annual Academy Awards - General Discussion

[tv echo]

Edited February 28, 2022 by tv echo

[Milburn Stone]

21 minutes ago, tv echo said:

Wow. The Academy isn't even trying to hide the stench of failure now.

[Crs97]

I'm really hoping that Will Smith's SAG win does not translate to the Oscars.  He is barely third in my vote, and I don't look at his film history and think he is "due."  Andrew Garfield (especially - he is my number 1 choice!) and Benedict Cumberbatch are revelations;  Will played a variation of characters he's played in the past.  Alas, I am sure to be disappointed yet again.

[NUguy514]

2 hours ago, Crs97 said:

I'm really hoping that Will Smith's SAG win does not translate to the Oscars.  He is barely third in my vote, and I don't look at his film history and think he is "due."  Andrew Garfield (especially - he is my number 1 choice!) and Benedict Cumberbatch are revelations;  Will played a variation of characters he's played in the past.  Alas, I am sure to be disappointed yet again.

I agree pretty much with every word (although I'd rank Denzel ahead of Smith), but we need to prepare ourselves for disappointment.😕

[truthaboutluv]

At the start of award season, having seen most of the performances, I really thought Benedict would be the heavy favorite, even though I personally love Andrew but that's just because I adore Andrew Garfield in general.  I was genuinely surprised when I saw this swinging Will's way. 

[Crs97]

Of the three, Andrew is the most “due.”  Silence, The Social Network, Tammy Faye,  the Ridge movie . . . He could/should have been nominated for every single one of those movies.  Benedict had the same kind of credentials.  I don’t know how Will even got in this group, much less become the favorite, and I like Will.  He’s Spencer Tracy to me - you know the performance you are going to get, which is good but not award-worthy.

[truthaboutluv]

I don't know about the being "due" argument and again, if we are going down that road, I still fail to see how Benedict Cumberbatch has become more due than Will Smith, much as I may not care for Will that much. I feel like I must have missed some of these roles Benedict was supposedly robbed for.

Keep in mind again that Wil has been in the game, if you will, since the mid-90s. I'm sure if you go through his filmography, we'll find roles that some have forgotten about that were likely underrated back then.

Andrew yes, had a few roles that he could have gotten nominated for, such as The Social Network. But unpopular opinion, as much as I fell in love with him from The Social Network, I think the years' long narrative of how robbed the film was is overrated. I never thought The Social Network was that amazing or so much better than The King's Speech.

[Bruinsfan]

With Cumberbatch's track record of playing queer characters I'm too worried about the possibility of him accepting the lead in a Bayard Rustin biopic and performing it in blackface to root for an award win for this one.

[Crs97]

I disagree with the "due" argument, but if I am going to play that game then I think Andrew wins it.  Frankly, I think Andrew's performance in tick tick boom should win it regardless of his previous performances that are masterclasses.

[scarynikki12]

3 hours ago, Crs97 said:

I don’t know how Will even got in this group, much less become the favorite, and I like Will.  He’s Spencer Tracy to me - you know the performance you are going to get, which is good but not award-worthy

I wouldn’t go with Tracy for comparison as he won back to back Oscars.

I can see the voters thinking this may be the best/last chance to give Will the award. More about the recognition that he does good/great work generally but doesn’t always do the typical Oscar bait. Doesn’t mean they will but if they do that’s probably the approach.

[Inquisitionist]

53 minutes ago, scarynikki12 said:

I can see the voters thinking this may be the best/last chance to give Will the award. More about the recognition that he does good/great work generally but doesn’t always do the typical Oscar bait. Doesn’t mean they will but if they do that’s probably the approach.

They didn't for Glenn Close a couple of years ago.  How many more Oscar chances do people honestly think she has ahead of her?

[ProudMary]

🙄

 

[Ms Blue Jay]

Sorry if this was already linked,

https://variety.com/2022/film/news/oscars-super-bowl-1235180351/

Why the Oscars Should Be More Like the Super Bowl

By Clayton Davis

 

4 minutes ago, ProudMary said:

🙄

 

How is it possible that the film Minamata has fans?  It made 1.7 million.  I haven't even heard of the first one.

