2022 Emmy Awards

[mlrg]

I
I absolutely do think that some of these features listed are as well known and absolutely as culturally releveant as some of these series (two very different metrics) but I couldn't help but notice that you ommitted winners of Outstanding Comedy Series from your citations. I do think that some of the past Best Picture winners are more culturally relevant than five years of Modern Family and I do think that some of the past Best Picture winners are as well-known than Veep, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, Fleabag, and Ted Lasso.

That being said, I do think that generally the Emmys have made more meaningful and relevant choices choices than the Oscars in past years. But you won't see me grousing two hard when Parasite and Moonlight are IMO as good as any choice either has made in years.

Just after posting my rationale and before you pointed it out I had the same thought about the Comedy category. Not to say that the comedy category is inferior to Drama, because it’s not, best series Drama was always somewhat regarded as best picture. And I totally agree with you assertion.

[OscarGuy]

My numbers came from the-numbers.com, but the same numbers come from boxofficemojo.com, which is now owned by IMDb. Both websites are focused on reported grosses: daily, weekly, and annually. Neither does a very good job adjusting for inflation, but that's a minor quibble.

You may not like being contradicted, but I cited facts. You know, there is strength in admitting you're wrong.

[Sabin]

I think we're getting into semantics between a hit and a blockbuster, but then again this is probably the place to do that, so...

From the 90's, I would consider anything close to $200 mil or over as a blockbuster and anything near $100 as a hit. And you just sort of adjust for inflation accordingly.

But from roughly 2016 onward, I haven't heard box office performance mentioned much at all. Before 2016, I recall something of a do-to made about how The Revenant bucked the odds to become a success, as well as some general grousing about the low box office performances of [fill in the blank Best Picture winner] signaling that we were in a new era. But from 2016 onward, I recall very little attention paid to box office aside from some slightly inside baseball chatter which was appreciative and bull-ish on 1917's box office performance and its Oscar chances (it lost) and skeptical and bear-ish on Green Book's box office performance and its Oscar chances (it won). I'm sure there was some chatter about La La Land's box office performance as a positive signal on its Oscar chances but it was overtaken by other conversations so quickly that I just don't recall. I know it's not the thrust of this conversation but we're definitely in a new era now.

I'll comment directly to mlrg:

mlrg wrote
The Crown, Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, The Handmaiden’s Tale and Homeland all won best series drama during the last years.

Are you saying that CODA, Nomadland, Parasite, Green Book, Moonlight, Spotlight, 12 Years a Slave, Argo or The Artist are as well known or cultural relevant as any of these series?

I absolutely do think that some of these features listed are as well known and absolutely as culturally releveant as some of these series (two very different metrics) but I couldn't help but notice that you ommitted winners of Outstanding Comedy Series from your citations. I do think that some of the past Best Picture winners are more culturally relevant than five years of Modern Family and I do think that some of the past Best Picture winners are as well-known than Veep, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, Fleabag, and Ted Lasso.

That being said, I do think that generally the Emmys have made more meaningful and relevant choices choices than the Oscars in past years. But you won't see me grousing two hard when Parasite and Moonlight are IMO as good as any choice either has made in years.

[mlrg]

That's incorrect. Schindler's List made $96, Braveheart made $75, and The English Patient made $78. Then before that, you had Last Emperor, Out of Africa, Amadeus, Gandhi, Chariots of Fire, Ordinary People, The Deer Hunter, Annie Hall, The Godfather Part II, The French Connection, Patton, and Midnight Cowboy. Now, you can claim inflation adjustment, but I wouldn't say their tallies were exactly blockbuster takes. Matter of fact, since modern numbers have been collected, only Forrest Gump, Titanic, and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King made over $200 million. There were a handful that toped $150 million, but several more barely crept past (thus my reference to a Best Picture win pushing a sub-$100 million over.

Honestly, it sounds more like you're trying to find facts to match your opinion rather than updating your opinion based on the facts.

Oh man, it’s just not worth the time to do it again but I googled every single best picture winner followed by the term “box office gross” and every single result was +100Musd. I could post every single link from the Google search.

