Coronavirus and the Oscars

[Big Magilla]

The idea that we're going to have Oscars this year strikes me as people holding desperately to something they know in their heart of hearts won't happen. Very few films will think it's their best move to go straight to VOD; that will financially limit grosses for both large and small films. The competitive pool will be a tiny fraction of a normal year. Who wants an Oscar race that's based on 20 or so films, many of them from Netflix? Who would feel proud to have won in such a reduced field?

And then there's Magilla's point: until the COVID-all-clear is sounded -- something that won't even be a prospect till January (god willing) brings us a change in leadership -- production is severely limited, meaning, if most things currently on the shelf are already out there streaming, there'll be no films to fill theatres once we are out of this nightmare.

The sensible thing is to just write off this annus horribilis, wait till something like normality returns, and allow all 2020/2021 films to compete in a combined race on the 2021 calendar.

The technical categories that tend to be dominated by big budget films will be limited in prospects, but the top ten categories - picture, acting, directing, writing, cinematography and editing won't be. When was the last time more than twenty films competed in those categories? Last year there was a total of 18 films nominated in those categories.

If next year is as bleak as this year in terms of production, which it may well be, the same 20 films being released in the last quarter of this year (mostly through streaming) and early next year plus West Side Story and one or two other postponed releases will be it. The question remains what will 2021 look like and will there be enough product available for a real competition or will 2021 have to be combined with 2022? That makes more sense to me than combining 2020 and 2021 as far as recognition goes. If the more important goal is to put on a show with everyone in the same place, then by all means go ahead and wait.

[OscarGuy]

That could all be resolved if they opened eligibility to off-Broadway as well.

[Mister Tee]

I really don't think there will be a sufficient roster of movies for an awards show next year. My idea will be to double up films from 2020 and 2021 for an awards show in 2022.

I thought the Tony Awards was gonna do that but they're pushing through with it later this year anyway.

The Tonys are used to nominating everything that's eligible.

This is very true. There've probably been other cases, but I recall specifically in 1984 the Best Play category was comprised of literally the only four new plays that opened on Broadway that year. (As it happens, three of them were good; the other lasted exactly 5 performances.)

[Greg]

I really don't think there will be a sufficient roster of movies for an awards show next year. My idea will be to double up films from 2020 and 2021 for an awards show in 2022.

I thought the Tony Awards was gonna do that but they're pushing through with it later this year anyway.

The Tonys are used to nominating everything that's eligible.

[Mister Tee]

Mark Harris -- who has a good source -- says West Side Story has been bumped to December 2021.

Prediction that's not fearless at all: MANY films will do likewise.

The idea that we're going to have Oscars this year strikes me as people holding desperately to something they know in their heart of hearts won't happen. Very few films will think it's their best move to go straight to VOD; that will financially limit grosses for both large and small films. The competitive pool will be a tiny fraction of a normal year. Who wants an Oscar race that's based on 20 or so films, many of them from Netflix? Who would feel proud to have won in such a reduced field?

And then there's Magilla's point: until the COVID-all-clear is sounded -- something that won't even be a prospect till January (god willing) brings us a change in leadership -- production is severely limited, meaning, if most things currently on the shelf are already out there streaming, there'll be no films to fill theatres once we are out of this nightmare.

The sensible thing is to just write off this annus horribilis, wait till something like normality returns, and allow all 2020/2021 films to compete in a combined race on the 2021 calendar.

The Emmys showed how you can stage an awards presentation in this environment. But there's no analogy in terms of competition: the Emmys had a May deadline that wasn't nearly as affected by COVID, and a competitive field that by nature was perfectly attuned to stay-at-home viewing.

[Big Magilla]

This year is not the problem, next year is.

Film production is not going to pick up until after the pandemic which is not going to end until well into 2021. No one knows if or when audiences will feel comfortable filling move houses. It may be just a matter of time before all films are released via streaming either in conjunction with theatrical release or via streaming only.