[Ms Blue Jay]

7 hours ago, Crs97 said:

Of the three, Andrew is the most “due.”  Silence, The Social Network, Tammy Faye,  the Ridge movie . . . He could/should have been nominated for every single one of those movies.  Benedict had the same kind of credentials.  I don’t know how Will even got in this group, much less become the favorite, and I like Will.  He’s Spencer Tracy to me - you know the performance you are going to get, which is good but not award-worthy.

I have to admit I'm completely shocked that you don't think Will is due but you think that Andrew and Benedict are.  It's shocking how different people can view the same thing.

6 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

Andrew yes, had a few roles that he could have gotten nominated for, such as The Social Network. But unpopular opinion, as much as I fell in love with him from The Social Network, I think the years' long narrative of how robbed the film was is overrated. I never thought The Social Network was that amazing or so much better than The King's Speech.

I'm part of the crew that definitely thinks The Social Network was much, much better than The King's Speech.  (Same with True Grit.  Same with Inception.  How about Black Swan?  LOL) What I can't wrap my mind around is the thought of Andrew Garfield in that movie being better than Will in most of his roles, but hey, it's subjective!

Edited March 1, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[NUguy514]

It definitely is subjective as I can't think of any Will Smith performance I've enjoyed more than most Andrew Garfield performances (and I did vote for Garfield for the SAG award this year).  Will is Will in most of his roles.  He's a good movie star, but he's not an interesting actor and doesn't seem interested in challenging himself as an actor.  That's been true ever since Denzel convinced him not to kiss a guy in Six Degrees of Separation back in 1993; from that point onward, his choices of roles and his acting choices in those roles have been dictated by what he thinks audiences will like.  That has certainly worked for him since he's pretty well-liked by audiences, but I don't think he's a great actor since that outward focus makes his acting feel inauthentic.

I'm not going to get too worked up over his inevitable Oscar win; there have certainly been worse choices (hell, he won't even be the worst – or second worst – Best Actor winner in the last five years!).  If he can somehow drag Aunjanue Ellis on his coattails with him to the winners' circle, I will happily support his win because she was phenomenal as Oracene.

[Ms Blue Jay]

I think Will is a very interesting actor.  I feel like people are judging him based on his blockbusters, but he's had a varied career.

[Bill1978]

So I just read the news that the 8 pre-filmed categories will still have their glory and full speech. And they are basically just editing out the long walk from the back of the room to the stage.

So basically instead of doing the sensible thing of sitting all the nominees at the front and pushing back all the non-nominee actors (basically) that are at the front for the camera we get this ridiculous alternate thing. 

Maybe I'm in the minority but I tune in for the awards, not to spot Meryl Streep or Tom Hanks in the crowd.

[Milburn Stone]

On 3/1/2022 at 5:24 PM, ProudMary said:

🙄

 

I can't believe that a couple of decent movies are on there!

[BetterButter]

Oscars: Academy Infighting Mounting Over Categories Controversy

[yowsah1]

The joke here is that the Academy is doing everything to fix their ratings decline except the one thing that might actually save them, to wit:  Stop turning the Oscars into the More-Obscure-Than-Thou Film Awards.

[Milburn Stone]

1 hour ago, yowsah1 said:

The joke here is that the Academy is doing everything to fix their ratings decline except the one thing that might actually save them, to wit:  Stop turning the Oscars into the More-Obscure-Than-Thou Film Awards.

I don't see that they have a choice about that. Movies have changed. There used to be big movies that had merit, like, I don't know, Gandhi and Doctor Zhivago. (I never saw Gandhi and I hated Doctor Zhivago, but they were big "prestige," "quality" pictures that everybody but me had seen or liked.) Hollywood doesn't make those movies anymore. They make really good little movies that draw a specialized audience, and they make big, popular movies that are stupid. If the Oscars are still about movies of exceptional merit, those movies now are the little ones.

Edited March 5, 2022 by Milburn Stone

[yowsah1]

47 minutes ago, Milburn Stone said:

I don't see that they have a choice about that. Movies have changed. There used to be big movies that had merit, like, I don't know, Gandhi and Doctor Zhivago. (I never saw Gandhi and I hated Doctor Zhivago, but they were big "prestige," "quality" pictures that everybody but me had seen or liked.) Hollywood doesn't make those movies anymore. They make really good little movies that draw a specialized audience, and they make big, popular movies that are stupid. If the Oscars are still about movies of exceptional merit, those movies now are the little ones.

