And the Oscar Goes to … Something the Voters Didn't Watch
There's faking it 'til you make it, and then there's faking it for years after you've already made it. Some Oscar voters who've long since made it into the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences have apparently embraced the latter. Last month, the elite film-industry group announced a new rule for the final round of voting for next year's Oscar winners. Academy members must now watch all of the films before casting their ballots—all of them, all the way through.
That might seem like an obvious rule for voters of any award: View the works you're judging. But when I recently spoke with several Academy members about the new condition, the lack of consensus about how to judge a movie was striking.
'I am the first one to be on that list of people who don't watch everything,' one film editor in the Academy told me. (All of my interview subjects in the Academy requested anonymity to speak candidly about their own behavior or the Academy's conduct.) 'Wicked is totally uninteresting. I know I'm not going to vote for it, and I didn't really watch it,' she added, referring to the Wizard of Oz prequel that was nominated for Best Picture this year. 'I can only watch the things I'm interested in. Otherwise, for me, it's a waste of my time.' The new rule won't change her habits, she told me. 'I know what I like. I know what I don't like. If I start it and watch 10, 15 minutes and know I'm not going to vote for it, I'll just continue 'Play,' but I might not watch it. I'm just gonna walk away.'
What exactly have the Academy's voting members been doing for the past nearly 100 years? Members have been encouraged to give all nominees a fair shake, but—aside from a few specialized categories—were not explicitly required to see a movie in competition from opening sequence to closing credits. Under the new system, to have their final-round ballots unlocked and counted, voters will have to either watch each nominee from start to finish via the Academy's private screening app or complete a form attesting to where and when they saw the film (if at an external venue).
[David Sims: The Oscars have left the mainstream moviegoer behind]
Some members I spoke with pointed out that the rule reform lacked teeth—if voters are willing to lie about having seen a movie at a festival or at the theater. 'The Academy can't track you,' one director in the Academy told me, 'and you can just tick it off.' The Academy's app isn't foolproof either. Voters can leave the movie running while cooking dinner or answering emails. But the point is that the Academy's honor system will now include the jeopardy of dishonor for cheating—given the theoretical risk of being caught in a lie.
One documentarian in the Academy told me that some tightening up was needed, but requiring voters to sit through all of the films in full was asking too much: 'Filmmakers know very quickly whether something that they're watching is really special,' he told me. 'What is watching a film? Is it watching the first 25 minutes of a film? Does that count? Or do you have to get all the way through?' If we decide to award an Oscar for the Best Opening 25 Minutes, perhaps we can all agree that Saving Private Ryan deserves one retroactively.
Other members disagreed that filmmakers can distinguish greatness from mediocrity so quickly. The new rule should have come out a 'long time back,' the director told me. So why did the update come only now? 'Not a lot of people saw The Brutalist in its entirety,' he said. The film took home three Academy Awards. Perhaps some of the Academy's members felt they didn't need to sit through the three-and-a-half-hour run time (plus a 15-minute intermission in theaters) and come to an independent view of their own, because the Golden Globes voters had already garlanded the film with three of their biggest awards a few weeks before the Oscars. (The Academy declined my request for comment.) 'The year-end films are Oscar-bait movies,' the director said—meaning they come late enough to be fresh in the voters' memory but early enough to accrue critical buzz.
'I made it through 45 minutes,' another documentary maker in the Academy told me. Watching it was 'a big ask.' A composer in the Academy, one of two I spoke with, told me that voters skipping the hours-long Brutalist was an open secret among his peers: 'Several people were like, 'I can't. I started it and I couldn't finish.'' Its success considering its scant viewership 'was definitely a head-scratcher to me and most of my friends,' he said.
The Brutalist was not the first film in Academy history to win more acclaim than viewing minutes. According to the director I spoke with, the 2022 four-Oscar winner All Quiet on the Western Front was also scarcely watched by voters. Nodding off early makes for a reliable verdict too. 'I fell asleep during Conclave,' the documentary maker confessed.
The obvious question: How do movies that many Academy members find unwatchable end up being nominated for, or even winning, the highest honors in the industry? From my conversations with Academy members, one answer emerged: If not everyone who votes has time—or makes time—to watch every movie in full, an army of publicists is ready to capitalize on time-crunched voters' suggestibility.
[Read: What college football and the Oscars have in common]
The 2025 Best Picture winner, Anora, made headlines after its studio spent a good chunk of its $18 million marketing budget—triple the film's $6 million production cost—on its Oscars campaign, which included selling a line of film-branded red thongs. Generating word-of-mouth excitement among a body of 10,000 movie insiders is an expensive but crucial part of the game. The other composer in the Academy I spoke with told me that bigger-budget films have been known to co-host a private concert for Oscar voters at L.A.'s Royce Hall theater that is essentially 'a cocktail party with drinks and hors d'oeuvres' to showcase their nominated score's composer. 'You're basically at a campaign rally for very few films,' he said.
