Commenting Rules: Keep the conversation civil and on topic. If your comment does not add to the conversation, it will be removed. Debate intelligently. Insulting the author, /Film, or other commenters will result in comment removal and possible ban. If you want to point out a typo, correction, suggestion or criticism for /Film, please email us instead. Please use your name or nickname and not your business name (ie Discount Car Parts) as we might confuse and mark it as spam. If you would like to have your own Avatar show up with your comment, sign-up for a free Disqus account. Any Links will go into moderation before being approved. Anything we deem as spam will not be approved.

Will The Dark Knight Snubs Result in the Lowest Rated Oscar Telecast in History?

Posted on Friday, January 23rd, 2009 by Steve Mason

LOWEST RATED OSCAR TELECAST IN HISTORY?: Snubs of THE DARK KNIGHT, Clint Eastwood and Bruce Springsteen point toward a new ratings nadir for the Oscar show; The five Best Picture nominees have combined to gross only $186M, about what TDK delivered in first 4 days!

Nobody is ever completely satisfied with the Academy Award nominations, but with several key snubs, Oscar voters may have ensured that the 2009 telecast hits an all-time ratings low.

Investor Warren Buffet coined the phrase “skin in the game” to describe a situation where executives use their own money to buy shares in their company. The so-called Oracle of Omaha likes companies where insiders have their own money invested because they work harder, care more and generally are more emotionally invested.

The problem with the Oscars is that voters are nominating films that relatively few people have seen. The five movies nominated for Best Picture this week – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Slumdog Millionaire, Milk, The Reader and Frost/Nixon – have combined to gross just $186.7M. The Dark Knight passed that box office total early in its fifth day of release.

TO-DATE BOX OFFICE FOR 2009 BEST PICTURE NOMINEES
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - $104.3M
Slumdog Millionaire - $44.7M
Milk - $20.6M
Frost/Nixon - $8.9M
The Reader - $8M

How many average moviegoers and potential Oscar viewers have “skin in the game?” Based on the current average US ticket price ($7.15), only about 26 million Americans have seen Hollywood’s big five so far.

Yes, I think The Dark Knight should be a Best Picture nominee. It is absolutely one of my five favorite movies of 2008, and I believe it to be a masterpiece. Artistic excellence and blockbuster status are not mutually exclusive. I believe that one of the reasons Christopher Nolan’s comic book sequel soared past $500M US is that it struck a very real cultural chord with audiences.

There was talk that this comic book adaptation was too dark, but it is actually a relentlessly optimistic movie. What Heath Ledger’s Joker character demonstrates is that, even when the world is in shambles and people are faced with impossibly difficult choices, they do the right thing. The message of TDK is that regular people, at their core, are good. We need more movies like that right now.

I also believe that Clint Eastwood’s Gran Torino, although not a perfect movie, should not have been snubbed entirely. No Best Actor for Eastwood’s turn as the irascible Walt Kowalski, and not even a Best Original Song nomination for co-writing the heartfelt theme song with his son Kyle and jazz vocalist Jamie Cullum. Gran Torino, by the way, with a to-date cume of $79.8M, has grossed more than all of the Best Picture nominees except Benjamin Button.

Other snubs that will depress the viewing audience include Best Original Song contenders, Bruce Springsteen (The Wrestler), Miley Cyrus (Bolt), Beyonce (Cadillac Records) and Alicia Keyes (Quantum of Solace). I have yet to get a good answer about why the Academy narrowed the category to just three nominees. If Bruce Springsteen is big enough for the halftime show at Super Bowl 43, he must be big enough for Hollywood’s biggest night, and if there were the usual five nominations here, Springsteen would have certainly been among them.

A disastrously low 31.76M viewers watched last year’s Oscar show for an all-time worst 18.6 Nielsen rating. Last year’s Best Picture nominees combined to gross $357.9M. This year, the five nominees will be lucky to combine for more than $300M domestic. How much lower can the TV ratings get?

There is a growing divide between what Academy voters view as film excellence and what audiences actually want to see. That’s not to say that all Best Picture nominees should be blockbusters, but they should include some true, crowd-pleasing hits. If you look at this list, it’s pretty clear where the Oscars came off the rails.

