On first read, the blast-from-the-past news this week that the Oscars would, for the first time since 1944, feature 10 Best Picture nominees instead of the five we've become used to was disconcerting and a little dismaying. Will it mean an even more crowded holiday/award season release schedule? twice as much "for your consideration" advertising? a
*shudder* six-hour awards telecast?
But consider what might have happened last year, when the feel-good fairy tale
Slumdog Millionaire was a shoo-in months ahead of the awards, and you'll see why this is actually a great idea. Might there have been a different outcome if the field of nominees had been twice as wide?
As a brief aside, first, let's take a moment and reflect again on the fact that of last year's fiee Best Pic nominees, only two of them were in the
top twenty best-reviewed of the year:
Milk (#13) and
Slumdog Millionaire (#6). Yup. The other three nominees weren't even in the top twenty. Contrast
Slumdog's 86 score on
Metacritic to
The Reader's dismal 58. This disconnect between mass critical opinion and the voting tastes of the Academy will probably never be resolved, so anyway...
Here are the five nominees from last year:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Slumdog MillionaireAnd, as we know,
Slumdog Millionaire looked like the best choice to Academy voters.
Now consider, the following list:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Frost Nixon
Iron Man
Milk
Slumdog Millionaire
Rachel Getting Married
The Reader
Revolutionary Road
Wall-EThis is what I think the BP nominees might have looked like with a field of ten. In this company,
Slumdog doesn't look quite so much like a slam-dunk, does it?
Using the "voters vote with their hearts" theory (which is shaky at best, but we'll go with it), voters could have taken their
Slumdog vote and cast it instead for
Iron Man or
Wall-E. What's that?
Iron Man is too lightweight for the Academy? I'm sorry, did you
see Slumdog?
That doesn't necessarily mean
Iron Man or
Wall-E would have won. But if they leeched enough votes away,
Milk, The Dark Knight or even
Benjamin Button could have benefitted and snuck into the lead. On the other hand, with
Wall-E actually in the running, instead of relegated to its token Best Animated Feature category, it could have built enough momentum (it certainly had the goodwill and the rave reviews) to win on its own.
So that's what's ultimately so great about this new plan, and why it's the smartest thing the Academy has done since... well... in a long time. For a couple of months it will give a smaller film like
Rachel Getting Married or
Revolutionary Road, or a genre pic like
The Dark Knight a chance to bask in the spotlight as a Best Picture nominee. But more than that, by taking the same voting pool and spreading it twice as thin, it makes it that much more likely a real — and, perhaps, more deserving — underdog will win.