Academy Award Collusion?

[combatentropy]

Is there some kind of pressure within the Academy to give several awards to one movie?

It makes sense that the Best Picture would also deserve Best Director, or Best Actor, or Best Screenplay. I'm suspicious about how often it also gets more technical awards like Best Sound.

I think the awards, if completely fair, would be more distributed. Like some random movie that didn't have that great of acting happened to have great sound.

[Christopher Grant Harvey]

The Dark Knight should have gotten sound, or Iron Man.

[Karl Gustav H.]

Every member gets to vote in every category, yes? I suspect that a lot of people feel they can't break down a movie to the constituent levels as defined by the Academy, so simply tick what they thought was the best film overall as that particualr aspect contributed to making it good, rather than as a standalone achievement.

I think sound is a prime example of something lost in the overall experience while visual things, like costume and VFX are easier to see in the abstract.

[combatentropy]

Every member gets to vote in every category, yes?

[Edited since some have replied] Nominations are restricted to those of the field. But after nominations, all can vote in all categories.

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm an AMPAS member and I voted. Committees nominate, the whole Academy votes on the winner, except in certain fields that require you watch everything in that category first. I can't remember the exact breakdown, but I recall that I couldn't vote in the short doc. and narrative category, the feature doc category, and the Foreign Language category, but I could vote for all the others as a member. Something like that (I don't have the ballot in front of me.)

To be more clear, we're encouraged to watch everything before general voting, but for certain smaller categories, the winners are voted by select members in a committee.

There is no collusion that causes one movie to sweep the categories -- honestly, that's just luck or chance. The fact that all AMPAS members vote on the winners obviously means that we're not all experts in each category -- it feels a bit odd as a cinematographer that I get to vote on the Best Actor or Screenplay, for example, but hey, I guess I'm entitled to an opinion...

You have to factor that in a tight race in a category, some may win by a small margin due to votes being split rather closely.

The psychology of the Academy voter varies from person to person -- some may want to "spread the wealth" so to speak while another may want to load one movie with a lot of acclaim, but generally we just vote for what we think is best in each category and sometimes that causes a sweep and other times, it causes different movies to win with no real sweep. No collusion, no discussing it among ourselves or with others really. We generally see these movies on our own and we vote on our own.

[Peter Hodgins]

I think the awards, if completely fair, would be more distributed. totally illogical thinking ...

[combatentropy]

totally illogical thinking ...

Why do you say that?

[Jonathan Stevenson]

Man, It made NO sense to me that Slumdog won for sound mixing. Absolutely no sense. Wall-E was 100% sound mixing, it was simply brilliant. They were robbed.

This really blows my mind too, how the best picture wins so many other awards it doesn't seem to deserve. Like editing? Or cinematography? Mr. Mullen, maybe you can comment on why Slumdog was cinematically superior to films like Button or Knight, who seem to clearly have been better? I guess it's a matter of opinion.

It also seems that politics have a lot to do with the Academy winners. If Sean Penn hadn't won, the Academy would've been called homophobes? Just like Crash a few years ago. If it hadn't won, the Academy was racist... So they're obligated to vote for the more controversial films.

[Brandon Fraley]

It also seems that politics have a lot to do with the Academy winners. If Sean Penn hadn't won, the Academy would've been called homophobes? Just like Crash a few years ago. If it hadn't won, the Academy was racist... So they're obligated to vote for the more controversial films.

no one's going to call hollywood homophobic lol. while the acceptance speeches might have been political (to be expected) I don't think the decisions were. Penn's performance was awesome and right up there with Rourke's. Crash... well, I can't explain that one :)

[David Mullen ASC]

I voted for Sean Penn because I thought he gave a great performance, not because I'm trying to be politically correct. And I voted for "The Dark Knight" for Best Cinematography but I was hardly surprised that "Slumdog Millionaire" won -- even the ASC award went to that movie and a lot of ASC members were very excited by Anthony Dod Mantle's work. I voted for "Wall-E" for Sound Mixing. But I'm a cinematographer, not a sound mixer nor an actor.

There isn't some big conspiracy, collusion, whatever -- most of us Academy members see these movies on our own and we fill out the ballot at home alone.

You guys read WAY too much into something as silly as an award, which is not much more than a popularity contest. The nominations mean a lot more -- who wins it is a matter of how the votes broke down (two movies can easily split the votes and allow a third to win), and the whims of Academy members at the time they filled in the ballot. Don't think that there was some great collective thought that went into some sort of "message" they wanted to send the public -- if that happens, it's accidental, due to a number of people coming to the same conclusions at the same time.

As for explaining the merits of "Slumdog" to a non-believer, I'm not going to try, it's a bit like explaining jazz to someone who says they don't like jazz and wants to know why they should like jazz -- what's the point? I can talk about the energy of the camera movements, the musicality of the movie, the colors, etc. but if you don't see that, you don't see that.

[David Wyatt]

I think both Anthony Dod Mantle and Danny Boyle share a gritty realist background combined with a bit of a punk aesthetic which is less about polish & more about energy and vibrancy - maybe not everyone's cup of tea & maybe an approach not traditionally rewarded by the Academy but even if you don't rate these guys as film makers doesn't it at least make a nice change that a different type of film has won this year??

[Jonathan Stevenson]

As for explaining the merits of "Slumdog" to a non-believer, I'm not going to try, it's a bit like explaining jazz to someone who says they don't like jazz and wants to know why they should like jazz -- what's the point? I can talk about the energy of the camera movements, the musicality of the movie, the colors, etc. but if you don't see that, you don't see that.

Thank you. I understand that completely. I guess when I think of a Cinematography award, I think of a technical achievement, such as shooting on IMAX. I never really thought of it as an artistic award, but now I see what you're referring to.

It's funny that you say there's no conspiracy, and I'm sure you're totally right. I guess conspiracies and evil plots are just so much more interesting that we all want to believe there's something "else" going on. :matrix:

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

I think of a technical achievement, such as shooting on IMAX. I never really thought of it as an artistic award, but now I see what you're referring to.

Well, a crappy lit set in the hands of a pseudo-DP shot on Imax becomes instantly good?

:mellow:

[Jonathan Stevenson]

Well, a crappy lit set in the hands of a pseudo-DP shot on Imax becomes instantly good?

:mellow:
No no no no.... You've got me all wrong. All I was saying is that, in my head, I had always imagined that category as highlighting a technical achievement, even though I wholly believe that cinematography is an art form. So to see Slumdog win over Button or Dark Knight felt weird to me. But the way Mr. Mullen referred to jazz simply reminded me that in the end, cinematography is about expression, not gadgets.

[Andrew clemson]

I thought Slumdog Millionaire was brilliant. That scene when the kid meets amitabh Bachchan covered in poo is hilarious.

The fact that a large part of it was digital would have made me think it would have been supported here a lot more.

[Brandon Fraley]

I guess when I think of a Cinematography award, I think of a technical achievement... I never really thought of it as an artistic award

We all occasionally wish we could "unsay" certain things *wink* :)

[Alex MacLean]

The Dark Knight should have gotten sound, or Iron Man.

I agree. I was shocked to see Slumdog any technical awards to be honest.

[Christopher Grant Harvey]

I agree. I was shocked to see Slumdog any technical awards to be honest.

For me personally Slumdog was really good all round, it deserved the awards.

The Dark Knight just had the best sound I have heard in a while. :w00t: The mixing and actual sound creation was just great. The soundtrack was also really great too.

[Alex MacLean]

For me personally Slumdog was really good all round, it deserved the awards.
.

yeah, I agree slumdog is a good film, its just too bad the awards weren't a little more evenly distributed this year.

[Christopher Grant Harvey]

yeah, I agree slumdog is a good film, its just too bad the awards weren't a little more evenly distributed this year.

Each to his own. :sarcasm:

But I personally don't feel awards should be handed out willy nilly. If one film deserves all 5, 8, or 10 awards then it should win them.

[Hrvoje Simic]

I think both Anthony Dod Mantle and Danny Boyle share a gritty realist background combined with a bit of a punk aesthetic which is less about polish & more about energy and vibrancy -

Nicely put.

With Danny Boyle I'd add a great sense for music and rhythm combined with a pretty rare taste in electronic music, which he tends to incorporate into his films.

[Jonathan Stevenson]

We all occasionally wish we could "unsay" certain things *wink* :)
I shall now return home with my tail between my legs :blush:

[Roberto Lequeux]

I am so glad that Make up and VFX went to CCBB... if they didn't I would have jumped off a building. :) I was also happy to see they got Art Direction.

What was it 8 for Slumdog? Well I think it might call for catching it in on the big screen? lol... It really sucks when you didn't get to go to the movie before an Oscars rampage like that.

Congrats to Kate, and congrats to Sean Penn! In my eyes he is pure acting gold. I really liked how he took off his hat for the editor, very classy and humble. I was also very happy to see Penelope win. I was a bit biased there since I speak both languages but she did so much in so little time. What an adorable crazy she created!

Congrats to all the winners and nominees!

[Alex MacLean]

Each to his own. :sarcasm:


touché

[Dominic Cochran]

Mr. Mullen, maybe you can comment on why Slumdog was cinematically superior to films like Button or Knight, who seem to clearly have been better? I guess it's a matter of opinion.



No need to guess. It's clearly a matter of opinion. For instance, other than the technical achievements, I thought Benjamin Button was a terrible movie. But I can also understand why it got nominated. I just thought it was better the first time when it was called Forrest Gump.

[Cüneyt Kaya]

isnt it the first time that a digitally shot movie won an oscar for cinematography?---isnt this a historic moment

[Matthew Greene]

No need to guess. It's clearly a matter of opinion. For instance, other than the technical achievements, I thought Benjamin Button was a terrible movie. But I can also understand why it got nominated. I just thought it was better the first time when it was called Forrest Gump.

Hahaha, well, the novel was released in the 1920's so perhaps it's the other way around. :wink:


isnt it the first time that a digitally shot movie won an oscar for cinematography?---isnt this a historic moment

Oh, but it won for the 40% of the movie that was shot on film don't you know :sarcasm:

[Jonathan Stevenson]

Hahaha, well, the novel was released in the 1920's so perhaps it's the other way around. :wink:



Awwww, Snap!

