Happy Birthday
Entertainment News and Features
Entertainment Web Guides
Small Films Shine at the Oscars
by
findingDulcinea Staff
The Oscars are no longer dominated by big-budget hits. This year’s best picture nominees prove money doesn’t guarantee quality.
30-Second Summary
Big-budget films such as the “Lord of the Rings” series and “Titanic” have certainly had their place in Oscar history.
But filmmakers and movie fans alike are noticing a growing trend for smaller, quirky movies to pick up coveted awards. More people than ever have been wondering whether mammoth budgets can actually hurt movies.
According to a recent article in USA Today, Hollywood is so in tune with America’s love for the independent film that “every major film studio has specialty departments designed to create offbeat, smart contenders for the awards.”
While blockbuster movies used to rake in millions at the box office on their first weekend, the story suggests that the new model for success is the relatively low-budget film that receives critical acclaim, followed by Academy Award recognition, and then triumphs commercially.
Bob Burnett picks up on the changing trend in best picture nominees in his blog in the Huffington Post, pointing out that not only are the successful films smaller in budget, but also darker in tone.
Burnett calls all the nominees this year, bar "Juno," "relentlessly grim." The ultra-serious films “Atonement,” “Michael Clayton,” “There Will Be Blood” and “No Country for Old Men“ may be popular because of the national mood, he says. Recent polls suggest that 67 percent of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Big-budget films will never go away. But filmmakers now understand that you can't buy artistic merit, says Andrew O’Hehir in a Salon piece. “It's not that the Oscar voters have suddenly embraced finely honed upscale tastes and left multiplex America behind. At least, it isn't just that,” he writes. “It's more that Hollywood, in the corporate oligopoly sense of the word, has left the older, affluent, movieland-insider demographic of the Academy behind.”
But filmmakers and movie fans alike are noticing a growing trend for smaller, quirky movies to pick up coveted awards. More people than ever have been wondering whether mammoth budgets can actually hurt movies.
According to a recent article in USA Today, Hollywood is so in tune with America’s love for the independent film that “every major film studio has specialty departments designed to create offbeat, smart contenders for the awards.”
While blockbuster movies used to rake in millions at the box office on their first weekend, the story suggests that the new model for success is the relatively low-budget film that receives critical acclaim, followed by Academy Award recognition, and then triumphs commercially.
Bob Burnett picks up on the changing trend in best picture nominees in his blog in the Huffington Post, pointing out that not only are the successful films smaller in budget, but also darker in tone.
Burnett calls all the nominees this year, bar "Juno," "relentlessly grim." The ultra-serious films “Atonement,” “Michael Clayton,” “There Will Be Blood” and “No Country for Old Men“ may be popular because of the national mood, he says. Recent polls suggest that 67 percent of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Big-budget films will never go away. But filmmakers now understand that you can't buy artistic merit, says Andrew O’Hehir in a Salon piece. “It's not that the Oscar voters have suddenly embraced finely honed upscale tastes and left multiplex America behind. At least, it isn't just that,” he writes. “It's more that Hollywood, in the corporate oligopoly sense of the word, has left the older, affluent, movieland-insider demographic of the Academy behind.”
Headline Link: 'Box office: Modest Films, Niche Marketing Change Landscape'
In a year dominated by the small-scale runaway hit “Juno,” the fact that big-budget pictures aren’t receiving Oscar nods is evident, according to a story in USA Today. What’s more, filmmakers are beginning to understand that Oscar nominations and critical acclaim may mean making more money than throwing millions at a big-budget picture that tanks—if the filmmakers are willing to wait for the critical acclaim and best picture nominations that attract the big audiences.
Source: USA Today
Opinions & Analysis: Best picture nominees becoming darker, as well
In his blog on the Huffington Post's Web site, Bob Burnett suggests that America’s obsession with depressing movies such as “There Will Be Blood” and “No Country for Old Men” reflects a growing dissatisfaction with the state of the nation. Americans love of the gory and dark, he says, is related to our own life experience, “as we trudge through this inhospitable terrain, we believe we are constantly in terrible danger: death and destruction can happen at any minute and there is little that can save us except a super hero, the Virgin Mary, or a sagacious pregnant sixteen-year-old.”
Source: The Huffington Post
Hollywood will probably never leave big movies behind, says Andrew O’Hehir in a Salon piece, but those in the film business are certainly coming to grips with the fact that smart, mid-budget movies are making a splash. The Hollywood economy now includes “a relatively low-budget prestige wing” built to create critical successes that may not bring in the huge crowds at first, but stand a chance of triumphing at the Oscars.
Source: Salon
Related Topic: Scripts are getting smarter
In a story for Newsday, Gene Seymour quotes screenwriter Terry George as saying that the increase in smart, independent screenplays gives hope to writers like himself who want to make good movies. “The independents are where good stories are being told. Look at the two front runners for best adapted screenplay: 'No Country for Old Men' and 'There Will Be Blood.' They both have these weird endings that don't conform to whatever the studios believe the audiences want,” George says.
Source: Newsday
Historical: The best in Oscar history
The New York Times has a database of best picture winners for the entire 77 years of the Academy Awards.
Source: The New York Times
Related Links: Big money doesn’t always mean success
A $100 million budget doesn’t necessarily make a good movie, says Roger Ebert in his Chicago Sun Times review of "Battlefield Earth." The high price of costumes, makeup and sound effects was not enough to save this movie, detested by critics and moviegoers alike. Ebert writes that it is “unpleasant in a hostile way” and “the soundtrack sounds like the boom mike is being slammed against the inside of a 55-gallon drum.”
Source: Chicago Sun-Times
Yet, some movies prove that money can’t hurt. A December 2007 article in The Guardian points out that “Titanic,” said to have cost $200 million, is still the most profitable movie of all times.
Source: The Guardian
Most Recent Beyond The Headlines
© 2012 Dulcinea Media, Inc.