The first composer told me that 'when Barbie was a nominee, the year before last, Warner Bros. put on so many events.' He offered a blunt appraisal of how Academy voting works: 'It certainly isn't whether or not we watch the films. It's the extent to which we are being wined and dined'—then adding, 'Not wined and dined, but given access.' Particularly in determining votes for more niche award categories, film publicists play a big role. 'There's so much competition,' he said. Some people would consider the choices 'overwhelming, and want to be told what to vote for.' (Members are not, of course, under any obligation to vote in every category.)
Although Academy members tended to see the rule change as a housekeeping fix, online cynics read it as a confession of fraud and corruption. The controversy has put a spotlight on the gap between what the Oscars strives to be and what it actually is. Instead of celebrating what makes cinema great, it's made intra-Hollywood intrigue visible to the general public. 'What's fascinating,' William Stribling, a filmmaker who is not an Academy member, told me, 'is that the public and moviegoing audiences are so heavily invested in this thing, which is really an internal, industry-celebrating-industry event.'
By trying to make the Oscars fairer, the Academy inadvertently revealed that the award business hasn't been all that fair to begin with. But perhaps that's Hollywood's worst-kept secret already.
Article originally published at The Atlantic
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
3 hours ago
- Forbes
Cynthia Erivo's Post-‘Wicked' Music Brings Her To New Career Highs
Cynthia Erivo's solo album I Forgive You debuts on five Billboard charts, marking her first ... More appearances on both the Top R&B Albums and R&B/Hip-Hop Albums rankings. PARIS, FRANCE - OCTOBER 01: (EDITORIAL USE ONLY - For Non-Editorial use please seek approval from Fashion House) Cynthia Erivo attends the Louis Vuitton Paris Womenswear Spring-Summer 2025 show as part of Paris Fashion Week on October 01, 2024 in Paris, France. (Photo by Pascal) Most people in America are familiar with Cynthia Erivo's singing voice thanks to the massive success of the film adaptation of Wicked. In the box office smash, the talented singer and actress portrays Elphaba, the green witch from the famed Wizard of Oz story. Erivo, of course, had been successful for many years prior to Wicked, with standout roles in Broadway shows like The Color Purple and movies such as Harriet. She also releases music as a solo artist, and her latest project — a full-length album titled I Forgive You — has become her greatest solo success on a number of Billboard charts. I Forgive You Debuts on Five Charts I Forgive You benefits from Erivo's newfound level of fame, which is directly tied to how popular Wicked has been. The album opens in lofty positions on several tallies in America, and most notably, it brings the singer and actress to two rankings for the very first time. I Forgive You debuts at No. 16 on the Top R&B Albums chart and No. 45 on the Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums tally. Erivo has never appeared on either of these rankings with any prior release. Cynthia Erivo Returns to the Billboard 200 I Forgive You also becomes Erivo's second score under her own name on both the Vinyl Albums chart and the Billboard 200. She first reached those rankings just a few months ago, when the Wicked soundtrack — which is credited not only to the cast, but also separately to Ariana Grande and Erivo — made a splash. Her latest solo effort opens at No. 10 on the list of the bestselling vinyl collections in the United States and No. 165 on the Billboard 200. While those positions are further down the rankings than Wicked, they still mark a new high point for Erivo on her own. Cynthia Erivo Earns Her Third Bestseller Erivo also claims her third placement on the Top Album Sales chart, as her latest solo collection sold 7,600 copies across the U.S. in its debut tracking frame, according to Luminate. Last December, the Wicked soundtrack opened at No. 1, and back in the fall of 2021, Erivo's debut solo album Ch. 1 Vs. 1 spent a single turn at No. 77 on the list of the bestselling albums in America. Since then, the roster has been shortened to 50 spaces — meaning that earlier project likely wouldn't even chart if it were released today.