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

Wall-E really should have been a shoe in for sound.

[Jim Klatt]

Awwww, Snap!

It was very loosely based on F. Scott Fitzgerald's short story. Button's screenwriter did write Forrest Gump as well, and I think that you could say that the film actually has more in common with Gump than the original short story.

[Jonathan Stevenson]

It was very loosely based on F. Scott Fitzgerald's short story. Button's screenwriter did write Forrest Gump as well, and I think that you could say that the film actually has more in common with Gump than the original short story.
I just thought the comment was funny :)

[Chris Parker]

isnt it the first time that a digitally shot movie won an oscar for cinematography?---isnt this a historic moment

I wonder if in 20 years time, when a bunch of film school students are playing Trivial Pursuit, Film Buff version, and the question comes up.....

"What digital camera was used on the first digital film that won the Oscar for Cinematography?"

How many of them will say RED? Even though it wasn't......

[Dominic Cochran]

Hahaha, well, the novel was released in the 1920's so perhaps it's the other way around. :wink:





You may want to read the short story, THEN decide for yourself how much the film was based on it.

F. Scott is my second favorite writer so I'm certainly not disparaging him. The main problem I had with BB as a film is that if you take away the gimmick, the story itself is incredibly pedestrian and average. If you take away the gimmick in Gump, we're left with an epic story in which incredibly interesting things happen to and around him.

Fitzgerald was a smart man and knew it would work best as a SHORT story. Fincher should have made a short film.

Or at least one an hour shorter.

[Matthew Greene]

You may want to read the short story, THEN decide for yourself how much the film was based on it.

I have read it, I was just being silly with my comment.

[Dominic Cochran]

Definitely nothing wrong with being silly, especially when talking about something as ephemeral as an awards ceremony... :-)

[Alex MacLean]

Fitzgerald was a smart man and knew it would work best as a SHORT story. Fincher should have made a short film.

Or at least one an hour shorter.

thank you.

[Roberto Lequeux]

I find that very interesting... Fitzgerald was a genius but I disagree on the running time. I walked out of the theater thinking it was not a minute too long. :huh:

I really appreciated the pacing set by the editors and director, and felt that it really helped full-lifetime timeline.

Then again I seem to be an above average chick flick lover amongst other guys, and there was a good full feature just about the relationship with Cate Blanchett in there. Then again it IS Cate Blanchett who I nearly worship as an actress. Also, I do tend to cut my stuff a bit longer than most, and have to fight myself to cut it down... :blush:

Yet I felt it moved forward effortlessly. I'd be very interested in hearing if more people felt it was that much on the long side, and if they are people that seldom enjoy 3 hs movies.

[Michael "Dorkman" Scott]

I'm curious how it's "fair" to give awards to films that don't deserve them just for the sake of "distributing evenly." Whatever had the best achievement in [BLANK] should win the award for achievement in [BLANK], regardless of its other nominations or wins.

Also, it's not like the voters knew which movie won which category. Even if they WANTED to "evenly distribute" the awards, there's no way they could know which films were getting more Oscars and which were getting less. That would, ironically, require "collusion."

I need to see Slumdog again, because I don't understand how it swept the awards. I liked it, don't get me wrong, but I didn't think it was particularly remarkable in any of the nominated categories. But that's how the Academy (and all the other awards groups) voted.

By the way, I think that the Sound categories need a serious overhaul. Personally I think sound editing and mixing should be combined into a single award, and there should be a separate award specifically for sound design. I don't even know which of the two existing awards is supposed to take that into account.

[Peter Hodgins]

Why do you say that?Let's say a movie has the "best" director, odds are that the producer has some "pull" or credibility. Then maybe he already procured a great script ... this producer ... probably knows the best cinematographers and sound men etc. etc.

In other words all these guys tend to work together on projects.

would the "best" director agree to work on a project with inferior sound guys or editors ... no .... they tend to all work together.

A superstar producer will staff his entire production with superstar craftsmen.

So best Cinematography and best directing etc. etc. are likely to occur in the same picture, statistically , more often than random choice would predict.

[Dominic Cochran]

I find that very interesting... Fitzgerald was a genius but I disagree on the running time. I walked out of the theater thinking it was not a minute too long. :huh:



I appreciate your opinion, but just for the record I like chick flicks and long movies. I like ANY kind of movie if it's well done.

Just personally didn't like this one, but I enjoyed the FX and Production Design!

[Alex MacLean]

would the "best" director agree to work on a project with inferior sound guys or editors ... no .... they tend to all work together.

So best Cinematography and best directing etc. etc. are likely to occur in the same picture, statistically , more often than random choice would predict.

good point

[Roberto Lequeux]

I appreciate your opinion, but just for the record I like chick flicks and long movies. I like ANY kind of movie if it's well done.

Just personally didn't like this one, but I enjoyed the FX and Production Design!

I see. For the record I also enjoyed the design and VFX, more than anything else other than possibly the concept itself.

[Cristina S]

Any link for the ceremony's video? Thank you.