Yes, absolutely, but they would need a way of narrowing it down. We've seen more recently how a lot of films just hire celebrities and well-known people to voice characters without giving actual trained voice actors a chance at all. I worry if a voice actor category would encourage studios to continue this famous voice actor trope to pull support for the award.
Especially with motion capture, rotoscoping, and reference videos from recording sessions - even beyond their voices, voice actors significantly influence the animated performances.
I think that the Best International Category should also be expanded to 10 nominations. There's more than 5 other countries besides the U.S. that are making movies. With all the new categories and expansions, the Oscars should be presented over two nights, like how the Emmys and the Grammys do it.
that is very good and obvious suggestion. If the best Picture has been expanded to 10 then why is Best International Picture limited at 5. Not sure about stunt category. Because stunts work even if very important is not "art" per se.
The Hugo awards have something similar where they look back and award works on their major anniversary years if no award in the category was given that year. I think legacy awards for 10, 25, 50, 75, & 100 years where they did not win best picture or a previous legacy award and a certain percentage votes for them- so it might not be awarded every year.
@@LavaLot-zi5us With the best actor wins including a lot of method acting, didn't the best actor award make it an incentive for Leonardo to go out into the snow? Didn't it encourage guys like Matthew Mcconnaughey to starve himself to lose weight? Does the screenplay categories deprive the writers of sleep because they are working on the script more? Its a silly argument.
My change to the oscars would be to add two stunt categories - best stunt choreography to celebrate the team that put it together and best stunt performance to celebrate the execution and this category would be open to international nominations
The problem becomes that someone can't judge a stunt actor's performance unless they're on set. With CGI and editing, it's tough for someone to see an awesome stunt on a screen and know whether or not there was an actual person doing it. Stunt actors and choreographers deserve Oscar recognition, 100000%, just saying the practical reality of evaluating it is difficult
@@misterderp4566 And also major actors have multiple stunt doubles (like even up to 5 or more in some cases) so who would get the award if they all did the stunts?
Love the Legacy film award suggestion. That's what me and my buddies are constantly arguing about when we discuss film over beer--what should have won. This would create a whole new meta-level to that conversation for people.
Same. I very much like the idea of giving some respects to those who have made an impact after so long. It's one thing to get gold in the now, but it's another thing to have lasting appeal beyond it.
interesting, I don't really like the idea personally, but I think doing more of the hall of fame inductees thing may work better? 10 years or later a movie can be eligible for the hall of fame and say 5 make it in every year?
I agree with the editing choices. I feel old movie montage should be part of the pre Oscar’s show. But once the show starts it’s all about the current year.
And for very temporary reasons: it was targeted by William Randolph Hearst for its obvious depiction of elements of his life and his media apparatus was turned against it. A great example.
I find it hilarious that a show where they only hand out like 20 awards takes 3 hours. Most people only get like a minute for their speech, unless it’s one of the big ones. So there is truly no reason why that show can’t be over and done with in a tight 60 minutes.
27:06 A few days ago clips were going around from the 2015/2016 Oscars where the Sound Design category showcased only the sound from the clips. It was incredibly effective and how I think it should be done like you're saying.
Jesus, 2015 Oscars was like one of the best years of the show I've ever seen. The way they introduced every single nominee was absolutely brilliant, I wish the Oscars these days were as good as in 2015
Ever since I became a huge fan of Andy Serkis’s work as Gollum in LOTR, and then learned that he was not nominated for an Oscar because it was an “animated performance” and not him acting, it made me want a category I would call, “Best Voice or Animated Performance” and it would be an award shared by the actor and whoever the lead animator(s) were on the character. I would love that! Either that or make those people eligible for the main acting Oscar’s too.
I don't know what the fix is, but it's always bothered me that there are anonymous interviews every year with a member that openly admits to not seeing all of the movies or nominees they're voting for.
This is actually a thing that the Oscars got right one year. It must have been 2000. Next to the nominees in the writing categories, they showed pages from their scripts. More or less showcasing that writing is more or less the fundament of moviemaking.
"They showed pages from their scripts" They actually did it back in the 87th Academy Awards/2015 Oscars (it was probably the last time they did that). When they introduced the nominee in the writing category, they showed dialogues and script pages of each of the nominees with a beautiful animation intro to it. That in my opinion, is how you introduce the writing category properly
@@K0m30ng They even did it this one (last?) time. Quite sure that it was 2000. Because I as a teenager was surprised how different their writing styles were. (Too young to have seen it back in 95, so it had to be end of the century.)
@@nikitaaverin Nope, 2015 was the last time they introduced the writing category with that intro. Actually in only requires for the original screenplay, as far as I can remember for adapted ones, the intro was the source material of each of the nominee. If you wanna see it, see when Birdman won Best Original Screenplay
There are three things that Dan will likely never let go about the Oscars 3) Will Smith slap 2) The Best Picture envelope mixed up 1) Toni Collette's Hereditary Oscar snub 😂😂😂
Agree with pretty much all except the shorts. I think they should keep them but present all three in a row followed by one of the bigger awards or sandwich them between the two screenplay or lead/supporting acting performances. You guarantee eyeballs, build anticipation for a “main event” Oscar, and knock out a large chunk of awards in one swoop
Yeah, I don't like hiding awards due to time constraints in general. I think they need to figure out where they can trim the fat on things that are less necessary first before going after certain categories.
In my country, they had the Oscars (atleast since Disney+ came out so i guess 2021) streamed for like a month on Disney+ before they removed it about three weeks. Since then i only rewatched some of the award years past (if they're available) on some illegal websites. Probably the most that i rewatched was 2015 Oscars, only because of Neil Patrick Harris' opening number and it was a nice year for movies at that time
Great suggestions! I do think an Oscar for Voice Over Performance is long overdue; both animated and live action. Thanks for being the voice of reason Dan!
One thing i would love to see being back for the Oscars are the animation clip packages in introducing the nomineee, it was so unique and beautiful. The last time they did that was at the 87th Academy Award/2015 Oscars (see the Best Picture nominee intro, you know what i'm talking about), why they didn't bring it back afterwards, i'll never understand it! 2015 Oscars was seriously one of the better Oscars in the past decade
100% agree, I guess the Oscars are just lazy to pay animators these days for that. Still even if they had to pay some people to do the intro, it'll still make the show interesting and unique
The one that kills me is the requirement that "The main storyline(s), theme or narrative of the film is centered on an underrepresented group(s)." Not every great movie does that. Even previous best picture winners such as No Country For Old Men (2007), Argo (2012), and The Artist (2011) would not qualify under those requirements. While it is important to represent various groups in Hollywood, not every amazing story needs to do that to leave an impact. In my mind, best picture should mean "The Best Picture" and that would be the most fair to every nominee rather than trying to artifically make a checklist. Especially when movies like Avatar: The Way of Water beat out films like Aftersun (2022).
This is not accurate as to what the requirements are. That is one of the possible areas that would fulfill the requirement. It is not solely required that a movie focus on an underrepresented group. I don’t like the standards, but they’ve also been very misrepresented by a lot of people, sometimes purposely.
Like Dan said with the stunt idea, it could lead to people doing that performative for the sake of winning that oscar. Brings question as to what was made with genuine intentions and what was made specifically to win an award. So I feel you on that regard. It's even quite patronizing in some respects.
@@DanMurrellMovies That's true there are other requirements such as casting and training opportunites, though from a personal perspective those ones don't bother me. That's why I was solely talking about that one.
Some truly fantastic ideas for change. As one of those fans of cinema that always watches the Oscars, I’d implement about 90% of what you’ve come up with. Fingers crossed the powers that be have seen this and take on at least 50%.
One thing I'm passionate about is no credits song in Best Original Song. Instead of radio tunes filling up the category, I think it would organically push forward musicals. It's a shame that Hollywood is embarassed of musicals, considering how historically important a genre it is.
I like this but an existing musical’s best song is ineligible because it is not original to that movie. They would have to add a song and that annoys a lot of people.
There is a Best Animated Feature award. I always thought there should also be acting awards for voice over work. Even if it was just the one award I think it makes sense.
Great video Dan! I love a lot of these ideas. Releasing the vote breakdown for Best Picture would be great. One thing I'd consider too is moving up the voting period for the final round of votes to somewhere around end of Jan or early Feb, when all nominees are out but the winners of industry awards aren't out yet. That might be controversial among people who like to predict this stuff, but I just think it would kind of force voters to really consider the nominees and not rely too much on the perceived consensus.
a person who is in the trenches every day would have had less time to see the movies due to being busy as opposed to someone who has the time on their hands to see much more. also if you add more nominees it diminishes the importance and significance of receiving a nomination.
