chadisdangerous t1_j1upx7r wrote
A big reason for the Oscars to exist in the first place is to promote the nominated films and boost the careers of the cast and crew who made them. It doesn't make business sense to go back and re-promote films that are 5-10 years old.
Also this would be tantamount to the academy publicly admitting that they made bad choices, and if they're trying to promote the Oscars as something prestigious and meaningful why the hell would they do that? And what would be the point of having the current-year Oscars if there's a chance they'd just write over the winners in 5-10 years time?
Just look at it with the healthy and realistic attitude that the Oscars are a snapshot of industry sentiment at a specific point in time and not some eternal indicator of the objectively best films of that year. These things are evaluated subjectively and no one is ever going to agree anyway, so it's a fool's errand to try and make them more objective or "right" or whatever.
stumpcity t1_j1vd7hm wrote
>A big reason for the Oscars to exist in the first place is to promote the nominated films and boost the careers of the cast and crew who made them
The Academy Awards were invented as a labor management tool.
Studio heads figured if you turned acting into a legitimate competition and could set the talent against each other in competition for recognition and awards, it would minimize their attempts to come together against their miserly, predatory labor practices.
which absolutely worked.
Later on, it became extra useful to them as an advertisement for their product (much in the same way the Game Awards are now).
The Oscars have never primarily been about properly recognizing good work in the industry, which is why they're frequently terrible at that part.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments