Should box office affect oscars?

[Crim122]

From EW.com

This weekend's box office results bring up a perennial question: Does a movie need to be a commercial hit to score a Best Picture nomination? Certainly poor box office performance helped kill movies like Memoirs of a Geisha and The Kite Runner in the past, while blockbusters like The Sixth Sense and The Fugitive capitalized on their financial success to earn Oscar nods.

This weekend, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button performed strongly with almost $40 million in its first four days, a fantastic figure for what is essentially an art film (granted, one starring Brad Pitt) with a nearly three-hour running time. Meanwhile, Frost/Nixon, despite earning rave reviews, has posted decent but not terrific numbers, grossing $1.5 million over the three-day portion of the weekend in 205 theaters. Despite playing in one-fifteenth the number of theaters as Button, its per-theater average was still the lower of the two. I've had a couple friends wonder if the soft box office means Frost has moved down a few pegs in the Best Picture race. Perhaps it's now the No. 4 contender instead of No. 3 (Milk, which has been doing well in limited release, is on the rise), but I still think it's solidly in there for a nomination next month.

The question is, should it make a difference? Whether or not The Dark Knight ends up snagging the fifth slot may just provide the answer.

What do you think?

Personally I dont think the box office means shit. A movie could make 1 million dollars and be better than one that makes 100 million.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by Crim122

From EW.com



Personally I dont think the box office means shit. A movie could make 1 million dollars and be better than one that makes 100 million.

I agree with your statement. The financial sucess of the film is determined by the box office receipts, but that is not a measure of the quality of the film. Look at Hancock $227 million domestic haul...and the movie stinks in all aspects ( well the flying was pretty cool ).

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

I agree with your statement. The financial sucess of the film is determined by the box office receipts, but that is not a measure of the quality of the film. Look at Hancock $227 million domestic haul...and the movie stinks in all aspects ( well the flying was pretty cool ).

Right, and movies like Disaster Movies get about 60 Million overall where as some films dont even break even (Milk) which is a fantastic movie.

[Leopold BUTTERS]

spiderman 3 is the perfect example. 1 billion dollars and it is a absolute crap movie i will never in my life watch again.

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by Leopold BUTTERS

spiderman 3 is the perfect example. 1 billion dollars and it is a absolute crap movie i will never in my life watch again.

ugh and it was MY first IMAX experience, and I still want my money back.

[thedarkangel1975]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

I agree with your statement. The financial sucess of the film is determined by the box office receipts, but that is not a measure of the quality of the film. Look at Hancock $227 million domestic haul...and the movie stinks in all aspects ( well the flying was pretty cool ).

I liked Hancock actually. the movie was meant to be fun.

As for Box office, that means a summer blockbuster would win every year. this year is an exception with the Dark knight. That movie was actually good in all aspects.

[Teabaggins]

no, I don't believe it should. I don't want to see an autobot give a speech at the oscars

[fighthefutureofhd]

but many of the top oscar contenders are not blockbuster movies. it's not that often that a big blockbuster movie gets an oscar nomination to begin with.

[Blu-Benny]

i do think the academy should be willing to give some recognition to movies that do well @ the box office though. i don't care what people say, The Dark Knight deserves to be recognized.

take Return of the King a few years ago. there's nothing wrong w/rewarding a great movie.

[DAROCKNESSMONSTER]

it should never be about the box office.

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by Blu-Benny

i do think the academy should be willing to give some recognition to movies that do well @ the box office though. i don't care what people say, The Dark Knight deserves to be recognized.

take Return of the King a few years ago. there's nothing wrong w/rewarding a great movie.

Well I agree if the movie is good, if Dark Knight had sucked and still grossed what it did then it shouldnt be recognized...it was a rare blockbuster film that wasnt just a popcorn flick.

[thedarkangel1975]

Well Blu-Benny they honor the Box Office King. The Oscars don't but MTV or Blockbuster movie awards do lol.