Love the categories you included. One final one should be “Non-Traditional Performance”. This would acknowledge CGI, Motion Capture, and voice acting performance.
In addition to the new segments featuring movie casts doing bits/skits (instead of a host), and in place of the "clip montages" you suggested removing, I would add a "never seen before" behind the scenes segment for movies nominated that year, truly celebrating their creation and efforts that might've been overlooked + it's something people interested in those movies might actually tune in to see (as an exclusive first look).
I'm almost mad you posted this video because most of these ideas have been circulating within my friend group when talking about the Oscar's, and to feel validated for something that I doubt will ever change just hurts more
Congratulations Dan on an amazing video. I pray that someone from the academy has watched this video and present it to the board for review. You should get a huge consulting fee for helping them. At this point, the academy cannot find their way out of a wet paper bag.
I think you had GREAT ideas Dan, but I think even if you implemented all of them I would still just look up the winners the next morning online. My favorite idea though was about producing videos that helped educate the audience by giving examples of why that certain film was nominated in that category.
I think the legacy award is a great idea! The Hugo awards (science fiction/ fantasy literary award) have been doing something similar for a while now. They retroactively give an award for best novel for books that came out before the Hugo’s were around. It would be cool to have a similar award for films
I don’t mind if there’s an opening sketch about the best film nominees like Billy Crystal used to do back in the 1990s. Lasting maybe 5-10 minutes to open the show. Pre-taped with actors and cameos like an SNL sketch. Then, no host. Just actors coming out to present the awards.
Yes International movies to me is always a weird category because often you have to be a good enough movie to be nominated and win but not great enough to be nominated in the best movies category because normally that means you wont win anything..City of God should have been a win for Brazil and ended up leaving with nothing.
These “if I ran…“ Videos are always so depressing because so much of what you say makes sense and would be exactly what I would want to see happen but I know almost none of it ever will😭😭
I disagree about adding more individual nominees because it becomes more diluted, similar to the Grammys and Golden Globes. Even if the nominees are increased, we don't know for sure if the snubs (i.e., Greta Gerwig) will get in because the Academy tends to pick left-field choices than the usual/popular choices.
Actually show clips (not just sometimes), stop undermining nominated movies (long runtime 'jokes'), best stunt coordination category, consider all genre of films as valid for nominations etc.
Loved this video Dan. The only disagreement I have is with the Shorts Category. I think eliminating it from the broadcast would encourage less people to check them out, and often the shorts are my favorite discoveries when watching all the nominees. Also, for a year like this year where it's likely Wes Anderson will win his first oscar, I think it would be a missed opportunity not to televise, as I'm sure that'll be a very buzzed about moment
Given the use of ranked choice voting, releasing those voting results would i) be a bit complicated to read, ii) be really insightful because you can track where supporters of the film eliminated each round move, and iii) maybe help educate people on how ranked choice voting works. I really like the idea. There will be controversy when a film with an early lead loses it because voters are polarized on it (mostly top votes and bottom votes). But even that controversy can be fun.
Sorry Dan but Rule #1, started off poorly. The idea that you get kicked out of voting for merely wanting to retire seems honestly kind of cruel and bit ageist. Additionally the idea that people who are working are *more* likely to see things, honestly doesn't make a lot of sense, as a retiree would have much more time to watch the films than a lot of people who are too busy working.
I think to make it more acceptable for the Academy, add a „Best Choreography“ Award that works for Dance and Fight Scene alike. You could have John Wick and West Side Story in the same category. Could be wild.
The only thing I would change from your suggestions, Dan, is the waiting 10 years to release the results of the vote. You should release the results a week after the Oscars. I don't really care about the vote from 10 years ago. I do care about the current year. 10 Years is too long a wait. And it doesn't matter now anyways.
The biggest change they NEED to make is to make it more accessible. Correct me if I’m wrong, but if you don’t have cable, there’s no way to watch it live. It’s no wonder their ratings are so low. Who still pays for cable?!
@@lydia1634 that may be true but I think even less people have that, this comment its aimed at the fact that the account hasn't singed a streaming deal yet.
Overall I like your suggested changes except for one - the changes to shorts! The Oscars shorts are something I look forward to every year, and often the nominated short films are some of the best films of the year - period. You really need to broaden your horizons, and embrace the shorts!
I watch the shorts every year and I enjoy them. There’s nothing to stop anyone from watching them. But it is odd to have three on-air categories that are disconnected completely from the rest of the show.
@@DanMurrellMovies Yeah, I get that. Maybe the best way to handle it would be as you said to air them in the time prior to the Oscars or the day prior (maybe as a separate programming lineup), and just announce the winners during the main show. Either way, great video and great suggestions.
For the most part I agree with these but HEAVILY disagree with expanding the individual awards above five. Especially when I think the Best Picture category need to go back to 5. One of the reasons I think people have checked out of the Oscars is that massive 10 slots for best picture. It leads to a lot of movies no one has heard of (which can be a great thing for exposure) but not enough time to watch them all so the personal investment on part of a general viewer drops while cheapening the value of the nomination itself.
Here's a small change that could go a really long way: stream the ceremony. Cable TV is not what it used to be, and even if the numbers don't get published, i guarantee that the viewership of the Oscars would nearly double instantly just because of the convenience.
Cinefix (I think it was them?) did a great video on how its not that easy to do an Oscar for Stunts, and its kinda on Stunt people to try and propse a plan, as who gets the noms? The stunt performers? The co-ordinators? Stunts are a combined effort in its own right with a lot of departments and people.
RULE CHANGE TIME CODE: 1:14 - Rule 1: Limit the Academy votes 3:20 - Rule 2: Campaign reform 5:54 - Rule 3: Revise the International Film Rules 8:36 - Rule 4: Drop the current diversity standards 11:00 - Rule 5: Expand the field of nominees 14:45 - Rule 6: Add category for Best Stunts 15:47 - Rule 7: Add a category for actors under 21 17:12 - Rule 8: Give out a legacy award 10 years later 19:06 - Rule 9: No Oscar for most popular film 21:45 - Rule 10: Oscar hosts are optional 23:13 - Rule 11: Curate your presenters 24:24 - Rule 12: Award the short films at a different ceremony 25:16 - Rule 13: Speeches are about feelings, not names 26:35 - Rule 14: Don’t Show montages of old film clips 27:01 - Rule 15: Do show clips explaining categories 28:05 - Rule 16: Bring back the televised Honorary Oscar 29:25 - Rule 17: Know your audience 30:51 - Rule 18: Always end with Best Picture 31:46 - Release Best Picture totals 10 years after it’s rewarded. My response. 1. Totally disagree. I think Steven Spielberg rightly argued that it shuts out veteran members of the Academy who were overlooked but worked on iconic films but were never nominated. 2. Slightly Agree. I think some of what you’ve proposed is already into effect. I know one of the rules is that you can have parties or screenings but can’t serve drinks or food. Definitely would get a lot of pushback against having to register for small screenings with friends. 3. Slightly Agree. I understand why the International film rule has one film per country and it’s so that European countries like France don’t dominate the category. It’s to give countries a chance to get nominated. My problem with the Branch is that the winner of Best International Film should go to the director of the film and NOT the country which is how it is set up right now. 4. Agree. The rules are pretty hollow and easy to get around. 5. Totally disagree. Not everyone gets a participation trophy! This is the Academy Awards not the People’s Choice Awards. If there are up to 10 nominees in the acting category it dilutes the award. Hope they never expand the categories beyond 5. 6. Agree. Yes I agree, the Stunt Category make sense 7. Totally disagree and unnecessary. They should compete in the acting categories. They can break into the categories look at Tatum O’Neal, Anna Paquin, Haley Joel Osmet, Abigail Breslin, Quvanzhane Wallis, Hailee Steinfeld, Saoirse Ronan, etc. 8. Totally disagree and unnecessary. This seems pointless and more suitable for another award show. 9. Totally agree. I’m not for pointless new categories. 10. Totally disagree. Hosts are often necessary. You just need a good one! Kimmel’s been so reliably good in recent years. I would love to see John Mulaney, Steve Martin, Martin Short host. You need someone to be the cruiseship director. 11. Agree. I also love when they bring classic stars to the show like Shirley MacLaine, Rita Moreno, Eva Marie Sant, etc. 12. Completely agree. I would switch out the short films and present Honorary awards at the main telecast. 13. Agree but not new. Every year they remind people to try and limit their speeches. 14. Disagree. I love when they show at least one montage of old film clips. It brings a sense of history of the preceding and why this award ceremony is important. 15. Completely agree. I love it when there’s a brief explanation or montage of costumes/set etc. 16. Completely agree. To shun Honorary Oscar winners aside at a private dinner party feels disrespectful 17. Completely agree. People will come once you’re confident about what you’re about. 18. Completely agree and yes one of the worst Oscar moments aside from the Slap. 19. Slightly agree. I think voting totals should be released but for historical context. I think they should start releasing totals from 1927 onward. Maybe each year you get totals so it’s stagnant.