I disagree with this attitude, but it is typical of the thinking amongst Oscar voters that has made their awards show virtually irrelevant to any serious discussion of movies as a popular art.  If they want to to continue to push their cramped, narrow, insular view of what constitutes "merit" in cinema, they need to accept that vast numbers of people will simply not care about or respect what they have to say on the matter.  They are doing this to themselves.  They are making their institution obsolete.

[Vermicious Knid]

So reportedly ABC threatened to cancel The Oscars if categories weren't cut.

Quote

While originally believed to be a decision made solely by the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Science, it appears the decision actually came because of pressure from ABC. According to THR, an unnamed member of one of the boards of governors for one of the branches said that ABC threatened to cancel the Oscars via a clause in the deal the Academy and ABC's made for the Oscars' broadcasting rights if 12 categories were not removed from the show. A compromise was reached that satisfied ABC. The unnamed Governor said, "We were told we'd have to sacrifice something or we were going to lose the whole show."

 

[Milburn Stone]

14 hours ago, yowsah1 said:

I disagree with this attitude, but it is typical of the thinking amongst Oscar voters that has made their awards show virtually irrelevant to any serious discussion of movies as a popular art. 

I believe a serious discussion of movies as popular art continues with vigor, in that Nomadland and Moonlight (to pick two examples) reach many more people, and move many more people, than the latest contemporary classical music piece or painting. Those realms (classical music and painting) exist in a rarified atmosphere that makes a movie like Minari a blockbuster of popular art in comparison. The movies shown on TCM are also grist for an ongoing discussion of movies as popular art.

Edited March 6, 2022 by Milburn Stone

[Ms Blue Jay]

12 hours ago, Vermicious Knid said:

So reportedly ABC threatened to cancel The Oscars if categories weren't cut.

That is shocking but not shocking.  I wonder if another network could or would take on this show.

[Sarah 103]

On 3/5/2022 at 5:30 PM, Milburn Stone said:

I don't see that they have a choice about that. Movies have changed. There used to be big movies that had merit, like, I don't know, Gandhi and Doctor Zhivago. (I never saw Gandhi and I hated Doctor Zhivago, but they were big "prestige," "quality" pictures that everybody but me had seen or liked.) Hollywood doesn't make those movies anymore. They make really good little movies that draw a specialized audience, and they make big, popular movies that are stupid. If the Oscars are still about movies of exceptional merit, those movies now are the little ones.

Yet another reason to be sorry Hollywood gave up mid-budget movies. That was the sweet spot. They had the kind of writing, directing and performances that would sometimes get nominated for the Oscars, but also had wide appeal and were seen by a vast number of the movie-going public, movies like Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Sting, The Fugative, When Harry Met Sally. These movies are no longer made by studios because they can make far more money with large franchise driven blockbusters. 

[NUguy514]

On 3/5/2022 at 3:21 PM, yowsah1 said:

I disagree with this attitude, but it is typical of the thinking amongst Oscar voters that has made their awards show virtually irrelevant to any serious discussion of movies as a popular art.  If they want to to continue to push their cramped, narrow, insular view of what constitutes "merit" in cinema, they need to accept that vast numbers of people will simply not care about or respect what they have to say on the matter.  They are doing this to themselves.  They are making their institution obsolete.

I'd say you have this backwards: studios have a cramped, narrow, insular view of what moviegoers want to see and fill theaters with the same remakes, sequels, superhero and franchise films.  There's no creativity there at all, and the entertainment value for me is a series of diminishing returns since these films are so homogenous; any discussion of "merit" that applies to popular art as embodied by blockbuster films needs to start there.  And the Academy does nominate blockbuster/popular films: Joker, 1917, Little Women, Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood, Black Panther, Bohemian Rhapsody, and A Star Is Born all did incredibly at the box office and all were nominated for Best Picture; the last two years are unfair to judge on that front because of COVID.

Moreover, I think the films that are highlighted by the Academy now are much less homogenous than they used to be.  We are two years removed from a Korean film and one year from a film centered on an older woman dealing with life in the aftermath of the Great Recession winning Best Picture.  I think that's fantastic, and I found more "merit" in either of those films than I did in, say, the remake of The Lion King or the Bad Boyz sequel – or even Endgame.

I watched Drive My Car last night – a three-hour meditation on art, language, grief, and love.  The Batman is also three hours.  Guess which one made the viewing feel effortless and which one was bloated and dragged?  The incredible, and often incredibly quiet, power of the former is rare and unique and much more meritorious than the parade of franchise films that occupy the top of the box office charts, and I'm thrilled the Academy recognized it as such now because it would never have been nominated for Best Picture even five years ago.