Your assumptions on other peoples points of view are insufferable and honestly I have more important things to invest my time.

[OscarGuy]

Now, if you want to compare something else.

Rocky. We all know it was a huge hit and many people have seen it, right? You know how many people have given it ratings on IMDb? 564,728. You know how many people have given ratings to The Shape of Water, a film that made significantly less than Rocky at the BO? 412,191.

What can we take from these numbers? Nothing. Everyone who sees a film doesn't push their vote onto IMDb. However, of the people who do, Rocky is only slightly more seen than a Best Picture winner of more recent vintage.

Films that might have been huge hits back in the 1980s aren't. Spotlight is a great example. If it had released in the 1980s, I could imagine having done the numbers of an All the President's Men or Broadcast News (neither Best Picture winners, but of similar content). All the President's Men released to $51 million at the box office. Broadcast News also made $51 million, albeit a decade later. Spotlight made $45 million. Again, several decades later.

People don't go to the theater for serious movies anymore. They want spectacle for their $12-$15 for one ticket. They would rather watch a film on RedBox, HBO, or Netflix where they get more bang for their buck with bigger screen sizes for home viewing. $15 per person for a movie? or $14 a month for everything on Netflix.

What you're seeing here is not a byproduct of the Academy picking niche films for Best Picture. There's some of that sure, but I think what you're seeing is the ubiquity of streaming and home viewing, compared to even a decade ago, depressing what audiences will pay to see a "serious" movie. Let's do another quick comparison with all the films referenced here:

IMDb ratings: Rocky (8.1), The Shape of Water (7.3), Spotlight (8.1), All the President's Men (7.9), Broadcast News (7.2).

Spotlight polls better than All the President's Men with audiences. Spotlight had 462,599 ratings if you were curious.

[OscarGuy]

That's incorrect. Schindler's List made $96, Braveheart made $75, and The English Patient made $78. Then before that, you had Last Emperor, Out of Africa, Amadeus, Gandhi, Chariots of Fire, Ordinary People, The Deer Hunter, Annie Hall, The Godfather Part II, The French Connection, Patton, and Midnight Cowboy. Now, you can claim inflation adjustment, but I wouldn't say their tallies were exactly blockbuster takes. Matter of fact, since modern numbers have been collected, only Forrest Gump, Titanic, and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King made over $200 million. There were a handful that toped $150 million, but several more barely crept past (thus my reference to a Best Picture win pushing a sub-$100 million over.

Honestly, it sounds more like you're trying to find facts to match your opinion rather than updating your opinion based on the facts.

[mlrg]

Depends on your definition of blockbuster. Three films since LOTR won Best Picture have crossed the $100 million mark (Argo, Slumdog Millionaire, The King's Speech). The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King made $377 million. Before that, it was Titanic. Best Picture doesn't go to blockbusters very often at all. Sure, some films vault past $100 million with a Best Picture win, but you'd really have to go back to the 1970s to find actual blockbusters doing that on the semi-regular, IMO...

Every single best picture winner of the 90’s grossed over 100m usd

[OscarGuy]

Depends on your definition of blockbuster. Three films since LOTR won Best Picture have crossed the $100 million mark (Argo, Slumdog Millionaire, The King's Speech). The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King made $377 million. Before that, it was Titanic. Best Picture doesn't go to blockbusters very often at all. Sure, some films vault past $100 million with a Best Picture win, but you'd really have to go back to the 1970s to find actual blockbusters doing that on the semi-regular, IMO...

[Greg]

Would The Lord Of The Rings: The Return Of The King be considered the last true blockbuster to win the Best Picture Academy Award?

[Mister Tee]

Oh I see the statistics are for the United States.
The rest of the world has embraced streaming and have more of an eclectic taste in their viewing habits.

Taken it as a whole, yes, the U.S. is not very eclectic in its viewing habits, but that doesn't apply to most people on this board.

I know Reza loves nothing more than to trash Americans and presume all other cultures are more discerning, but movie grosses around the world suggest the rest of the world ingests the same crud Americans do -- some even moreso.