Legacy award: Social Notwork is a contender - It has become even more relevant with all that has happened with Facebook since 2009. It should have beaten the Kings Speech.
I really miss how creative some of the category presentations were in past years. I remember they did a showcase on stage of all the nominated costumes one year, they played clips from nominated films with all the dialogue taken out to show off sound design, etc...
4:00 - One minor tweak to the budget cap, you said you'd either limit it per studio or per project. I would do both. Studios like Disney or WB might put up 5, 6, 7 films, while someone like A24 might put up one or two. So with hypothetical numbers, I'd put the cap at say $1 million total per project, $5 million per studio. If Disney wants to put up 8 movies, they have the scale back per movie. If A24 wants nominees is the "big 6" categories, they have to combine their "FYC" campaign or split their $1 million to whatever they prioritize.
The only reason I can think of as to why they don't have a stunt category, is due to stunt performers being non-union. I just can't think of any other logical reason they continue to be so hard-nosed about not making it an awards selection.
There are many reasons why the Academy Awards doesn't have a Best Stunts category. The most obvious one would be that it essentially becomes a life-risking death race for stunt workers to have more incentive to perform more dangerous, risky, and ambitious stunts just for the sake of awards (they obviously won't be doing it only for the Oscar, but it's an important factor if they are awarding this department). If a stunt worker gets seriously injured or dies, shouldn't the movie be disqualified for Oscars? If not, then it's essentially awarding dangerous and unsafe production conditions. If serious injuries or deaths as a result of a stunt were to disqualify the movie, where is the cutoff for a "serious injury"? Would it be permanent paralysis or just a broken neck or back? It's a reasonable concern to have for an award that exists purely for the most at-risk department on a movie set. Another reason why a Best Stunts award would never happen is that it essentially is only awarding one genre of movies only -- action. There are very few exceptions where a non-action movie would be considered to have better stunts than an action movie so it feels like an odd award to have at the Academy Awards of all places. It would be similar to having a "Best Jump-Scare" category where it unreasonably restricts the eligible contenders to only one or two genres of movies. I think a more reasonable Oscar to introduce would be a "Best Choreography" award. Stunt work is considered "stunt choreography" but choreography also applies to any type of movement in a movie, most notably dancing in musicals. But even other movies can have great choreography without being action or musicals, like many Spielberg movies. Best Choreography would refer to the planning and artfulness of stunt work without emphasizing the pure spectacle/danger of it. If a stunt actor were to jump out of a five story building while on fire, that would be considered a "best stunt," but not necessarily choreography, so it would take more planning and thought than a simple "Best Stunts" Oscar would.
I agree with almost all you said, but I disagree about the international film category. The committee shouldn't decide on it's own about a second film from a country. Even if it's a popular movie, not controversial in that country (which could be a real diplomatic problem), imagine how the committee of that country would feel like if the Academy says "yeah, we don't like the movie you picked, we're going to decide ourselves what movie should represent your country". Then no one will want to submit their movie, because it won't matter anyway. It's that country's responsibility to choose the movie that has the best chance of winning. And yes, sometimes they will make a bad choice, but they need to learn from it, do their homework, and make a better choice next time. What can be done is allow the country to submit one or 2 movies of their choice. Also, you need to remember that foreign films need to be submitted by the end of September, 6 months before the Oscars! So a lot of times, those popular movies that should have been submitted were not released yet in many countries, and they can't forecast what movie will be the most popular internationally by the end of the year. Maybe the deadline is something that should be reformed.
I’ve been saying for years that just once, for fun, when they introduce the presenters instead of highlighting a previous Oscar nomination/win or promoting a current project, each and every one should be introduced with the absolute WORST movie they’ve ever been involved in. “Ladies and Gentlemen, to present the Oscar for Best Director, please welcome the Director of 1941, Steven Spielberg.” “Please welcome from ‘She-Devil’ Ms. Meryl Streep.” Keep the celebrities humble and send a message to viewers that no matter how hard you fail don’t give up, just pick yourself up and try again.
Great ideas, Dan! I like your reasoning behind the expansion of category slots, especially when there are a lot of strong performances in a given year, but I also think it will make the nominations insanely hard to predict! I remember how hard it was to predict Best Picture when 10 slots were not guaranteed.
There are many reasons why the Academy Awards doesn't have a Best Stunts category. The most obvious one would be that it essentially becomes a life-risking death race for stunt workers to have more incentive to perform more dangerous, risky, and ambitious stunts just for the sake of awards (they obviously won't be doing it only for the Oscar, but it's an important factor if they are awarding this department). If a stunt worker gets seriously injured or dies, shouldn't the movie be disqualified for Oscars? If not, then it's essentially awarding dangerous and unsafe production conditions. If serious injuries or deaths as a result of a stunt were to disqualify the movie, where is the cutoff for a "serious injury"? Would it be permanent paralysis or just a broken neck or back? It's a reasonable concern to have for an award that exists purely for the most at-risk department on a movie set. Another reason why a Best Stunts award would never happen is that it essentially is only awarding one genre of movies only -- action. There are very few exceptions where a non-action movie would be considered to have better stunts than an action movie so it feels like an odd award to have at the Academy Awards of all places. It would be similar to having a "Best Jump-Scare" category where it unreasonably restricts the eligible contenders to only one or two genres of movies. I think a more reasonable Oscar to introduce would be a "Best Choreography" award. Stunt work is considered "stunt choreography" but choreography also applies to any type of movement in a movie, most notably dancing in musicals. But even other movies can have great choreography without being action or musicals, like many Spielberg movies. Best Choreography would refer to the planning and artfulness of stunt work without emphasizing the pure spectacle/danger of it. If a stunt actor were to jump out of a five story building while on fire, that would be considered a "best stunt," but not necessarily choreography, so it would take more planning and thought than a simple "Best Stunts" Oscar would.
I think I agree with literally every change you mentioned. Some of these things, I was not even aware of, so I appreciate the information as well. And for crying out loud, just like you had as an addition, if we had to pick one category to add, IT MUST BE STUNTS!!!
One small thing, International Feature Oscars should go to their directors, not countries. The nation of Germany didn't make All Quiet on the Western Front any more than the United States made EEAAO, yet Germany was the recipient of the award. Edward Berger made the movie, and he should be the one winning the Oscar.
They used to have an Honorary "Juvenile" award for performers under 18 years old so if they didn't want to add a full category (for years where there aren't enough performances in the age range) they could just revive that idea.
Dominic Sessa and Milo Machado-Graner gave two of the most moving performances I saw this year. I’m constantly frustrated by the academy not recognizing young actors.
Love the legacy idea! And it’s way past time for stunt performances to be recognised. They don’t have to be big, dangerous ones to have a huge impact on the delivery of the story. Look at special effects - some of the most impactful are ones the audience doesn’t immediately consciously recognise as an effect. A physically impossible camera move, for example.
Hello Dan. Great video as always. I would have to disagree on the young performers category idea. I think from a safeguarding and responsible point of view I think it is very important NOT to go overboard about a child performer. The industry is notoriously riddled with young actors who have been psychologically damaged because of too much fame, either by peers, the press or the public from a young age. Putting young people up against each other for an award means a huge amount of extra pressure at an age where these young people are already finding it difficult to cope. Once they are mature enough to deal with so much public scrutiny then yes, give them an award. I hope this makes sense. :-)
I think an option for shorter speeches would be that the nominees can either pre record a “who they would personally like to thank” or make it a voice over by announcer. We usually have dead time when someone has to walk up stage anyways so a nice way to fill the air with something meaningful while keeping the show moving. They can then focus on the more meaningful side of this award win than a list of names. It also wouldn’t be presumptuous since all the nominees would participate in it.
