This year’s race for Oscar gold just might leave those
with an early lead in the dust.
As the highly anticipated Oscar nomination deadline quickly
approaches, on Dec. 31, movie studios are unleashing a barrage of
star-driven movies upon audiences everywhere. And with such films
as “Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World,”
“The Last Samurai,” and “House of Sand and
Fog” all set for release in the coming month, it begs the
question if a film’s marketing is more important than its
quality.
For many movie studios, the hype generated by the Oscars has
been increasingly used to get people to view movies in the theaters
around the time of the nominations, according to UCLA film and
television Professor Jonathan Kuntz, who studies the history of
U.S. filmmaking.
“Back in the day, the studios knew that most people would
go out and see their movies, because it was the most popular medium
of entertainment at the time,” he said. “Today, most
people stay at home and watch television. They need a reason to go
out and watch these movies.”
All five of last year’s Academy picks for Best Picture
were films released in December 2002, as well as four of the five
Best Actor nominees (The one that wasn’t was released in late
November.) According to “House of Sand and Fog”
producer Michael London, heaping a film into this
“Oscar” time frame only increases its success.
“For better or for worse, the only way to get serious
movies like this made is to release them around the time when they
are going to get Oscar consideration,” he said.
This year, Academy Awards organizers moved up the film
industry’s highest honors from late March to late February in
an effort to lessen pre-Oscar hype, arguing that the many award
shows prior to the Oscars play too large a role in swaying the
decisions of voters. However, many critics argue that their efforts
might backfire, instead resulting in the domination of big-budget
films amongst this year’s nominations.
“Critics groups, such as the Boston Society of Critics and
the (Hollywood Film Press Association, who host the) Golden Globes,
are normally an important factor in gaining recognition for smaller
independent films,” said marketing and communications
assistant for the School of Theater, Film, Television and Digital
Media, Sasha Stone.
“Without the influence of these groups, a lot of good
films are going to get lost,” she said. Stone also edits the
popular www.oscarwatch.com Web site, which keeps tabs on all the
buzz for the annual awards ceremony.
However, not everyone doubts independent films’ ability to
compete with larger, studio-driven fare.
“I think the studios realize that independent films are
getting more recognition because a lot of the time the stories are
better, and they are less star-driven,” said film and
television Professor Delia Salvi.
While the effects of the shortened Oscar season are unclear, one
thing is for certain: Films that win Oscars are films that make
money. With close to 6,000 academy voting members to please,
filmmakers might have to do more than just advertise in order to
receive an academy nod.
“The big-budget studios like to push, of course in terms
of money, and pat themselves on the back by putting up big
billboards with Oscar written all over them,” said Salvi, who
is herself an Oscar voter. “But the key to a successful movie
is word of mouth.”
With contributions by Jake Tracer, dB Magazine Senior
Staff.