[anonymous1980]

I really don't think there will be a sufficient roster of movies for an awards show next year. My idea will be to double up films from 2020 and 2021 for an awards show in 2022.

I thought the Tony Awards was gonna do that but they're pushing through with it later this year anyway. If the Tonys can still happen, the Oscars sure as heck can, even if it's gonna be a virtual ceremony honoring mostly films that premiered on streaming/VOD.

[Greg]

I really don't think there will be a sufficient roster of movies for an awards show next year. My idea will be to double up films from 2020 and 2021 for an awards show in 2022. That would be matched with a double number of Governor's Awards for a show on 2021 to cover both 2021 and 2022. They could televise the Governor's Awardees accepting at home.

[mlrg]

I actually like Kimmel as a host.

And there is no way that the Oscars, or any awards show for that matter, will ever gain back the audience ratings they used to have so this comment is rather mean.

[Eenusch]

A funny, yet true, comment from a poster on Deadline.com

"Jimmy Kimmel truly has a special talent. He hosted the Oscars and delivered the LOWEST ratings in their entire history. So naturally, in their marketing brilliance, the Academy then asked him to host the following year again — at which point, he “succeeded” in driving the ratings EVEN LOWER and set yet another all-new, all-time WORST ratings record.

And now, in the most amazing and laughable achievement of all, he’s actually managed to jump industries and pull off the exact SAME trick with the Emmys, once again going back-to-back to produce the all-time LOWEST ratings in their history as well.

And that sure takes real talent!"

[OscarGuy]

I thought the Emmys show was terrible. Everyone heaped praise on it, but it might be because I thought Jimmy Kimmel was terrible. His delivery was off, his jokes weren't funny. Along with all the canned banter that felt even more disagreeable without the laugh track, it just seemed an off show. Then there were the audio problems with stars accepting where sometimes you couldn't hear a damned thing. It had a very tacky feel to it all.

[Reza]

I don't see why the pandemic has made them delay the announcement of the Honorary Oscar recipients. Even if they decide not to hold the ceremony the awards could still be handed out.

[anonymous1980]

I personally thought that the Emmys did a great job with showing how an awards show can be done during a pandemic. I think the biggest lesson that the Oscar show should take away from it is: Do what the Schitt's Creek crew did.

The cast and crew of Schitt's Creek planned their Emmy party very carefully. Everyone in attendance got tested and self-isolated before the ceremony. The venue followed their city's COVID-19 safety guidelines and social distancing measures. The result is that the cast and crew were able to dress up, even do a red carpet, celebrate their wins and make their speeches.

I think the Oscars should do the same. Once the nominations are announced, the nominees will NOT be in the theater (only the HOST will be in the Dolby) isolated sections all over with only a limited number of people, grouped by either nominated film or studio will be scattered in small sections with safety protocols and proper social distancing will be place each connected via satellite.

[Precious Doll]

Sonic, I'm pretty sure you just described James Cameron's utopia.

But yeah, I doubt the oscars are happening. And if they never happen again, Parasite was an amazing note to go out on.

Yesterday (16 June) was one year since I first saw Parasite. It seems like only yesterday and that was my 40th year of attending the Sydney Film Festival. Needless to say the festival was cancelled months ago though they are presenting some films on-line most of which I have zero interest in viewing. And I didn't get to savour all those great Parasite wins at the Oscars as I was so distracted by the fucking impending pandemic from 23 January onwards.

[Greg]

They could film actors individually in front of a green screen and with the use of CGI and editing tricks make it seem they're in the same room and in the same shot. They did it for the later seasons of The Good Wife when Archie Panjabi and Julianna Margulies couldn't stand each other so when their characters had to be in the same scene, they did some editing and CGI trickery.

You mean like they did with Armie Hammer playing the Winkelvi in The Social Network? I think something like that would take an inordinate amount of work for things such as crowd scenes.