I like all your suggestions Dan, except I think ALL categories should be limited to five nominees. Even Best Picture. I'd go back to the days where there were only five nominees. I also wish they televised the Honorary Awards.
Big fan of the suggestions, one I hadn’t even thought of is the under 21 award. As you said, the academy is certainly showing a reluctance to nominate younger performers, so why not give them a platform to be recognized. Saoirse Ronan would have been the Meryl Streep of that category, we would have likely had Lindsey Lohan: Academy Award Winner and we also would have a non-gendered acting category, which would be interesting.
Cool idea but id move them to a cable network to do that say oppenhimer wins this year and in the interim that tradition would s implemented we would have to watch it edited which would suck donkey balls
Hi Dan, maybe you can look this up to find out more details. But from what I heard, Anatomy of a Fall was not submitted by France because someone in the Government did not like something the filmmaker had said. Anatomy of a Fall was deliberately left off France's submission, I guess as a punishment. They did not want to submit the Palme D'Or Winner of 2023.
That's correct. Triet was critical of the French government (I don't know in what way), so they nominated a mediocre film instead of Anatomy of a Fall, which (in my opinion) is an amazing film.
One thing I would do is get rid of Best Animated Feature. Brave had no business winning. Films like Shark Tale and Boss Baby had no business being nominated. Best Animated Feature is nothing but a "participation award" that the academy doesn't take seriously. It's the academy's excuse to not have to put animated films up for Best Picture.
The first change you mentioned was actually something that was done when Gregory Peck was president of the academy in the late 60s at the initial request of… Candice Bergen!! Fascinating chapter in the book “Oscar Wars” 10/10 recommend!
17:10 Dan, what if you did an annual video doing your own legacy celebration? You could celebrate those movies from the past and remind us how great they were 🎉🎉
What I believe is that veterans of the studio era understand Hollywood and the Oscars on a level beyond that of younger voters. At the same time, Oscars need both older and younger voters for a knowledgeable and balanced outcome.
Years and years ago, the night before the Academy Awards the broadcast network that was hosting had a special that was simply titled The Movies. And it was a three hour compilation of clips from movies of the past X number of years and it was amazing because it reminded you of the movies. And this got me thinking that one huge mistake producers of the awards show constantly make is that the movies are the reason why we’re watching them…not for the dance spectacles… not for the political commentary…not for the antics in the audience when you’re ordering pizza or taking selfies… Although that sometimes brightens up the evening… Clips of the movies that are nominated should be the core foundation of the entire evening
I would like a category for adapted song. Because I am tired of these musicals having to shoehorn in a new song when they get adapted to the screen. Also there are so many directors who are so good at doing needle drops properly that recontextualize those songs forever.
If I would/could ran the Academy - first I dropping out the short lists in the technical/minor categories (put in the list all films that deservingly to be nominate) and put it the acting categories and enough of the category frauds--in the lead performances it should be a from 95-100 percent in the film appreances and it should be the title of the film (in case Michelle Williams in The Fabelmans & Carey Mulligan in the Maestro, she is not the Maestro only Bradley Cooper's character) and in the supporting role it should be from 50 percentage to 75 percent of the film appearances then if below 40 percentage appreances of the actor on the film it will be considered a cameo even if they had impact of the film. And mostly important is they should be voting to merits by the performances not on who's time is - next is adding the Stunt & Choreography category and members up too 200 membership - add film critics as a members of the Academy/Oscars and they can vote all categories - the Academy/Oscars annually survey 10 major film theaters in USA and 3 each country what audiences loves in the year films been releases--the public voting serves as the preferencial ballot out of the Dolby Theater (surroundings) from December-February (2nd week) - adding members to the Academy/Oscars from each countries who've been in the film industry in thier 10 years film career above - in the ceremony itself should be live broadcasts in all social medias [Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, RUclips (in YT to subscribers & members)] and some footages from the ceremony, behind-the-scenes, trivias of the nominees that year and past nominees (in Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, etc) with subtitles accordingly what languages audiences preferred and partnership each country of a television network [contractually] - all members of the Academy/Oscars should submit a report of how many films they been watch-form sheets are from the Academy itself to be giving to all the members, they listed what those films are [infos be like title of the film; the director; distribution company] - all films to be in consideration in all categories (no exceptions) should be premieres in any film festivals - partnership companies to Letterboxd, Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB, Metacritic & Gold Derby - all private screenings should be listed in the Academy with the 3 board members (that's not closed to the screeners) acquired to be there and must documented via video live to the Academy office - to the smaller distribution companies (like Bleecker Street, IFC Films, etc.) having a consideration films in the run should the Academy finding a sponsorship from the big companies out there (not from the "competitors"/not related film companies) to funding them to helping in the campaigns - once in ten years the Oscars ceremony event should be place (outside of the Dolby Theater) in a bigger event venue (like SoFi Stadium, Allegiant Stadium, Allianz Arena etc.) in the USA or any country as long as it safe to place the Oscars ceremony and the audiences whoever wants to go they fans can get book a ticket of the venue, so the film geeks also can celebrate/cheer with thier favorite film of that year, a live Oscars experience - all been nominated films have a cealed with the Academy logo in the title of films (not branding) from physical copies to streaming. In silver logo are the nominated films, gold logo are the winners and the crystal logo is the best picture winner
Arguing against #14. Keep the old film clips!! We agree that posterity and preservation are an important function of the Oscars. Every Oscars is some budding film fan's first Oscars viewing and it's a suitable time to expose them to film history and/or reward them for learning it. Although, perhaps contemporary aspiring cinephiles get their film history from TikTok and are already as jaded as some of us!
Imo they should just remove the submission process for international film, but keep the actual nominations limited to 1 per country, the one with the most votes if more than 1 are in the top 5.
I'd add voice actor category, they're so much underrated and there would be a lot of movies to pick from, not only animation
Too specific of a category and wouldn't bring in any new viewers. Plus it's not a huge injustice by excluding them now.
Yes, absolutely, but they would need a way of narrowing it down. We've seen more recently how a lot of films just hire celebrities and well-known people to voice characters without giving actual trained voice actors a chance at all. I worry if a voice actor category would encourage studios to continue this famous voice actor trope to pull support for the award.
Especially with motion capture, rotoscoping, and reference videos from recording sessions - even beyond their voices, voice actors significantly influence the animated performances.
I absolutely agree that this category should be implemented.
No, not merely voice actor category. A combination Best Voiceover/Motion Captured Performance.
I think that the Best International Category should also be expanded to 10 nominations. There's more than 5 other countries besides the U.S. that are making movies. With all the new categories and expansions, the Oscars should be presented over two nights, like how the Emmys and the Grammys do it.
that is very good and obvious suggestion. If the best Picture has been expanded to 10 then why is Best International Picture limited at 5. Not sure about stunt category. Because stunts work even if very important is not "art" per se.
The 10 years later legacy award is SUCH a good idea
The Hugo awards have something similar where they look back and award works on their major anniversary years if no award in the category was given that year. I think legacy awards for 10, 25, 50, 75, & 100 years where they did not win best picture or a previous legacy award and a certain percentage votes for them- so it might not be awarded every year.
Dan: They should add a category for stunts.
Tom Cruise: YOU SUMMONED ME!?!?!?!
Chad Stahelski and David Leitch : "We beg your pardon"
If there was a stunts catagory this year, John Wick should have won.
Stunts category will make studios pursue more death inducing scenes that would kill the stunt crew
@@LavaLot-zi5us Tom cruise is already doing that.
@@LavaLot-zi5us With the best actor wins including a lot of method acting, didn't the best actor award make it an incentive for Leonardo to go out into the snow? Didn't it encourage guys like Matthew Mcconnaughey to starve himself to lose weight? Does the screenplay categories deprive the writers of sleep because they are working on the script more?
Its a silly argument.
My change to the oscars would be to add two stunt categories - best stunt choreography to celebrate the team that put it together and best stunt performance to celebrate the execution and this category would be open to international nominations
Actually criminal this doesn’t get rewarded.
The problem becomes that someone can't judge a stunt actor's performance unless they're on set. With CGI and editing, it's tough for someone to see an awesome stunt on a screen and know whether or not there was an actual person doing it.
Stunt actors and choreographers deserve Oscar recognition, 100000%, just saying the practical reality of evaluating it is difficult
What's the difference between stunt choreography and stunt performance? How would it be possible for the same movie to not win both of them?
@@misterderp4566 And also major actors have multiple stunt doubles (like even up to 5 or more in some cases) so who would get the award if they all did the stunts?