[Ohiopirate02]

On 3/6/2022 at 2:08 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

That is shocking but not shocking.  I wonder if another network could or would take on this show.

This is going to depend on how much the Academy charges ABC for the privilege of airing the Oscars.  If it is line with the deal CBS has with the Tonys, then they might be interested.  It really depends on who is being greedy here--the Academy, ABC or both.  

[Rootbeer]

On 3/6/2022 at 2:08 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

That is shocking but not shocking.  I wonder if another network could or would take on this show.

No one else is going to take it on at the price the Academy currently demands unless the ratings improve.  The general public isn't going to watch a program about movies they haven't seen.  I do think the Academy needs to open up a little and figure out a way to include popular films that are well done.  They do exist.  On the other hand, they also need to find a way to bring the smaller, quality films to the general public prior to the ceremony.  Streaming services have actually improved access to these films which may help them in the long run.

The main issue is that much of the theater going public consists of teens/young adults who want the action blockbuster and the comic-based thrillers.  They are not going to go to the theater to see Moonlight or The Shape of Water.  There was a time when adults comprised the majority of those going out to see a movie.  No more.

[Milburn Stone]

3 hours ago, Rootbeer said:

Streaming services have actually improved access to these [smaller, quality] films which may help them in the long run.

That's a good point, and it makes me wonder something. Let's take Nomadland. How many people streamed it compared to how many saw it in a theater? My guess is that many more people saw it at home. But we don't know how many, because the streaming services are very mysterious about their numbers. It could be that when you add streaming to other forms of viewing, Nomadland actually was a big popular hit!

[NUguy514]

3 hours ago, Milburn Stone said:

That's a good point, and it makes me wonder something. Let's take Nomadland. How many people streamed it compared to how many saw it in a theater? My guess is that many more people saw it at home. But we don't know how many, because the streaming services are very mysterious about their numbers. It could be that when you add streaming to other forms of viewing, Nomadland actually was a big popular hit!

Theaters were still largely closed because of COVID when Nomadland was released, so I'd wager very, very few people saw it in the theater.  I wish I could've seen it on the big screen since it was so gorgeous to watch even on my TV, but no theater was open here in LA at that time.

[Milburn Stone]

8 hours ago, NUguy514 said:

Theaters were still largely closed because of COVID when Nomadland was released, so I'd wager very, very few people saw it in the theater.  I wish I could've seen it on the big screen since it was so gorgeous to watch even on my TV, but no theater was open here in LA at that time.

Good correction, but I still wonder about my larger point, which is: Can we evaluate the popularity of a new movie by theater ticket sales alone? This has bearing on what we consider "popular art" and whether the Academy's choices are in fact elitist. There are indie movies which--if streaming didn't exist and Covid never happened--would be drawing substantial audiences to theaters, qualifying them as "popular art" even though the receipts be well below those of the Marvel superhero movies.

[Kel Varnsen]

On 2/23/2022 at 10:40 AM, ShadowHunter said:

All valid points. The show will probably still drag they will just make the skits longer. I'm all for a show that doesn't drag on but knowing them as I said it still could. 

I was thinking about the skits and the musical numbers and all the extra stuff they add. ABC probably knows minute by minute which awards people watch and which ones they change the channel for. And they probably have for years. So I presume the skits and the songs were probably added to try and keep people's interest during those awards. Because I remember watching the awards when I was younger and they would always give out the best supporting awards then it would be a long haul of awards to people who aren't famous until towards the end when they give out the other acting awards, director and best picture. Throw in a top level musical artist in the middle of that and people were probably more likely to keep watching.

6 minutes ago, Milburn Stone said:

Good correction, but I still wonder about my larger point, which is: Can we evaluate the popularity of a new movie by theater ticket sales alone? This has bearing on what we consider "popular art" and whether the Academy's choices are in fact elitist. There are indie movies which--if streaming didn't exist and Covid never happened--would be drawing substantial audiences to theaters, qualifying them as "popular art" even though the receipts be well below those of the Marvel superhero movies.

I was thinking about the short awards and I really wonder how many people who make like a documentary short actually try and get it into a theatre? Like in these times is a director better off, when it comes to attention and exposure by just putting their work on YouTube. And if the best documentary shorts aren't going to theatres what does the award actually represent?

[yowsah1]

22 hours ago, Rootbeer said:

No one else is going to take it on at the price the Academy currently demands unless the ratings improve.  The general public isn't going to watch a program about movies they haven't seen.  I do think the Academy needs to open up a little and figure out a way to include popular films that are well done.  They do exist.  On the other hand, they also need to find a way to bring the smaller, quality films to the general public prior to the ceremony.  Streaming services have actually improved access to these films which may help them in the long run.

 

The Academy would do itself a world of good of it changed it's rules to say that a movie was only eligible for an Oscar if it was in wide release or on a streaming service during the year it was competing in. None of this, "played for one week at only one theater in L.A." nonsense.

[Ohiopirate02]

3 minutes ago, yowsah1 said:

The Academy would do itself a world of good of it changed it's rules to say that a movie was only eligible for an Oscar if it was in wide release or on a streaming service during the year it was competing in. None of this, "played for one week at only one theater in L.A." nonsense.

 The only played for one week at only one theatre in LA only happened before the pandemic by Netflix to get their streaming movies into consideration.  And it only happened for like 2 years because the Academy would not change their criteria.  The pandemic changed this due to the dearth of movies that were released theatrically in 2020. 

Sure some studios do purposely release a movie early in LA or NYC in order to make the cutoff date, but those movies are released widely in January.  Plenty of time for the rest of us to make plans to catch them before the Oscars.  If a smaller film does not make it to your part of the country, that is not the Academy's fault.  The fault lies with the big movie chains choosing not to devote a screen in your area.  Movies like Roma or Parasite or Minari or Drive My Car are never going to be widely released in America because they are not going to generate enough revenue for AMC, Regal, etc.  Theatre owners are always going to choose a third screen for the latest Marvel movie over showing these smaller films.  

 

[BetterButter]

 

[yowsah1]

On 3/8/2022 at 4:03 PM, Ohiopirate02 said:

If a smaller film does not make it to your part of the country, that is not the Academy's fault.

It isn't the Academy fault, but it is definitely the Academy's problem, as not being able to see these films is a big driver in the catastrophic ratings drop that has put the very existence of the Oscars on the chopping block.

[Milburn Stone]

10 hours ago, yowsah1 said:

It isn't the Academy fault, but it is definitely the Academy's problem, as not being able to see these films is a big driver in the catastrophic ratings drop that has put the very existence of the Oscars on the chopping block.

I agree with you, if ability-to-stream is impaired to any significant degree nationally.

I don't know the answer to that.. It's obvious that lower-income families would be impacted, but is there a regional skew when it comes to streaming? My (uninformed) impression is that pretty much across the whole country, in every imaginable cohort except low-income, streaming is the norm.

[AngieBee1]

Will Smith beat out Benedict Cumberbatch and Tony Kotspur beat Kodi Smit-McPhee at the BAFTAs.  I feel this couls be the end of the road for them. Campion and the film, however, are fine.

[ProudMary]

3 hours ago, AngieBee1 said:

Will Smith beat out Benedict Cumberbatch and Tony Kotspur beat Kodi Smit-McPhee at the BAFTAs.  I feel this couls be the end of the road for them. Campion and the film, however, are fine.

And now add a Critics Choice Award for both Smith and Kotsur. It does look like Will Smith's finally going to get his Oscar.

Also, tonight's Critics Choice Award coupled with her SAG win would seem to give Jessica Chastain front-runner status for the Oscars.

 

[ShadowHunter]

12 minutes ago, ProudMary said:

And now add a Critics Choice Award for both Smith and Kotsur. It does look like Will Smith's finally going to get his Oscar.

Also, tonight's Critics Choice Award coupled with her SAG win would seem to give Jessica Chastain front-runner status for the Oscars.

 

I just mentioned in the Critics choice topic how strong Jessica Chastain is feeling for Best Actress. Kotsur is definitely the one to beat now. 