USA Today
12 hours ago
- USA Today
Johnny Depp doesn't regret Amber Heard trial: 'It had gone far enough'
To some, Johnny Depp's headline-making defamation trial with ex-wife Amber Heard was a stain on his gleaming Hollywood career. But despite the legal drama, Depp wouldn't change a thing. The Oscar-nominated actor reflected on the 2022 court battle in an interview with The Sunday Times published June 21. "Look, none of this was going (to) be easy, but I didn't care," he told the British outlet. "I thought, 'I'll fight until the bitter (expletive) end.' And if I end up pumping gas? That's all right. I've done that before." Depp sued Heard in 2019, claiming she defamed him in a 2018 Washington Post op-ed in which she said she was a victim of domestic abuse without specifically naming him. Heard was granted a temporary restraining order against the actor in May 2016, just days after filing for divorce, alleging Depp physically abused her various times during their 15-month marriage. As for their trial, a Virginia jury in 2022 awarded Depp more than $10 million in damages following six weeks of widely watched testimony, during which both parties and witnesses testified about alleged abuse throughout the couple's tumultuous relationship. "Look, it had gone far enough," Depp, 62, continued. "If I don't try to represent the truth it will be like I've actually committed the acts I am accused of. And my kids will have to live with it. Their kids. Kids that I've met in hospitals. So the night before the trial in Virginia I didn't feel nervous. If you don't have to memorize lines, if you're just speaking the truth? Roll the dice." 'A soap opera': Johnny Depp shades Amber Heard defamation trial Heard won $2 million in damages from her countersuit over Depp's lawyer calling her claims a hoax. In December 2022, the former couple agreed to a settlement in the defamation case, with Heard paying Depp $1 million that he pledged to charity. The "Pirates of the Caribbean" alum also reflected on the professional fallout from the trial, including testimony from his former agent Tracey Jacobs. According to The Hollywood Reporter and Variety, Jacobs testified that Depp's industry status was being increasingly undermined by his "unprofessional" on-set behavior, which allegedly included frequent tardiness. "There are people, and I'm thinking of three, who did me dirty. Those people were at my kids' parties. Throwing them in the air," Depp said. "And, look, I understand people who could not stand up (for me) because the most frightening thing to them was making the right choice. I was pre-MeToo. I was like a crash test dummy for MeToo. It was before Harvey Weinstein." 10 bingeable memoirs to check out: Celebrities tell all about aging, marriage and Beyoncé The legal troubles of disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein, who was indicted in May 2018 on charges of five sex crimes, are widely regarded as the tipping point for the #MeToo movement's impact on Hollywood. Weinstein was convicted on June 11 of a first-degree criminal sexual act in the retrial of his 2020 conviction on sexual assault and rape charges. Following the conclusion of his trial with Heard, Depp resumed his entertainment career with a starring role in 2023's "Jeanne du Barry," and directed the 2024 period drama "Modi: Three Days on the Wing of Madness." "Honestly? I didn't go anywhere," said Depp of his showbiz reemergence. "If I actually had the chance to split, I would never come back." Contributing: KiMi Robinson, Andrea Mandell and Maria Puente, USA TODAY
USA Today
18 hours ago
- USA Today
Johnny Depp doesn't regret Amber Heard trial, calls himself a 'crash test dummy for MeToo'
To some, Johnny Depp's headline-making defamation trial with ex-wife Amber Heard was a stain on his gleaming Hollywood career. But despite the legal drama, Depp wouldn't change a thing. The Oscar-nominated actor reflected on the 2022 court battle in an interview with The Sunday Times published June 21. "Look, none of this was going (to) be easy, but I didn't care," he told the British outlet. "I thought, 'I'll fight until the bitter (expletive) end.' And if I end up pumping gas? That's all right. I've done that before." Depp sued Heard in 2019, claiming she defamed him in a 2018 Washington Post op-ed in which she said she was a victim of domestic abuse without specifically naming him. A Virginia jury in 2022 awarded him more than $10 million in damages following six weeks of widely watched testimony, during which both parties and witnesses testified about alleged abuse throughout their 15-month marriage. 'A soap opera': Johnny Depp shades Amber Heard defamation trial "Look, it had gone far enough," Depp, 62, continued. "If I don't try to represent the truth it will be like I've actually committed the acts I am accused of. And my kids will have to live with it. Their kids. Kids that I've met in hospitals. So the night before the trial in Virginia I didn't feel nervous. If you don't have to memories lines, if you're just speaking the truth? Roll the dice." Heard won $2 million in damages from her countersuit over Depp's lawyer calling her claims a hoax. In December 2022, the former couple agreed to a settlement in the defamation case, with Heard paying Depp $1 million that he pledged to charity. The "Pirates of the Caribbean" alum also reflected on the professional fallout from the trial, including testimony from his former agent Tracey Jacobs. According to The Hollywood Reporter and Variety, Jacobs testified that Depp's industry status was being increasingly undermined by his "unprofessional" on-set behavior, which allegedly included frequent tardiness. "There are people, and I'm thinking of three, who did me dirty. Those people were at my kids' parties. Throwing them in the air," Depp said. "And, look, I understand people who could not stand up (for me) because the most frightening thing to them was making the right choice. I was pre-MeToo. I was like a crash test dummy for MeToo. It was before Harvey Weinstein." 10 bingeable memoirs to check out: Celebrities tell all about aging, marriage and Beyoncé The legal troubles of disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein, who was indicted in May 2018 on charges of five sex crimes, are widely regarded as the tipping point for the #MeToo movement's impact on Hollywood. Weinstein was convicted on June 11 of a first-degree criminal sexual act in the retrial of his 2020 conviction on sexual assault and rape charges. Following the conclusion of his trial with Heard, Depp resumed his entertainment career with a starring role in 2023's "Jeanne du Barry," and directed the 2024 period drama "Modi: Three Days on the Wing of Madness." "Honestly? I didn't go anywhere," said Depp of his showbiz reemergence. "If I actually had the chance to split, I would never come back." Contributing: KiMi Robinson, USA TODAY