Would dance/choreography count as stunts?
Love the Legacy film award suggestion. That's what me and my buddies are constantly arguing about when we discuss film over beer--what should have won. This would create a whole new meta-level to that conversation for people.
Same. I very much like the idea of giving some respects to those who have made an impact after so long. It's one thing to get gold in the now, but it's another thing to have lasting appeal beyond it.
What movie would you pick from 2013?
interesting, I don't really like the idea personally, but I think doing more of the hall of fame inductees thing may work better? 10 years or later a movie can be eligible for the hall of fame and say 5 make it in every year?
@@zbitykieliszek9358personally I like Gravity, but Frozen has had the most lasting impact.
@@zbitykieliszek9358gravity or her. It does seem like the opposite of what the Oscars are meant for
I would give an award to one random person in the audience regardless of why they are there
I would limit it to seat fillers. The unsung heroes of the Oscars.
Best clapper award
I agree with the editing choices. I feel old movie montage should be part of the pre Oscar’s show. But once the show starts it’s all about the current year.
Easiest way to sell the legacy award is to point Citizen Kane didn’t win Best Pic
That would be amazing!
And for very temporary reasons: it was targeted by William Randolph Hearst for its obvious depiction of elements of his life and his media apparatus was turned against it. A great example.
Saving Private Ryan too!
Bohemian Rhapsody has way more Oscar's than Citizen Kane. Now that's depressing.
I find it hilarious that a show where they only hand out like 20 awards takes 3 hours. Most people only get like a minute for their speech, unless it’s one of the big ones. So there is truly no reason why that show can’t be over and done with in a tight 60 minutes.
🤔I doubt the academy can make pull off a quick ceremony to their biggest acting awards within the hour. 2hrs or 2hrs and a half seems more like it.
Well let's flashback to Joe Pesci's Oscar speech which was just
"It's my privilege thank you"
😂
I'd rather have 3 hours with more awards than a shorter, halfway thought through show.
27:06 A few days ago clips were going around from the 2015/2016 Oscars where the Sound Design category showcased only the sound from the clips. It was incredibly effective and how I think it should be done like you're saying.
Jesus, 2015 Oscars was like one of the best years of the show I've ever seen. The way they introduced every single nominee was absolutely brilliant, I wish the Oscars these days were as good as in 2015
Ever since I became a huge fan of Andy Serkis’s work as Gollum in LOTR, and then learned that he was not nominated for an Oscar because it was an “animated performance” and not him acting, it made me want a category I would call, “Best Voice or Animated Performance” and it would be an award shared by the actor and whoever the lead animator(s) were on the character. I would love that! Either that or make those people eligible for the main acting Oscar’s too.
I don't know what the fix is, but it's always bothered me that there are anonymous interviews every year with a member that openly admits to not seeing all of the movies or nominees they're voting for.
This is actually a thing that the Oscars got right one year. It must have been 2000.
Next to the nominees in the writing categories, they showed pages from their scripts. More or less showcasing that writing is more or less the fundament of moviemaking.
"They showed pages from their scripts"
They actually did it back in the 87th Academy Awards/2015 Oscars (it was probably the last time they did that). When they introduced the nominee in the writing category, they showed dialogues and script pages of each of the nominees with a beautiful animation intro to it. That in my opinion, is how you introduce the writing category properly
@@K0m30ng They even did it this one (last?) time. Quite sure that it was 2000. Because I as a teenager was surprised how different their writing styles were. (Too young to have seen it back in 95, so it had to be end of the century.)
@@nikitaaverin Nope, 2015 was the last time they introduced the writing category with that intro. Actually in only requires for the original screenplay, as far as I can remember for adapted ones, the intro was the source material of each of the nominee. If you wanna see it, see when Birdman won Best Original Screenplay
@@K0m30ng I stand corrected.
While we’re on this topic; that “Birdman” wasn’t nominated for Editing… Mind. Blown.
@@K0m30ng And I am blind. I thought you wrote 1995. 🙈
I ❤ how Dan is never going to let Toni Collette’s Oscar snub go 😂
There are three things that Dan will likely never let go about the Oscars
3) Will Smith slap
2) The Best Picture envelope mixed up
1) Toni Collette's Hereditary Oscar snub 😂😂😂
When is the last time I mentioned Will Smith?
Agree with pretty much all except the shorts. I think they should keep them but present all three in a row followed by one of the bigger awards or sandwich them between the two screenplay or lead/supporting acting performances. You guarantee eyeballs, build anticipation for a “main event” Oscar, and knock out a large chunk of awards in one swoop
Yeah, I don't like hiding awards due to time constraints in general. I think they need to figure out where they can trim the fat on things that are less necessary first before going after certain categories.
If Cillian is in pink and Margot is in black, I may scream.
No way that’ll happen but it’s a great idea
I would add that the show should be streamed online. With a chat!
Just watch the sposcars
In my country, they had the Oscars (atleast since Disney+ came out so i guess 2021) streamed for like a month on Disney+ before they removed it about three weeks. Since then i only rewatched some of the award years past (if they're available) on some illegal websites. Probably the most that i rewatched was 2015 Oscars, only because of Neil Patrick Harris' opening number and it was a nice year for movies at that time
Great suggestions! I do think an Oscar for Voice Over Performance is long overdue; both animated and live action. Thanks for being the voice of reason Dan!
One thing i would love to see being back for the Oscars are the animation clip packages in introducing the nomineee, it was so unique and beautiful. The last time they did that was at the 87th Academy Award/2015 Oscars (see the Best Picture nominee intro, you know what i'm talking about), why they didn't bring it back afterwards, i'll never understand it! 2015 Oscars was seriously one of the better Oscars in the past decade
100% agree, I guess the Oscars are just lazy to pay animators these days for that. Still even if they had to pay some people to do the intro, it'll still make the show interesting and unique
The one that kills me is the requirement that "The main storyline(s), theme or narrative of the film is centered on an underrepresented group(s)." Not every great movie does that. Even previous best picture winners such as No Country For Old Men (2007), Argo (2012), and The Artist (2011) would not qualify under those requirements. While it is important to represent various groups in Hollywood, not every amazing story needs to do that to leave an impact. In my mind, best picture should mean "The Best Picture" and that would be the most fair to every nominee rather than trying to artifically make a checklist. Especially when movies like Avatar: The Way of Water beat out films like Aftersun (2022).
This is not accurate as to what the requirements are. That is one of the possible areas that would fulfill the requirement. It is not solely required that a movie focus on an underrepresented group. I don’t like the standards, but they’ve also been very misrepresented by a lot of people, sometimes purposely.
Like Dan said with the stunt idea, it could lead to people doing that performative for the sake of winning that oscar. Brings question as to what was made with genuine intentions and what was made specifically to win an award. So I feel you on that regard. It's even quite patronizing in some respects.
@@DanMurrellMovies That's true there are other requirements such as casting and training opportunites, though from a personal perspective those ones don't bother me. That's why I was solely talking about that one.
@@DanMurrellMovies Why do movie have to be diverse...does it make them better movies or more worthy. People have had enough of this.
Some truly fantastic ideas for change. As one of those fans of cinema that always watches the Oscars, I’d implement about 90% of what you’ve come up with. Fingers crossed the powers that be have seen this and take on at least 50%.
One thing I'm passionate about is no credits song in Best Original Song. Instead of radio tunes filling up the category, I think it would organically push forward musicals. It's a shame that Hollywood is embarassed of musicals, considering how historically important a genre it is.
When a musical is good though, it often dominates the nominations, and sometimes even wins. Chicago, West Side Story remake, La La Land of course
I couldn't agree more!
Dance should be recognised in the choreography category.
I like this but an existing musical’s best song is ineligible because it is not original to that movie. They would have to add a song and that annoys a lot of people.
There is a Best Animated Feature award. I always thought there should also be acting awards for voice over work. Even if it was just the one award I think it makes sense.
Great video Dan! I love a lot of these ideas. Releasing the vote breakdown for Best Picture would be great.
One thing I'd consider too is moving up the voting period for the final round of votes to somewhere around end of Jan or early Feb, when all nominees are out but the winners of industry awards aren't out yet. That might be controversial among people who like to predict this stuff, but I just think it would kind of force voters to really consider the nominees and not rely too much on the perceived consensus.
a person who is in the trenches every day would have had less time to see the movies due to being busy as opposed to someone who has the time on their hands to see much more. also if you add more nominees it diminishes the importance and significance of receiving a nomination.
