Oscars 2024: Netflix Wins Just One Award and Apple Shut Out After Streamers Combine for 32 Nominations (variety.com) 48
Streamers narrowly avoided getting shut out at the 2024 Oscars: Netflix came away with just one trophy and Apple left empty-handed, after they garnered a total of 32 nominations. From a report: Netflix collected its one win for Wes Anderson's "The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar," an adaptation of a Roald Dahl story, in the live action short film category. The 40-minute film, with a cast that includes Benedict Cumberbatch, Dev Patel, Ben Kingsley, and Ralph Fiennes, is the first Oscar for Anderson (who wasn't in attendance to receive the award). Heading into Sunday's 96th Academy Awards, Netflix led all studios and platforms with 19 nominations across 11 films, including seven for Bradley Cooper's "Maestro" -- which was shut out. Apple had picked up 13 nods, including 10 for Martin Scorsese's "Killers of the Flower Moon," which also drew a goose egg.
Since 2017, Netflix has now won 23 Oscars in all. But the best picture prize continues to elude the streamer as "Maestro" lost out to this year's awards powerhouse, "Oppenheimer." Nor has Netflix won in the lead actor or actress categories, coming up empty this year after four noms (Cooper and Carey Mulligan for "Maestro"; Colman Domingo for "Rustin"; and Annette Bening for "Nyad"). "Killers of the Flower Moon's" nominations included one for Scorsese in the best director category. His only Oscar to date came in 2007 for "The Departed" (for director). In 2020, his mafioso pic "The Irishman" for Netflix was shut out at the Oscars after receiving 10 nominations.
Since 2017, Netflix has now won 23 Oscars in all. But the best picture prize continues to elude the streamer as "Maestro" lost out to this year's awards powerhouse, "Oppenheimer." Nor has Netflix won in the lead actor or actress categories, coming up empty this year after four noms (Cooper and Carey Mulligan for "Maestro"; Colman Domingo for "Rustin"; and Annette Bening for "Nyad"). "Killers of the Flower Moon's" nominations included one for Scorsese in the best director category. His only Oscar to date came in 2007 for "The Departed" (for director). In 2020, his mafioso pic "The Irishman" for Netflix was shut out at the Oscars after receiving 10 nominations.
And? (Score:1)
Am I supposed to feel sad that two tech titans didn't get the chocolates?
De Niro is like 105 years old. No one wants to watch a crusty old great grandpa as a serious actor after the Fockers.
Napoleon? Give me a break. River's little brother already did the small dick dictator thing in Gladiator.
De Niro’s newfound legacy. (Score:1, Interesting)
De Niro is like 105 years old. No one wants to watch a crusty old great grandpa as a serious actor after the Fockers.
No one takes him as a sane person anymore after the TDS took over forcing him to scream “FUCK TRUMP!” every time he sees a podium with a live mic on it. Should we feel bad or sad for him when he finally realizes that stupid shit destroyed his entire acting legacy, and WILL be what people remember him for? No, we should not.
He should have at least made it worth it and become a politician. Seven kids is a whole lotta legal risk to mitigate should one of them decide to sue Dad, Inc. for breach o
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, his career crashed because he's an asshole and hard to work with and really only plays one character in almost every movie.
Goodfellas is the last movie I recall where he was any good and that was the same type cast role he always plays.
Amazingly the guy got paid millions and had an entire very successful career on just reading lines as himself. Good for him even if he's now turned into a weird grumpy old man sitting on his porch with an old 2 barrel shotgun talking about how the next president is goin
Re: De Niro’s newfound legacy. (Score:2)
I think he was greatly overshadowed by Joe Pesci in Goodfellas and Casino, but those two were his best.
Oscars doesn't matter anyways, the whole thing is well known to be rigged. I never watch the thing (Who the hell wants to watch a bunch of yokels talk about who they thank for two hours? Fuckin srsly. What is this? A second Thanksgiving? And why don't they ever thank the studio that paid the biggest bribe to get them there?)
The only noteworthy event that happened in it over the last twenty years was Will S
Re: (Score:2)
Joe was awesome. I read that the real life guy he was playing made his character look like a friendly kitten. He actually underplayed the guy. Damn.
As far as the awards guy, I haven't watched in decades. They're a boring snooze fest of self congratulations.
