Coronavirus and the Oscars

For the films of 2020
mlrg
Associate
Posts: 1770
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by mlrg »

Elegibility extended to February 28th, nominations announced March 15th, Oscars ceremony April 25th. Just announced
anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 6420
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by anonymous1980 »

Oscars may be postponed and eligibility window extended.

I suspect this might happen. My hunch? The eligibility deadline will be extended till late January-early February and the Oscars will be mid-to-late March.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19608
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by Big Magilla »

I agree with what Precious wrote about the various stages of films in production.

If theatres don't survive the pandemic, distribution will have to change anyway. Films could still be made before a vaccine is found with social distancing, but it would be difficult. No kissing, for example!

As for the Oscars, I don't know. Postponing them until the end of April would put the timing back to the way it was for decades, meaning that calendar year eligibility could still prevail. I don't know what pushing them back to May or later would do. We would know by then, however, whether or not there would be forthcoming product for release in 2021, which is the real year we should be concerned about there being no Oscars.

One thing is certain, though, it won't be like 1927/28 which was not two years of releases in one awards year. The official eligibility period was for films released between August 1, 1937 and July 31, 1928 which was one fiscal year, although they did cheat. 7th Heaven, for example, opened in May 1927 in both Los Angeles and New York. You can confirm the New York date by going the New York Times Machine for 5/21/1927 which is free for non-subscribers today. The ad appears on page 25.

https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/browse ... pe=article

The longest eligibility period was from August 1, 1932-December 31, 1933 when the Oscars moved to a calendar year. There were years in the late 1930s and early 1940s when the period was extended through January 12th of the following year so that films that opened in New York prior to the end of the year could qualify even though they opened in Los Angeles in the early part of the following year.

On the other hand, if the eligibility period isn't extended, and there are no awards for 2020, it could be like the New York Film Critics Awards for 1962 - there weren't any because of a prolonged newspaper strike. When they voted at the end of 1963, only films that had opened in New York during that calendar year were eligible. Lawrence of Arabia was ineligible, but To Kill a Mockingbird and Days of Wine and Roses which didn't open in New York until 1963, were, although they didn't win anything.

I don't know if anything being released through streaming this year is remotely in the same class as To Kill a Mockingbird but anything that is, might suffer the same fate if it has to compete with films released closer to the end of the extended eligibility period. They could, of course, try something new, like awarding films of 2020 and 2021 separately but if they're going to do that, why not just have a 2020 ceremony with the acting contenders at least participating on Zoom or some other platform so we can still the faces of the losers when "the Oscar goes to" someone else?
User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 4453
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by Precious Doll »

I wrote up a post three hours ago and thought I posted it only to find it failed :oops:

It went something like this:

Film (and TV productions) are pretty much in four positions:

1) Completed ready to show and/or already screened at festivals and waiting for cinema release;

2) In post-production which will be able to be completed at some time in the future;

3) In production and shutdown anywhere from filming for a few days to just a few days left to film;

4) Pre-production.

Aside from big budget studio films most completed films will end up going directly to streaming and/or physical media. Likewise this applies to films in post production once they are finished.

I suspect most films in production will never be finished. I doubt any of them had pandemic insurance but as we are in the beginning of an unfolding economic worldwide calamity lots of film/TV production companies will go to the wall (along with businesses from across a wide range of industries) and most of those uncompleted films will be canned.

Films in pre-production is pretty much a 'watch this space'.

The Hollywood studios have already stated that they will not release any of the 'product' until they can release the films at the same time across most of the major markets (i.e. the US and Europe but I would expect Asia as well).

Whilst cinemas are eager to open again I personally think they will struggle to attract many patrons. More so even if one made an individual choice to go to the cinema would people go one step further and purchase food that you eat in an environment that is far from ideal during a pandemic. And its the candy-bar that keeps cinemas financially viable. It will be interesting to see what the major studios decide to ultimately do.

It's quite possible that cinema is simply not a viable option until such times as the pandemic is over or we adapt to live with it.

As for the Oscars. They really is the least of everyone's problems and if anything the pandemic shows highlights how pointless they really are.
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8783
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by Mister Tee »

I made this assertion in another thread -- that there probably won't really be movies or Oscars in 2020, and that it makes sense to wait a year -- and it was batted aside. But I don't see how it can be otherwise. There are going to be barely any movies released this year. Such theatres as open up (a minority, and excluding the big cities) will be forced to limit seating capacity significantly. What studio is going to release an expensive film into that setting? You can say people can just see the movies over a more extended period of weeks and get to the same attendance, but the industry is now built on quick in/out, and studios wouldn't trust they could make the money they need to offset their budgets within those limitations. For that same reason they wouldn't simply release their films in streaming format. Studios rely on making something from $100 million to a billion in theatres for major releases BEFORE they go to streaming; they're not going to give that up.