Love the categories you included. One final one should be “Non-Traditional Performance”. This would acknowledge CGI, Motion Capture, and voice acting performance.
In addition to the new segments featuring movie casts doing bits/skits (instead of a host), and in place of the "clip montages" you suggested removing, I would add a "never seen before" behind the scenes segment for movies nominated that year, truly celebrating their creation and efforts that might've been overlooked + it's something people interested in those movies might actually tune in to see (as an exclusive first look).
I'd let Dan run my life.
I'm almost mad you posted this video because most of these ideas have been circulating within my friend group when talking about the Oscar's, and to feel validated for something that I doubt will ever change just hurts more
Dan Murrell for President of AMPAS. Now. Right now!!
Any chance we could extend that out to POTUS?
He’d certainly get my vote over either of the two clowns in contention come November.
If he was the AMPAS president, he should reject any offer from studios in using the Oscars to promote their future work
Oscar for Best Voice Acting 🏆
Those changes you mentioned are just common sense - probably why they haven't happened yet 😂
Congratulations Dan on an amazing video. I pray that someone from the academy has watched this video and present it to the board for review. You should get a huge consulting fee for helping them. At this point, the academy cannot find their way out of a wet paper bag.
I think you had GREAT ideas Dan, but I think even if you implemented all of them I would still just look up the winners the next morning online.
My favorite idea though was about producing videos that helped educate the audience by giving examples of why that certain film was nominated in that category.
I love so many of these ideas, especially the segments about how the various departments impact the final film.
They should also stream the ceremony on one or all of the streamers or RUclips or something. It shouldn't just be available on cable
I think the legacy award is a great idea! The Hugo awards (science fiction/ fantasy literary award) have been doing something similar for a while now. They retroactively give an award for best novel for books that came out before the Hugo’s were around. It would be cool to have a similar award for films
I don’t mind if there’s an opening sketch about the best film nominees like Billy Crystal used to do back in the 1990s. Lasting maybe 5-10 minutes to open the show. Pre-taped with actors and cameos like an SNL sketch. Then, no host. Just actors coming out to present the awards.
Get rid of the ""funny"", no Amy Schumer, no Jimmy Kimmel. Give more time for speeches and make sure the right people are voting.
Thank you! We already have a series of songs for the nominees and a ton of commercials. Why undercut speeches for gags we can watch anywhere else?
There is time for good comedy . Billy Crystal and Steve Martin are proof
This!
Ah I forgot, more respect for animated movies would be nice too. No Spiderverse for score/music is criminal.
@@mellow3995 Same thing for Original Song.
Yes International movies to me is always a weird category because often you have to be a good enough movie to be nominated and win but not great enough to be nominated in the best movies category because normally that means you wont win anything..City of God should have been a win for Brazil and ended up leaving with nothing.
These “if I ran…“ Videos are always so depressing because so much of what you say makes sense and would be exactly what I would want to see happen but I know almost none of it ever will😭😭
I disagree about adding more individual nominees because it becomes more diluted, similar to the Grammys and Golden Globes. Even if the nominees are increased, we don't know for sure if the snubs (i.e., Greta Gerwig) will get in because the Academy tends to pick left-field choices than the usual/popular choices.
Actually show clips (not just sometimes), stop undermining nominated movies (long runtime 'jokes'), best stunt coordination category, consider all genre of films as valid for nominations etc.
Hey Dan, would you keep the best sound category or revert it to the best sound mixing and sound editing?
Keep it the way that it is
@@DanMurrellMovies Cool. Thanks for the update.
Loved this video Dan. The only disagreement I have is with the Shorts Category. I think eliminating it from the broadcast would encourage less people to check them out, and often the shorts are my favorite discoveries when watching all the nominees. Also, for a year like this year where it's likely Wes Anderson will win his first oscar, I think it would be a missed opportunity not to televise, as I'm sure that'll be a very buzzed about moment
Given the use of ranked choice voting, releasing those voting results would i) be a bit complicated to read, ii) be really insightful because you can track where supporters of the film eliminated each round move, and iii) maybe help educate people on how ranked choice voting works. I really like the idea. There will be controversy when a film with an early lead loses it because voters are polarized on it (mostly top votes and bottom votes). But even that controversy can be fun.
Sorry Dan but Rule #1, started off poorly. The idea that you get kicked out of voting for merely wanting to retire seems honestly kind of cruel and bit ageist. Additionally the idea that people who are working are *more* likely to see things, honestly doesn't make a lot of sense, as a retiree would have much more time to watch the films than a lot of people who are too busy working.
I think to make it more acceptable for the Academy, add a „Best Choreography“ Award that works for Dance and Fight Scene alike. You could have John Wick and West Side Story in the same category. Could be wild.
The only thing I would change from your suggestions, Dan, is the waiting 10 years to release the results of the vote. You should release the results a week after the Oscars. I don't really care about the vote from 10 years ago. I do care about the current year. 10 Years is too long a wait. And it doesn't matter now anyways.
The biggest change they NEED to make is to make it more accessible. Correct me if I’m wrong, but if you don’t have cable, there’s no way to watch it live. It’s no wonder their ratings are so low. Who still pays for cable?!
You don't need cable, but you do need an actual TV and an antenna. We only use it for the Oscars and the Olympics.
@@lydia1634 oh interesting, I’ve never tried that..
Yeah, come on Academy, UPDATE your program availability!
@@lydia1634 that may be true but I think even less people have that, this comment its aimed at the fact that the account hasn't singed a streaming deal yet.
Would be nice to have the Original Score nominees performed for at least like 10 minutes total for all 5 nominees.
They did this one year! They did short ballets to suites from each film. It was really cool.
Overall I like your suggested changes except for one - the changes to shorts! The Oscars shorts are something I look forward to every year, and often the nominated short films are some of the best films of the year - period. You really need to broaden your horizons, and embrace the shorts!
I watch the shorts every year and I enjoy them. There’s nothing to stop anyone from watching them. But it is odd to have three on-air categories that are disconnected completely from the rest of the show.
@@DanMurrellMovies Yeah, I get that. Maybe the best way to handle it would be as you said to air them in the time prior to the Oscars or the day prior (maybe as a separate programming lineup), and just announce the winners during the main show. Either way, great video and great suggestions.
The fact that we got casting before stunt actor and voice actor is kinda wild.
For the most part I agree with these but HEAVILY disagree with expanding the individual awards above five. Especially when I think the Best Picture category need to go back to 5. One of the reasons I think people have checked out of the Oscars is that massive 10 slots for best picture. It leads to a lot of movies no one has heard of (which can be a great thing for exposure) but not enough time to watch them all so the personal investment on part of a general viewer drops while cheapening the value of the nomination itself.
Here's a small change that could go a really long way: stream the ceremony. Cable TV is not what it used to be, and even if the numbers don't get published, i guarantee that the viewership of the Oscars would nearly double instantly just because of the convenience.
Cinefix (I think it was them?) did a great video on how its not that easy to do an Oscar for Stunts, and its kinda on Stunt people to try and propse a plan, as who gets the noms? The stunt performers? The co-ordinators? Stunts are a combined effort in its own right with a lot of departments and people.
RULE CHANGE TIME CODE:
1:14 - Rule 1: Limit the Academy votes
3:20 - Rule 2: Campaign reform
5:54 - Rule 3: Revise the International Film Rules
8:36 - Rule 4: Drop the current diversity standards
11:00 - Rule 5: Expand the field of nominees
14:45 - Rule 6: Add category for Best Stunts
15:47 - Rule 7: Add a category for actors under 21
17:12 - Rule 8: Give out a legacy award 10 years later
19:06 - Rule 9: No Oscar for most popular film
21:45 - Rule 10: Oscar hosts are optional
23:13 - Rule 11: Curate your presenters
24:24 - Rule 12: Award the short films at a different ceremony
25:16 - Rule 13: Speeches are about feelings, not names
26:35 - Rule 14: Don’t Show montages of old film clips
27:01 - Rule 15: Do show clips explaining categories
28:05 - Rule 16: Bring back the televised Honorary Oscar
29:25 - Rule 17: Know your audience
30:51 - Rule 18: Always end with Best Picture
31:46 - Release Best Picture totals 10 years after it’s rewarded.
My response.
1. Totally disagree. I think Steven Spielberg rightly argued that it shuts out veteran members of the Academy who were overlooked but worked on iconic films but were never nominated.