As to the original topic: given the reach of television, even a poorly rated show is "seen" by more people than see all but the biggest hit movies. But I don't think mlrg's two lists are any kind of QED for his argument. First off, as OscarGuy points out, Argo was a quite large box-office hit (and I say this as someone who thought it was mediohcrity personified), so it stands out immediately as bad example. Game of Thrones might serve as an example from the other list. But I'd say, for instance, The Handmaid's Tale and Parasite are very close to equal in their cultural penetration: widely lauded and beloved by a core group, but not particularly widely seen (I only just watched Handmaid's Tale's first season in the past few months).

As for "people have figured how to watch all this for free", I'd suggest that not many of the people who don't subscribe to the streamers have that tech know-how.

[Big Magilla]

Reza, statistics don't lie. Ten times as many people in the U.S. just watch regular TV more than those who watch a combination of regular TV and streaming. Very few just watch streaming only, though that number may grow over time.

Oh I see the statistics are for the United States.
The rest of the world has embraced streaming and have more of an eclectic taste in their viewing habits.

Taken it as a whole, yes, the U.S. is not very eclectic in its viewing habits, but that doesn't apply to most people on this board.

[mlrg]

Reza, statistics don't lie. Ten times as many people in the U.S. just watch regular TV more than those who watch a combination of regular TV and streaming. Very few just watch streaming only, though that number may grow over time.

Oh I see the statistics are for the United States.
The rest of the world has embraced streaming and have more of an eclectic taste in their viewing habits.

[Reza]

Reza, statistics don't lie. Ten times as many people in the U.S. just watch regular TV more than those who watch a combination of regular TV and streaming. Very few just watch streaming only, though that number may grow over time.

Oh I see the statistics are for the United States.
The rest of the world has embraced streaming and have more of an eclectic taste in their viewing habits.

[Big Magilla]

The Crown, Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, The Handmaiden’s Tale and Homeland all won best series drama during the last years.

Are you saying that CODA, Nomadland, Parasite, Green Book, Moonlight, Spotlight, 12 Years a Slave, Argo or The Artist are as well-known or culturally relevant as any of these series?

We aren't saying that. The Oscars have not catered to the masses for some time. The disconnect with the Emmys is more recent.

Breaking Bad was shown on AMC which was a free cable channel during its run. Game of Thrones was shown on HBO, which has been a subscription TV service, not a streaming service, that many have had in their homes since its inception in 1972. Homeland was on Showtime which is also a subscription TV service that many have had in their homes since its inception in 1983 but as popular as those shows have been, not everyone in the U.S. has seen them either on TV or DVD where they were also highly popular.

The Crown and The Handmaiden's Tale are Netflix, but unlike most Netflix shows, they were also released on DVD, so people had access to them, but again not as many as have had access to broadcast television.

The failure of a phenomenally successful quality broadcast TV series like Yellowstone to receive Emmy recognition is astounding.

There are now more than 500 TV shows to choose from, yet they still nominate the same people for the same shows over and over. The difference between now and earlier decades is that most of the shows they nominate these days are not those seen by most TV watchers. The Emmies are as irrelevant to Joe and Jane Popcorn now as the Oscars have been for a while.

[OscarGuy]

You might not want to include Argo. It made $136 million at the U.S. box office ($160 million adjusted for inflation). While it only ranked 22 for the year 2012, it made more money than Silver Linings Playbook, Magic Mike, and The Bourne Legacy and was within $30 million of 21 Jump Street, Taken 2, Hotel Transylvania, Snow White and the Huntsman, and Django Unchained. So, I'd say the film was quite popular in its year. I also noticed that you skipped over Shape of Water.

In its 18th, 19th, 20th weeks in release, it is ranked in the top 30 all-time for weekend totals. It's 13th on the list of weekend numbers for its 21st week of release. It was in release a total of 28 weeks and was in the top 20 for 22 of those weeks and a further 7 weeks were spent in the top ten, 6 consecutively.

Also, Parasite made $53 million, which is pretty impressive for a foreign language film these days.