1993
Best Picture – Schindler’s List - $96M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $368.4M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 46.2M

1994
Best Picture – Forrest Gump - $329.7M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $543.5M
Total Oscar telecast viewers - 46.26M

1995
Best Picture – Braveheart - $75.6M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $378.1M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 44.5M

1996
Best Picture – The English Patient - $78.6M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $306.5M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 40.8M

1997
Best Picture – Titanic - $600.8M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $998.2M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 57.2M

1998
Best Picture – Shakespeare in Love - $100.3M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $440.9M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 45.6M

1999
Best Picture – American Beauty - $130M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $647M
Total Oscar telecast viewers - 46.5M

2000
Best Picture – Gladiator - $187.7M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $637M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 42.9M

2001
Best Picture – A Beautiful Mind - $170.7M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $620.1M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 40.5M

2002
Best Picture – Chicago - $170.6M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $664.5M
Total Oscar telecast viewers - 33M

2003
Best Picture – Lord of the Rings: Return of the King - $377M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $725.9M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 43.5M

2004
Best Picture – Million Dollar Baby - $100.5M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $401.6M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 42.1M

2005
Best Picture – Crash - $54.5M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $245.3M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 38.9M

2006
Best Picture – The Departed - $132.3M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $296.7M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 39.9M

2007
Best Picture – No Country For Old Men - $74.2M cume
Combined domestic box office of the 5 Best Picture nominees - $357.9M
Total Oscar telecast viewers – 31.7M

In 1997, there were three $100M grossing movies including Titanic ($600.7M cume). Over the next seven awards cycles, there were at least two $100M grossers in each Best Picture field, and in 2000 there were four hits of that magnitude.

Then came 2005, when the five Best Picture nominees combined to gross just $245M.

BOX OFFICE FOR 2005 BEST PICTURE NOMINEES
Crash - $54.5M
Brokeback Mountain - $83M
Capote - $28.75M
Good Night and Good Luck - $31.5M
Munich - $47.4M

The disconnect between the Oscars and rank-and-file movie fans started in 2005. This is where the Academy Awards “came off the rails.” Only 38.9M viewers watched that telecast, and the Academy has continued marching to the beat of that noncommercial drummer ever since. In the final analysis, 17 of the last 20 Best Picture nominees (including the just announced group) have failed to break the $100M threshold. Unless the Academy figures out a way to give more rank-and-file moviegoers “skin in the game,” the ratings slide will continue. My hunch is that the 2009 Oscar telecast will be the lowest rated in history.

Comments 

Related Posts

Tags

Academy Awards, 

  • KING of the South
    Awesome post, Peter. As much as I love Hugh Jackman, I'm not going to watch the Oscars because they snubbed my three favorite films of the year (TDK, Doubt, and the Wrestler). I hope that it is the lowest viewed of all time, and I hope the Academy takes note.
  • very nice
    deffinatly not a post from peter.
  • Steve Mason posted this.
  • KING of the South
    Sorry, that was my bad. Good post Steve.
  • But if The Reader wins people can stop complaining about Shakespeare in Love and Crash winning.
  • I don't understand how people are so wrapped up with considering how much a film grossed with the quality of the film itself. Money shouldn't be a factor when determining what stories have been best told.
  • "Money shouldn't be a factor when determining what stories have been best told."

    I agree. They shouldn't have disregarded The Dark Knight because of it's high box office sales. =]
  • No that's not the point. you're being so extreme about it. It's no about NOT considering a movie that made lots of money. There's just better quality movies out there when you actually sit down and observe the movie. you can have a movie that made lots of money be a story that was told extremely well. The Dark Knight wasn't one of them
  • The Academy take note? Doubt and the Wrestler are two more movies that NO ONE HAS SEEN!!! The only reason this kind of debate is going on is because everyone online's pissed TDK got snubbed. Also, the collective body of the Academy could give two shits about viewer turnout. How many people voting actually have real commercial interest in how many viewers tune in? Very few I would argue.
  • KING of the South
    Why does the fact that "no one" has seen Doubt or the Wrestler change the fact that they are better films than The Reader? Also, are you trying to say that more people have seen the Reader than Doubt or the Wrestler?
  • What I'm saying is the only movie that this "voter turn-out" argument applies to is the Dark Knight. The Wrestler, The Reader, Doubt, whatever ones you think are better, whatever. This article is bitching about Nielsen ratings and box office receipts like it applies to most films that that Academy has nominated, but that's just silly. The only movie that has had any really big box office success is TDK and has been "snubbed". I don't care enough to research the exact box office returns for Doubt, The Wrestler, and The Reader. But, I'm pretty sure that there isn't a huge difference in receipts. Don't try to make it seem like The Wrestler or Doubt were huge (commercial) successes when compared to The Reader, when all anyone is REALLY pissed abouted is TDK.
  • People have a warped perspective of things. They seem to think that the more people have seen/ agree on/ or believe in something, the better/ more correct/ or good it is. Just because most people agree with you doesn't mean you're right.
  • Excellent post & couldn't agree more. It's not that the nominees need to all be blockbusters, but the Academy is supposed to recognize culturally significant movies. What's more significant in 2008, The Dark Knight or The Reader? The Dark Knight or Frost/Nixon? Bruce Springsteen or one of those songs from Slumdog Millionaire? Shouldn't a best song nominee be something that you know? Something that you remember? Something that sticks with you? Something that's significant to the movie? The song "The Wrestler" embodies the movie. I thought that the Academy MAYBE was changing course when "It's Hard Out Here for a Pimp" won. That song was significant to the movie and it's something that you remember. But as Weyland_Yutani pointed out yesteday, they snubbed Eddie Veder last year for Into the Wild, so it shouldn't be shocking that the Academy only occasionally & probably accidentally gets it right.
  • Once again Crash is to blame for all of our problems. Cue David Chen's dramatic reading of Haggis' masterpiece.
  • That is exactly what came to mind... And Chen was just talking about Crash again this week on the AfterDark /Cast.

