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.
Real Thoughts 