And Greg is totally correct -- even if some production is ramped up eventually, how can films be shot with social distancing guidelines still in place? They're not going to be able to make movies as we know them until some kind of vaccine is available, and that won't be this year.

I think we just have to think of this as a year lost from our lives. I things are somewhat near normal next Spring, the industry can pick up where it let off: release what were to be 2020 movies in 2021; finish filming all the films that suspended production, and start up the ones that were imminent. And make the next Oscars cover all the movies released from January 2020 through December 2021.

I know it's hard to come to terms with, but it feels likely reality to me.
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3359
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by Greg »

A big question is how many movies will be made in 2020. During the period of social distancing only animated movies will be in production, as there will be no way to shoot with all the actors always being six feet away from each other.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 11075
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by Sabin »

anonymous1980 wrote
An online friend of mine believes there will be no 2021 Oscars and that the next Oscars will be on 2022 and it will honor both 2020 and 2021 films which I don't think will happen. That's the worst case scenario. I think it will be postponed to March or even April. They actually used to have the Oscars on April at one point so it's not unprecedented.
Postponing it a year would be a fine choice. The first Academy Awards covered 1927 and 1928.

Honestly, they should postpone it. The entire entertainment industry is completely changing before our eyes. It could use the extra year to catch back up. Besides, Parasite's win was enough of a jolt in the arm to keep us a year.
"How's the despair?"
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by OscarGuy »

I suspect that if the Academy negotiates a new date with ABC, then they'll shoot for May. One of the unspoken reasons I believe the Academy shifted into February in the first place.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 6420
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by anonymous1980 »

Academy considering postponing 2021 Oscars.

An online friend of mine believes there will be no 2021 Oscars and that the next Oscars will be on 2022 and it will honor both 2020 and 2021 films which I don't think will happen. That's the worst case scenario. I think it will be postponed to March or even April. They actually used to have the Oscars on April at one point so it's not unprecedented.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8783
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by Mister Tee »

rolotomasi99 wrote: Original Score has to be 60% original (80% for sequels)

https://www.slashfilm.com/academy-alters-oscars-rules/
This would retroactively knock about six nominations off John Williams' total.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8783
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by Mister Tee »

OscarGuy wrote: because no one bothered to explain the difference to people, sound is now combined.
Someone needed to explain it to the sound branch. Once they expanded to five in sound editing, they routinely nominated at least 4-of-5 the same in both categories, suggesting THEY didn't get the difference. (Also, even nominating La La Land or Bohemian Rhapsody in sound editing was inexplicable.) They should never have changed the name from Sound Effects.

Also, what Sabin said.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 11075
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by Sabin »

I'm bummed out by this change but they brought it on themselves with their inscrutable names. You shouldn't have to read three articles to understand a category.
"How's the despair?"
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by OscarGuy »

And yet still no Oscar for casting directors or stunt coordinators. Worse yet, because no one bothered to explain the difference to people, sound is now combined.

SFX have had their own category since 1963. It becomes the first category eliminated since Special Effects in 1962. Ironically, Special Effects was split into Sound Effects and Visual Effects categories in 1963.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
rolotomasi99
Professor
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by rolotomasi99 »

Major decisions have been made:
Movies forced to stream due to theater closures are eligible for Oscars
Sound categories combined
More voters can select International Film
Original Score has to be 60% original (80% for sequels)
DVD screeners are banned

https://www.slashfilm.com/academy-alters-oscars-rules/
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10216
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Re: Coronavirus and the Oscars

Post by Reza »

The show should go on.

From the various options the Academy is considering the following sounds good:

"Alternatively, it could make a one-time provision allowing films to qualify for Oscars eligibility via streaming services — distributors' own (e.g. Netflix) and/or the one created for Academy members — even if they have not screened for a week in an L.A. theater".

The streaming service created for Academy members might be the best venue through which they should watch and vote for the nominations.

With people in isolation it might actually be the first time many members actually watch the movies themselves instead of getting relatives, friends or the house help to vote on their behalf.
Post Reply

Return to “93rd Academy Awards”