    Oh yeah, very nice post Steve. Though, I am not to sure the amount of money a film makes should account for how good a film is made. And you know how the old cliche goes... There is no account for taste.
  • Rolin
    What a joke.
  • I think the focus should be on the awards and winners rather than TV ratings.
  • I agree with you and I agree with what the Academy has nominated. There might have been some snubs but it won't hurt the ratings.
  • I am with you on this thinking, Liam. It's not like the ratings are 'bad' -- they are still getting 30+ million viewers each year -- it's just not as many when compared to previous years. The Academy will not stop honoring what they believe are the best-told stories just because a handful of fanboys threaten to not tune in. So, what, the ratings drop to 29.9 million? Most of these people whinging are just doing it for show. They will still tune in.
  • starscream9289
    Everyone said that about the Golden Globes and they turned out okay, cause of Mickey's acceptance speech and Arnofsky flipping the bird of course. Not to mention Nolan's speech.
  • To be fair I only knew about those acts because they were posted online or here on /Film. The good thing is I didn't have to wade through all the crap to get to the diamonds.
  • Water
    So people watched The Golden Globes to see Arronofsky flip off Mickey? Why didn't anybody tell ME that was gonna happen!?
  • Booby
    So when is all this TDK stuff gonna end?
  • No one forced you to respond to the article. It's easier if you ignore things you might not like or want to hear.
  • Wow nice response. I was thinking of something along the lines of that but you have done a fine job.
  • For some reason the Academy feels they *need* to represent *all* of the so called "deeper" flicks made throughout the year whether they're better than some of the big blockbusters or not. I'm not mad that TDK got snubbed because it was a financially successful film, but because it was a *good* film.
  • I just think a lot people have since stopped watching these award shows as the years go on.

    Didn't the MTV Music Awards and the Golden Globes have all-time lows this past year or two?
  • I'm pretty sure I heard something about their ratings being low. I do agree with you that people have tuned out and no longer watch these award shows.

    I think that alot of people will watch this year's awards because of Ben Button and Dark Knight. Those are the top grossing movies out of all the nominations, I think, and should bring in some new viewers.
  • *giggle*you said mtv awards
  • Fred
    Maybe, but it's just not that great a movie. The real snubs will come from the fact TDK didn't get nominated, but empty-headed trash like Benjamin Button did.
  • zombiedmaster
    seriously grow up, just because some movies didn't get nominated its no reason to cry about it, that won't help
  • Dr. Doc
    the ratings will be terrible as usual. not to take anything away from flicks like Slumdog, The Reader etc. but most people havent seen them or have no desire to see them, so why bother watching an award show that will be celebrating them?

