Why the Move from 5 to 10 Best Pic Noms Could Make Sense

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has come under fire for expanding the number of best picture nominees from five to 10. Though naysaying the move is now in vogue, the switch to 10 may make a lot of sense—if the Academy is willing to make a few more changes.

The most obvious reason for the change, and one that has rarely been mentioned, is that there are simply more movies. According to the MPAA, from 1999 to 2008, the number of films released grew nearly 30 percent, from 471 to 610, in American markets. With more movies out there, shouldn't there be a wider field for the field's top honor? Over this same time period, the number of independent films, those released by non-MPAA members, has burgeoned by almost 75 percent. As a greater percentage of film releases are independent, a smaller number of films have the big-studio backing necessary for box office success. The growing independent field needs a wider Oscar sales boost to sustain itself.

A lot has been made of the types of films that will benefit from this expansion. It seems like the benefits will affect disparate ends of the movie business: critical/box office winners like The Dark Knight will probably be nominated, as will smaller films like, as David Carr points out, The Visitor and Frozen River. Musicals and comedies, rarely nominated, will now have a shot. This predicted shift in the kinds of films that will make it could not be better. The addition of popular successes will increase the popularity of the Oscars themselves, allowing the broadcast to remain culturally relevant. The inclusion of smaller, art house cinema will lend that indie support mentioned above, and the musical/comedy element will make the slate of nominees more dynamic. The other change few seem to be talking about--and the one that is most welcome--will be the increased number of foreign films that will make it into the best picture category. As the Oscars try to maintain their relevance in the 21st century, a more international group of contenders is a must. That the Academy can fulfill that need while simultaneously improving its American appeal with

Related content

Tulsa Takes ManhattanFlavor of the Week: An Open Letter to My Date of Last FridayThe Real Mad Men: Art & CopySexbama for Pres: Vote with your head not your hormones8 Million Stories: A Convenient TruthSuch Great Heights

Related to:New York PressNew YorkOnScreenOscarsOpinionbest picture

Dark Knight-like nominees is a damn welcome coincidence.

Major problems undoubtedly arise from this shift, and the Academy should, as it has begun to do, work to remedy them. No one ever complains the Oscars are too short, and introducing 10 noms is going to take more time, no bones about it. The Academy has been moving in the right direction, shifting the honorary awards to a separate ceremony and making best original song optional. The cuts should go further. The two sound awards should be removed from the telecast, possibly moved to that new honorary award ceremony. Art direction, costume design and best makeup should be combined or eliminated in some capacity. Perhaps costume design and makeup could also be moved to the other ceremony, or costume design and makeup could be combined into one award. This is horrible news for technicians in those fields, but it's not like anyone remembers who wins these awards, anyway.

The best argument against the five to 10 move is that a film now needs only 10 percent plus one vote to win. Who wants a best picture winner that only gets 11 percent of the vote? To fix this flaw, the voting should be done in two rounds. The Academy votes on the full 10, then re-votes on the top 5 only. It will require tight lips about who loses the first round, but, given how secretive the Academy is about the winner and the five to 10 shift (which seemed to surprise everyone), that is far from impossible.

Implicit in this entire argument is that the Academy has some cinematic worth, that the annual ceremony is a good thing. The films honored are not always, or even often, the most artistically rigorous or worthy, true. But the Oscars at least provide a widely-respected appreciation for films that, though not art house, are often artistic and profound (or at least attempting to be). Without the Oscars, no standard for film--aside from box office, a putrid benchmark--exists in the popular conscience. Oscars are better than no Oscars, and 10 may well be better than five.