Real Thoughts

Earlier this week the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science released its list of Oscar nominees. And surprisingly, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2, the last installment of the iconic series was missing from the list of nine movies competing for this year’s Best Picture Award. In the interest of full disclosure, I’m a huge Harry Potter fan who owns every film and book in the saga.

But back to the point that I want to make — as we approach the February 26 awards ceremony, the conversation will change from who the nominees are and those who were unfairly ignored, to the ever shrinking audience for the televised event. We will also hear about the Academy’s next gimmick to become more popular. Like the disastrous 2011 attempt to become hipper by having James Franco and Anne Hathaway, two young stars host the show.

I have a question for the Academy: If you want to attract a larger audience, why don’t you nominate movies that people have actually watched? Just like in sports, most individuals don’t watch games simply to awe at the beauty of the athleticism; instead, as fans, they have a vested interest in one or both of the teams competing against each other. For the majority of Americans, or foreigners, as the Oscar is an international event, what is the drive to watch a movie they haven’t seen beat another 8 movies they haven’t seen? Pass me the remote.

You cannot be a popular brand if you do not offer a popular product. This is not to endorse the notion of only nominating commercially successful films, of course, but rather a request that a film’s earnings be not held against it. The Academy can’t ignore popular taste while expecting millions to tune in. Do popularity and high box office make a movie any less worthy of a Best Picture Award? Is art real art only when it is enjoyed exclusively by a select few? I think not. It’s time the Academy learns to give its audience what they want; before its audience decides that the Academy is no longer relevant.

The other day I was talking with a friend who has a long and successful work history and is now trying to change fields. She was frustrated because the feedback she kept getting from recruiters was “stay with what you know. Right now employers are only looking for people who can hit the ground running.”

 This phrase-“hit the ground running”-stuck with me because, in my experience, that is very difficult to do. Even if you performed the same job within the same industry, a new position in a new company always comes with new challenges. After all, each company has its own culture, its own set of procedures, its own way to do things.

 I was once passed up for a job at a medical practice because I had no healthcare experience. The person who was hired (who had healthcare experience) lasted two weeks and shortly after I got a call asking if I was still interested in the position. I took it, and worked there for almost 3 years.

 I think that a better way to approach hiring is to focus on culture match, flexibility, and attitude. Skills can be taught, but you’ll never be able to change a personality.