[BetterButter]

 

[ProudMary]

Anonymous Oscar ballot from a Producer. Some interesting choices and the rationale behind them. 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-features/brutally-honest-oscar-ballot-dont-look-up-coda-1235116095/

[MicheleinPhilly]

18 hours ago, ProudMary said:

Anonymous Oscar ballot from a Producer. Some interesting choices and the rationale behind them. 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-features/brutally-honest-oscar-ballot-dont-look-up-coda-1235116095/

I used to love reading these but now I hate them. They always come off as really bitter and petty. I usually end up thinking, "Thank goodness the Academy is expanding so rapidly so they can cancel out the idiots." 🙄

[Simon Boccanegra]

I was re-reading Steve Pond's gossipy The Big Show recently. It covers a 15-year period in Oscar-telecast history beginning with the Allan Carr debacle of '89 and concluding with 2004, when The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King won. It's a reminder that concerns about the popularity of the nominated movies are nothing new. Gil Cates [edit: Quincy Jones was an earlier year] was producing the '97 telecast, and he felt he'd drawn a tough hand. The producer -- knowing the show is going to be judged on its viewer retention numbers -- always hopes for a year when big hits are nominated. That chapter is full of hand-wringing about how Jerry Maguire is the only blockbuster in contention, among challenging non-mainstream fare (The English Patient, Fargo, Secrets & Lies, Shine).

Today, I'd say Fargo ($60 mil, a modest hit at the box office) is the most widely beloved nominee from that batch. A lot of people caught up with it later, on home video or on television. I suppose most people who were teenagers or older in the '90s do still remember the lines "Show me the money!" and "You complete me" from JM.

Edited March 25, 2022 by Simon Boccanegra

[Ms Blue Jay]

Wow.  I would have bet that Fargo won BP, but The English Patient did.  I would have definitely got that wrong.  Film heads absolutely adore Fargo, and of course it spawned a television series.

I will never get Fargo and I've tried it so many times.  I understand the movie but I will never understand the love.  (It appears that I like 7 - yes 7 - Coen brothers movies better than that one.) I've always loved Jerry Maguire.  I finally watched Secrets and Lies recently - it IS worth the hype.  Great movie.

6 minutes ago, Simon Boccanegra said:

 I suppose most people who were teenagers or older in the '90s do still remember the lines "Show me the money!" and "You complete me" from JM.

I think not just that, but Cuba's acceptance speech.

Edited March 25, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Simon Boccanegra]

12 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I finally watched Secrets and Lies recently - it IS worth the hype.  Great movie.

I'm so happy to read this. Mike Leigh is a cinema treasure, and Secrets & Lies is an outstanding example of him and his unusual working method (and his always-superb actors). Definitely a top-five Leigh.

[Ms Blue Jay]

13 minutes ago, Simon Boccanegra said:

I'm so happy to read this. Mike Leigh is a cinema treasure, and Secrets & Lies is an outstanding example of him and his unusual working method (and his always-superb actors). Definitely a top-five Leigh.

Yeah, when that Oscars ceremony aired I was far too young to appreciate the movie.  I'm glad I waited until now.  It was the perfect time.  It was very moving.  It was very relatable.

I actually got all angry because Brenda Blethyn got like, a dozen awards for her portrayal and I was like How did she not win the Oscar??????

I look up the ceremony and lo and behold..... it was the Fargo year.  So Frances won.  🙄

I know people love Frances.  I know people love Marge. I know people love Frances in that movie.  I just. Don't.  Get it.  Also -- she has such a small part!  It's crazy when I watch Fargo today and I'm like..... her role was small!

Edited March 25, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Vermicious Knid]

THR also did their annual Should Win/Will Win rundown. They're calling CODA for Best Picture and Jane Campion for Director.

[scarynikki12]

I've read a few of these anonymous voters and they've all commented on how they aren't voting for Dune because it's Part 1. That is the stupidest reason to not vote for a movie to win an award. If you don't want Dune to win anything that's fine but have it be because you feel that it wasn't the best in the category and not because there's going to be a sequel. By this logic, if The Godfather had been marketed as Part 1 it shouldn't have won Best Picture? If Coppola had said prior to Part 2's release that he intended for Part 3 to be released the following year that means 2 shouldn't have won either? Two of the greatest movies ever made yet these anonymous asshats wouldn't have voted for them if they knew there were additional volumes in the story. Hell, what if they felt Dune was the greatest movie they'd ever seen? If that had been their reactions would they really have let this absurd criteria prevent them from giving it the necessary accolades? They'd rather a comparatively inferior movie win awards simply because it's not a Part 1?

They need to send me their ballots to fill out because my criteria isn't this stupid. Plus I'd actually watch all the movies if I had access to the screeners.