Machinegun Cinematography (Score:4, Insightful)
Not surprising at all. We all know that Netflix originals are a big pile of shite. Personally, I think that's because tech giants embraced what I call Machinegun Cinematography. Throw enough money at new productions, spit out hundreds of titles, perhaps some of them will turn out alright? Statistically, something should be good, right? However, the reality is that they produce so much garbage along the way that any creations showing some potential inevitably sink in the surrounding pile of crap.
Re:Machinegun Cinematography (Score:5, Insightful)
No. The problem with big streamers is low cost Cinematography. Sure they paint it as "we want to give unknown people an entrance into the world of cinema" but in reality their biggest problem is that most productions while based on solid ideas are horrendously written and poorly acted.
Pay peanuts, get monkeys. The streamers seem to be throwing the entire budget at visuals without asking if they wrote a good story in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll still take that over reality TV any day. What's funny is that these zero budget productions would probably do well on Youtube if their algorithms weren't tuned for short form content. And the creators would probably get more money out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Reality tv is awesome. You get scripted controversy with real people playing at playing themselves for internet clout with a season long story arc and amusing plots of people more fucked up than us doing fucked up things that fucked up people do.
It's great background noise while reading or gaming or whatever.
Re:Machinegun Cinematography (Score:5, Insightful)
Not for me. Watching drama prone people being drama is one of the last things I ever want to watch. All it does is annoy and repulse me.
Re:Machinegun Cinematography (Score:4, Interesting)
100% this -
The economics here seem really obvious from the outside. All the streamers seem want to crank out as much content as possible because they think offering something to everyone is the way to attract viewers, or maybe retain them after they binge thru 'hot show' in a week.
It does not seem to be working. They are knocking on the door of being more than people are willing to pay to watch tv. They are producing a lot of low quality content people don't want because they are trying to control costs without reducing the quantity.
Reality is they need to stop trying to all be distributors. They need to syndicate stuff so customers can pick a distributor they want, be that an entity like netflix in early 2000s, a cable provider, telco, etc and get more eyeballs on less production. They have spread the audience to thin.
Re: (Score:2)
So you watched Spaceman, I take it?
Re: (Score:2)
If those films are big pile of shite, why nominate them in the first place?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Throw enough money at new productions, spit out hundreds of titles, perhaps some of them will turn out alright?
Add in that most are reboots and derivatives and you've described the traditional studio model. Netflix is only disrupting distribution these days and barely at that anymore. Everything else is standard Hollywood except with a bonus of including worldwide streaming rights for "foreign" films for "domestic" subscriptions. It's very easy on Netflix to watch Korean or Mexican or German television because they usually don't sell streaming rights to their originals for other markets. At least for the ones th
C'mon, realize what these things are for (Score:4, Insightful)
The Academy Awards are a promo show for Hollywood. Why exactly would you expect them to promote their main competitor?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't mind the Oscars being a promo for Hollywood. I used to like that it gave me a little boost to watch any promising movies for the year I hadn't seen yet. But with the movies now scattered across so many different subscription services, that now seems harder than it has since the 1980's. At least in the 1990's with DVD rentals you could go to one store and get any film. Netflix had a golden era where it felt close to that, and better, right from you
Re: (Score:3)
Netflix isn't a competitor. They are a major studio at this point.
Regardless, the Academy members are not just voters, they are the people who actually create the movies and some of them do projects for Netflix. They're not going to leave their own work out of consideration. Even though the Academy was founded by a studio owner as a sort of union busting scheme, it has a life of its own now.
Re: (Score:3)
In 2021 netflix became the streamer of last resort and the union behind productions stop racking in awards. I am so surprised.
Re: (Score:2)
You're confusing the Academy Awards with actual film festivals. The academy awards isn't "Hollywood" it's very much global cinema, and Netflix et al. aren't competitors with the awards, they are competitors with the other competitors. Which should be obvious given their history of winning a variety of Oscars.
On the flip side there are some more ... toxic interactions in the world, such as Carnes Film Festival which tried to ban streamers.
Re: (Score:3)
It's Cannes [wikipedia.org].
But aside of that, spot on.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd think I could spell it given I've holidayed there twice. Damn French language :-)
Re: (Score:2)
That’s no mere moon.. (Score:2)
Streamers narrowly avoided getting shut out at the 2024 Oscars: Netflix came away with just one trophy..