2. Slightly Agree. I think some of what you’ve proposed is already into effect. I know one of the rules is that you can have parties or screenings but can’t serve drinks or food. Definitely would get a lot of pushback against having to register for small screenings with friends.
3. Slightly Agree. I understand why the International film rule has one film per country and it’s so that European countries like France don’t dominate the category. It’s to give countries a chance to get nominated. My problem with the Branch is that the winner of Best International Film should go to the director of the film and NOT the country which is how it is set up right now.
4. Agree. The rules are pretty hollow and easy to get around.
5. Totally disagree. Not everyone gets a participation trophy! This is the Academy Awards not the People’s Choice Awards. If there are up to 10 nominees in the acting category it dilutes the award. Hope they never expand the categories beyond 5.
6. Agree. Yes I agree, the Stunt Category make sense
7. Totally disagree and unnecessary. They should compete in the acting categories. They can break into the categories look at Tatum O’Neal, Anna Paquin, Haley Joel Osmet, Abigail Breslin, Quvanzhane Wallis, Hailee Steinfeld, Saoirse Ronan, etc.
8. Totally disagree and unnecessary. This seems pointless and more suitable for another award show.
9. Totally agree. I’m not for pointless new categories.
10. Totally disagree. Hosts are often necessary. You just need a good one! Kimmel’s been so reliably good in recent years. I would love to see John Mulaney, Steve Martin, Martin Short host. You need someone to be the cruiseship director.
11. Agree. I also love when they bring classic stars to the show like Shirley MacLaine, Rita Moreno, Eva Marie Sant, etc.
12. Completely agree. I would switch out the short films and present Honorary awards at the main telecast.
13. Agree but not new. Every year they remind people to try and limit their speeches.
14. Disagree. I love when they show at least one montage of old film clips. It brings a sense of history of the preceding and why this award ceremony is important.
15. Completely agree. I love it when there’s a brief explanation or montage of costumes/set etc.
16. Completely agree. To shun Honorary Oscar winners aside at a private dinner party feels disrespectful
17. Completely agree. People will come once you’re confident about what you’re about.
18. Completely agree and yes one of the worst Oscar moments aside from the Slap.
19. Slightly agree. I think voting totals should be released but for historical context. I think they should start releasing totals from 1927 onward. Maybe each year you get totals so it’s stagnant.
Legacy award: Social Notwork is a contender - It has become even more relevant with all that has happened with Facebook since 2009. It should have beaten the Kings Speech.
I really miss how creative some of the category presentations were in past years. I remember they did a showcase on stage of all the nominated costumes one year, they played clips from nominated films with all the dialogue taken out to show off sound design, etc...
4:00 - One minor tweak to the budget cap, you said you'd either limit it per studio or per project. I would do both. Studios like Disney or WB might put up 5, 6, 7 films, while someone like A24 might put up one or two. So with hypothetical numbers, I'd put the cap at say $1 million total per project, $5 million per studio. If Disney wants to put up 8 movies, they have the scale back per movie. If A24 wants nominees is the "big 6" categories, they have to combine their "FYC" campaign or split their $1 million to whatever they prioritize.
The only reason I can think of as to why they don't have a stunt category, is due to stunt performers being non-union. I just can't think of any other logical reason they continue to be so hard-nosed about not making it an awards selection.
There are many reasons why the Academy Awards doesn't have a Best Stunts category. The most obvious one would be that it essentially becomes a life-risking death race for stunt workers to have more incentive to perform more dangerous, risky, and ambitious stunts just for the sake of awards (they obviously won't be doing it only for the Oscar, but it's an important factor if they are awarding this department). If a stunt worker gets seriously injured or dies, shouldn't the movie be disqualified for Oscars? If not, then it's essentially awarding dangerous and unsafe production conditions. If serious injuries or deaths as a result of a stunt were to disqualify the movie, where is the cutoff for a "serious injury"? Would it be permanent paralysis or just a broken neck or back? It's a reasonable concern to have for an award that exists purely for the most at-risk department on a movie set.
Another reason why a Best Stunts award would never happen is that it essentially is only awarding one genre of movies only -- action. There are very few exceptions where a non-action movie would be considered to have better stunts than an action movie so it feels like an odd award to have at the Academy Awards of all places. It would be similar to having a "Best Jump-Scare" category where it unreasonably restricts the eligible contenders to only one or two genres of movies.
I think a more reasonable Oscar to introduce would be a "Best Choreography" award. Stunt work is considered "stunt choreography" but choreography also applies to any type of movement in a movie, most notably dancing in musicals. But even other movies can have great choreography without being action or musicals, like many Spielberg movies. Best Choreography would refer to the planning and artfulness of stunt work without emphasizing the pure spectacle/danger of it. If a stunt actor were to jump out of a five story building while on fire, that would be considered a "best stunt," but not necessarily choreography, so it would take more planning and thought than a simple "Best Stunts" Oscar would.
I agree with almost all you said, but I disagree about the international film category. The committee shouldn't decide on it's own about a second film from a country. Even if it's a popular movie, not controversial in that country (which could be a real diplomatic problem), imagine how the committee of that country would feel like if the Academy says "yeah, we don't like the movie you picked, we're going to decide ourselves what movie should represent your country". Then no one will want to submit their movie, because it won't matter anyway. It's that country's responsibility to choose the movie that has the best chance of winning. And yes, sometimes they will make a bad choice, but they need to learn from it, do their homework, and make a better choice next time. What can be done is allow the country to submit one or 2 movies of their choice.
Also, you need to remember that foreign films need to be submitted by the end of September, 6 months before the Oscars! So a lot of times, those popular movies that should have been submitted were not released yet in many countries, and they can't forecast what movie will be the most popular internationally by the end of the year. Maybe the deadline is something that should be reformed.
I’ve been saying for years that just once, for fun, when they introduce the presenters instead of highlighting a previous Oscar nomination/win or promoting a current project, each and every one should be introduced with the absolute WORST movie they’ve ever been involved in. “Ladies and Gentlemen, to present the Oscar for Best Director, please welcome the Director of 1941, Steven Spielberg.” “Please welcome from ‘She-Devil’ Ms. Meryl Streep.” Keep the celebrities humble and send a message to viewers that no matter how hard you fail don’t give up, just pick yourself up and try again.
My change is to stop category fraud. There should be screen time limits established for lead and supporting performances. Sorry Anthony Hopkins.
Great ideas, Dan!
I like your reasoning behind the expansion of category slots, especially when there are a lot of strong performances in a given year, but I also think it will make the nominations insanely hard to predict!
I remember how hard it was to predict Best Picture when 10 slots were not guaranteed.
Stunt performance should be an Oscar category ages ago, I agree with you and feel quite strongly about it.
There are many reasons why the Academy Awards doesn't have a Best Stunts category. The most obvious one would be that it essentially becomes a life-risking death race for stunt workers to have more incentive to perform more dangerous, risky, and ambitious stunts just for the sake of awards (they obviously won't be doing it only for the Oscar, but it's an important factor if they are awarding this department). If a stunt worker gets seriously injured or dies, shouldn't the movie be disqualified for Oscars? If not, then it's essentially awarding dangerous and unsafe production conditions. If serious injuries or deaths as a result of a stunt were to disqualify the movie, where is the cutoff for a "serious injury"? Would it be permanent paralysis or just a broken neck or back? It's a reasonable concern to have for an award that exists purely for the most at-risk department on a movie set.
Another reason why a Best Stunts award would never happen is that it essentially is only awarding one genre of movies only -- action. There are very few exceptions where a non-action movie would be considered to have better stunts than an action movie so it feels like an odd award to have at the Academy Awards of all places. It would be similar to having a "Best Jump-Scare" category where it unreasonably restricts the eligible contenders to only one or two genres of movies.
I think a more reasonable Oscar to introduce would be a "Best Choreography" award. Stunt work is considered "stunt choreography" but choreography also applies to any type of movement in a movie, most notably dancing in musicals. But even other movies can have great choreography without being action or musicals, like many Spielberg movies. Best Choreography would refer to the planning and artfulness of stunt work without emphasizing the pure spectacle/danger of it. If a stunt actor were to jump out of a five story building while on fire, that would be considered a "best stunt," but not necessarily choreography, so it would take more planning and thought than a simple "Best Stunts" Oscar would.
One thing that I would add would be to add Director to the list of people who win the Oscar for Best Picture, not just producers.
Why?
That might work if the director themselves is part of the producing team 🤷
the argument that stunts will get more dangerous is nonsense. Its already a thing trying to win the box office money award.