    most people just dont care
  • And what's so horrible about that? Ratings shouldn't determine which awards are handed out. Period.
  • Dr. Doc
    nothing is horrible about that. i was just answering the question
  • Birch
    Did you not read the post? The ratings have been quite good in every year mentioned. Sure, some years were better than others, but 30 million viewers on an off year isn't bad at all. Sure, there may be more viewers if The Dark Knight were up for best picture, but even if it's a bad year, more than 10% of the country will tune in.
  • These Scars
    The point of the oscars is not to nominate movies that make money, it's to nominate movies that are especially artistic and phenomenal. They shouldn't nominate movies to get ratings, if people don't want to watch, that's their choice. They might be missing something great.
    However I think there is a certain trend in movies in general: The Academy is getting more elitist while the public is getting less refined. Should the Academy not elect a movie because it is popular, or because it is a comic book movie? Absolutely not.
    But should the populace demand a movie be elected because it was well received? Again, not necessarily.
    Now, should the Dark Knight have gotten nominated? This is a tricky question, and I feel it could have gone either way. I loved the movie (I saw it five times in theatres and twice since). It is highly entertaining, well directed, acted, and certainly intelligent. But so are many of the movies that were chosen.
    While I love it, I do find it somewhat overrated. The more I watch it, the more glaring flaws I find. The people that voted it past the Godfather were mistaken, I'm afraid. I didn't even see the Godfather until after I saw TDK, but the difference is unmistakable. The Godfather is a movie that will persist for years to come, and I think TDK is more a pop-culture phenomenon, though certainly a great one.
    It certainly could have been nominated, but it was never a shoe-in.
  • If that's why you really think they nominate films. You're as delusional as the judges themselves. The fact that "Wanted" got as many nominations as "The Wrestler" speaks fucking volumes on how they perceive film.
  • omg again with Wanted! WANTED got nominated for sound...its didnt get nominated for best picture
  • Water
    I was gonna guess it went off the rails when "English Patient" or "Shakespeare In Love" won. Now I see. I remember the doubts of that year, but many said "But hey... these are good movies!" Now I see the trend. Something that even surprised all the friggin competing producers!

    TDK was by far one of the best crafted and most daring attempts (if not THE most) at filmmaking of the year. And it passed with flying colors. THAT's why it deserves a nomination imo. I don't care how much money or attention it garnered and neither should the academy.
  • "TDK was by far one of the best crafted and most daring attempts (if not THE most) at filmmaking of the year. And it passed with flying colors."

    You, sir/ma'am/Earthly element, need to fucking see some more movies.
  • Indeed, you need to watch more films and school yourself on certain things like pace, editing and character arc (GOOD character arc), to appreciate a well-crafted film. TDK was a fantastic watch - but it was not as well crafted as the films nominated ahead of it.
  • Joe
    Waah, the movie I've been fanboy-wanking over isn't good enough to merit an award!

    Seriously, stop it, all of you.
  • I fanboy-wanked all over your mom's face. OHHHH SNAPPP I went there!
  • I think the Oscars this year are going to be weak. This is the first time I haven't seen or even cared about the majority of films up for an Oscar. 2009 may be the first year I don't go out of my way to watch the Oscars...
  • Batman2029
    I completely agree that this will probably be the lowest rated Oscar telecast in history. I'm not just saying that because, I'm a huge Batman fan and loved The Dark Knight, but cause they snubbed a lot of good things. I really thought Bruce "The Boss" Springsteen was gonna get a nomination for Best Song. That's crazy he didn't. And I really thought Clint Eastwood would get a Best Actor nod. I knew Gran Torino wouldn't get a Best Picture nod, but at least it should have got something. And we all know Chris Nolan was robbed for Best Director. And it deserved a Best Picture nod. I just don't think anyone cares anymore about watching the Oscars. It just has gotten so stupid, snobby, sad to watch, same with the Golden Globes. And all the people that say The Dark Knight was overrated, just shut up, already. Really. It's getting wicked annoying. It wasn't overrated,it had great acting, a great story, great action and underlying themes and messages. Also not to mention, it was the biggest movie of last year and the 2nd highest grossing movie of ALL TIME. So, all of us upset and sad that it didn't get the right recognition it deserved,have a right to be. We all saw it building momentum and garner A LOT of support. even critics and insiders thought it would get the top nods. So, haters just shut up already, and find somewhere else to spread and post your hate.
  • janaya
    people are mad and i understand. those people love the movie like me and i'm mad and i;m not wasting 3 hours of my life watching this trash. its boring
  • Sounds like you weren't watching it regardless of TDK's nomination (or lack thereof). Sounds like you've come to realize the Academy Awards were boring long before your favorite comic-book movie missed out.
  • edog
    As for the songs, they narrowed the song category to three nominees a few years back. Not sure of the reason, but song performances are far more interesting than dumb montages (see: animals in film, through the years). I think those performances largely separate the Academy awards from the Golden Globes.

    Also, when is E! or another station going to start offering an alternative to the dull-as-butter speech from the President of the Academy?
  • It's always been 5, except 2005 when Three 6 Mafia won
  • Man, I was looking at recent song nominees and the Academy needs to diversify. This year is 2 out of 3 songs from Slumdog, last year was 3 out of 5 from Enchanted and the year before was 3 out of 5 from Dreamgirls. There are more movies that have good songs out there Academy!
blog comments powered by Disqus

gorilla nation

/Film

Copyright © 2010 /Film. Web design by Pro Blog Design. Logo Concept by: Illumination Ink

All names, trademarks and images are copyright their respective owners.