Behind the scene snippets during the nominations is a genius idea
I think I agree with literally every change you mentioned. Some of these things, I was not even aware of, so I appreciate the information as well. And for crying out loud, just like you had as an addition, if we had to pick one category to add, IT MUST BE STUNTS!!!
One small thing, International Feature Oscars should go to their directors, not countries. The nation of Germany didn't make All Quiet on the Western Front any more than the United States made EEAAO, yet Germany was the recipient of the award. Edward Berger made the movie, and he should be the one winning the Oscar.
I would add a category for Stunt Choreography…
One more change: you cant vote for the category unless you watched all the movies in that category
"while it's nice to take a break and celebrate dogs on film"... 😂😂😂
They used to have an Honorary "Juvenile" award for performers under 18 years old so if they didn't want to add a full category (for years where there aren't enough performances in the age range) they could just revive that idea.
They really should release voting results
Dominic Sessa and Milo Machado-Graner gave two of the most moving performances I saw this year. I’m constantly frustrated by the academy not recognizing young actors.
I'd watch your Oscars and would enjoy it much more than how it is now. Great suggestions!
The Muppets host the Oscars in perpetuity. Problem solved.
Love the legacy idea! And it’s way past time for stunt performances to be recognised. They don’t have to be big, dangerous ones to have a huge impact on the delivery of the story. Look at special effects - some of the most impactful are ones the audience doesn’t immediately consciously recognise as an effect. A physically impossible camera move, for example.
Hello Dan. Great video as always. I would have to disagree on the young performers category idea. I think from a safeguarding and responsible point of view I think it is very important NOT to go overboard about a child performer. The industry is notoriously riddled with young actors who have been psychologically damaged because of too much fame, either by peers, the press or the public from a young age. Putting young people up against each other for an award means a huge amount of extra pressure at an age where these young people are already finding it difficult to cope. Once they are mature enough to deal with so much public scrutiny then yes, give them an award. I hope this makes sense. :-)
I think an option for shorter speeches would be that the nominees can either pre record a “who they would personally like to thank” or make it a voice over by announcer. We usually have dead time when someone has to walk up stage anyways so a nice way to fill the air with something meaningful while keeping the show moving. They can then focus on the more meaningful side of this award win than a list of names. It also wouldn’t be presumptuous since all the nominees would participate in it.
I like all your suggestions Dan, except I think ALL categories should be limited to five nominees. Even Best Picture. I'd go back to the days where there were only five nominees. I also wish they televised the Honorary Awards.
Big fan of the suggestions, one I hadn’t even thought of is the under 21 award. As you said, the academy is certainly showing a reluctance to nominate younger performers, so why not give them a platform to be recognized. Saoirse Ronan would have been the Meryl Streep of that category, we would have likely had Lindsey Lohan: Academy Award Winner and we also would have a non-gendered acting category, which would be interesting.
My suggestion: Air the previous year’s Best Picture Winner on tv directly before the telecast.
Cool idea but id move them to a cable network to do that say oppenhimer wins this year and in the interim that tradition would s implemented we would have to watch it edited which would suck donkey balls
Great suggestions. Stunts - yes ! yes !
Hi Dan, maybe you can look this up to find out more details. But from what I heard, Anatomy of a Fall was not submitted by France because someone in the Government did not like something the filmmaker had said. Anatomy of a Fall was deliberately left off France's submission, I guess as a punishment. They did not want to submit the Palme D'Or Winner of 2023.
That's correct. Triet was critical of the French government (I don't know in what way), so they nominated a mediocre film instead of Anatomy of a Fall, which (in my opinion) is an amazing film.
One thing I would do is get rid of Best Animated Feature.
Brave had no business winning. Films like Shark Tale and Boss Baby had no business being nominated. Best Animated Feature is nothing but a "participation award" that the academy doesn't take seriously. It's the academy's excuse to not have to put animated films up for Best Picture.
I absolutely love the Legacy Award idea! I also like the categories for young actors.
The first change you mentioned was actually something that was done when Gregory Peck was president of the academy in the late 60s at the initial request of… Candice Bergen!! Fascinating chapter in the book “Oscar Wars” 10/10 recommend!
17:10 Dan, what if you did an annual video doing your own legacy celebration? You could celebrate those movies from the past and remind us how great they were 🎉🎉
What I believe is that veterans of the studio era understand Hollywood and the Oscars on a level beyond that of younger voters. At the same time, Oscars need both older and younger voters for a knowledgeable and balanced outcome.
Years and years ago, the night before the Academy Awards the broadcast network that was hosting had a special that was simply titled The Movies. And it was a three hour compilation of clips from movies of the past X number of years and it was amazing because it reminded you of the movies. And this got me thinking that one huge mistake producers of the awards show constantly make is that the movies are the reason why we’re watching them…not for the dance spectacles… not for the political commentary…not for the antics in the audience when you’re ordering pizza or taking selfies… Although that sometimes brightens up the evening… Clips of the movies that are nominated should be the core foundation of the entire evening
Man, this video was full of examples of major improvements that should be made to the Academy Awards.
I would like a category for adapted song. Because I am tired of these musicals having to shoehorn in a new song when they get adapted to the screen. Also there are so many directors who are so good at doing needle drops properly that recontextualize those songs forever.
If I would/could ran the Academy
- first I dropping out the short lists in the technical/minor categories (put in the list all films that deservingly to be nominate) and put it the acting categories and enough of the category frauds--in the lead performances it should be a from 95-100 percent in the film appreances and it should be the title of the film (in case Michelle Williams in The Fabelmans & Carey Mulligan in the Maestro, she is not the Maestro only Bradley Cooper's character) and in the supporting role it should be from 50 percentage to 75 percent of the film appearances then if below 40 percentage appreances of the actor on the film it will be considered a cameo even if they had impact of the film. And mostly important is they should be voting to merits by the performances not on who's time is
- next is adding the Stunt & Choreography category and members up too 200 membership
- add film critics as a members of the Academy/Oscars and they can vote all categories
- the Academy/Oscars annually survey 10 major film theaters in USA and 3 each country what audiences loves in the year films been releases--the public voting serves as the preferencial ballot out of the Dolby Theater (surroundings) from December-February (2nd week)
- adding members to the Academy/Oscars from each countries who've been in the film industry in thier 10 years film career above
- in the ceremony itself should be live broadcasts in all social medias [Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, RUclips (in YT to subscribers & members)] and some footages from the ceremony, behind-the-scenes, trivias of the nominees that year and past nominees (in Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, etc) with subtitles accordingly what languages audiences preferred and partnership each country of a television network [contractually]
- all members of the Academy/Oscars should submit a report of how many films they been watch-form sheets are from the Academy itself to be giving to all the members, they listed what those films are [infos be like title of the film; the director; distribution company]
- all films to be in consideration in all categories (no exceptions) should be premieres in any film festivals
- partnership companies to Letterboxd, Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB, Metacritic & Gold Derby
- all private screenings should be listed in the Academy with the 3 board members (that's not closed to the screeners) acquired to be there and must documented via video live to the Academy office
- to the smaller distribution companies (like Bleecker Street, IFC Films, etc.) having a consideration films in the run should the Academy finding a sponsorship from the big companies out there (not from the "competitors"/not related film companies) to funding them to helping in the campaigns
- once in ten years the Oscars ceremony event should be place (outside of the Dolby Theater) in a bigger event venue (like SoFi Stadium, Allegiant Stadium, Allianz Arena etc.) in the USA or any country as long as it safe to place the Oscars ceremony and the audiences whoever wants to go they fans can get book a ticket of the venue, so the film geeks also can celebrate/cheer with thier favorite film of that year, a live Oscars experience
- all been nominated films have a cealed with the Academy logo in the title of films (not branding) from physical copies to streaming. In silver logo are the nominated films, gold logo are the winners and the crystal logo is the best picture winner
Arguing against #14. Keep the old film clips!! We agree that posterity and preservation are an important function of the Oscars. Every Oscars is some budding film fan's first Oscars viewing and it's a suitable time to expose them to film history and/or reward them for learning it. Although, perhaps contemporary aspiring cinephiles get their film history from TikTok and are already as jaded as some of us!
If these changes were made, I’d actually watch the Oscars again. I love watching quality work which the Academy Awards isn’t.
Imo they should just remove the submission process for international film, but keep the actual nominations limited to 1 per country, the one with the most votes if more than 1 are in the top 5.