Uh, doesn’t that “streamer” have its own production studio? Cut paychecks to actors?
Nice try Hollyweird, but you’re probably gonna have to recognize the actual competition at some point regardless if they own an island somewhere or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice try Hollyweird, but you're probably gonna have to recognize the actual competition at some point regardless if they own an island somewhere or not.
https://www.whats-on-netflix.c... [whats-on-netflix.com]
Netflix came away with just one award from the most recent 2024 96th Academy Awards, which adds to the tally of 23 Oscar wins in its history.
In total, Netflix has received 152 Oscar nominations in its history, with 2021 being the year it received the most nominations, with 36.
Scorcese is overrated (Score:3, Interesting)
I could never understand why he was so highly regarded, when, to me, he seemed like just a very competent director, but nothing like the inspired greats. Where I lost it was the Departed. It was a remake of a film I loved (Infernal Affairs) and whose direction I admired. When I watched it, I called a chase scene (the one with the cast if you've seen it) the best-directed police chase I had ever seen. So when the Departed came out I was curious what Scorcese would do now that he got an already well-directed source. Well, he made it worse, he didn't even include the scene I liked and the film generally lost the fast pace that worked well with the story. And I won't even get into the botched ending (sort of based on the Infernal Affairs alternative ending which was made to pass Chinese morality sensors) - that may not have been his fault. Or the fact that there are no subtle clues about there being more moles, which makes for rewarding rewatches etc, we just get a sudden revelation for shock value. /rant
Re:Scorcese is overrated (Score:4, Interesting)
While I'm here I can also do a jab at Oppenheimer. The first half was excellent, yes, but after that it's just a long interrogation scene with self-doubts and nasty politics and is frankly boring.
Anatomie d'une chute was pretty good.
Re: (Score:2)
No-context time jumps are an accepted part of cinema now. I blame Lost. The goal is for the viewer to make connections between time periods that they wouldn't have made if they saw them as discrete time periods. Some instances are more successful than others.
If you look at Star Wars, Lucas couldn't even manage the idea of a jump cut to a new scene. He had to resort to wipes and fades. But it was well established in Hollywood and not confusing for most viewers.
Blind Love and Magic. (Score:1)
Let’s be honest with ourselves for a moment. Any original movie that you have come to truly love (we all have a few), will not stand a chance with a remake and be acceptable to you. Not even from the same director.
New actors, new acting methods, new line deliveries, even the global climate (political pandering) can absolutely destroy a remake. Before even a single scene is changed.
Sometimes magic captured on film, should be recognized as exactly that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most remakes, nowadays at least, are not motivated by the desire to improve on the original but by corporate reasoning. If a bunch of people liked the original, they'll also go to see this one, right? It's probably seen less financially risky than greenlighting new stories and ideas. But yeah, if you liked a bunch of things about the original, if a remake doesn't have those things, you're not going to like it. And if the remake does have those things, then it's a copy of the original so what's the point? Yo
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I really wasn't all that impressed with Flowers of the Killer Moon. It really did felt like it could have been edited better. Parts of the movie felt like Scorcese was beating a dead horse, and they could have easily cut about 30 minutes of filler content and made for a movie with much better pacing.
Repercussions (Score:3, Insightful)
My prediction is that Netflix will cut back even more on their US-based on-site productions, now that they are being openly and blatantly rejected by the actors and directors and such of Hollywood. That funding will be redirected or eliminated in several ways:
Re: (Score:3)
It's a both-and situation. To make money, Netflix has to do two things:
- Keep their existing customers happy
- Convince new/returning customers to give them a try
An endless stream of cheaply-made, decent content is good enough to keep most people happy who are already paying for the service. I hear people talk about Netflix the same way they used to talk about cable TV, but if you ask them what they're actually watching, it's whatever middling thing happened to come out that month. Which is fine, to be clear
Re: (Score:2)
Machinima is the future, and very soon you won't even need basic CGI asset design. An AI will create models and rig them for you, a human will review the results and tune them. An AI will animate them, a human will review the results and tune them.
This pattern continues with pretty much everything once your production is 100% CGI. AI will do the script, the voices, choose the camera angles and lighting... humans will give a system a prompt and then tune the output. All the stuff in the middle will be au
Wes Anderson (Score:1)
Wes Anderson is probably the worst director ever. How can anyone give that idiot an award? I wouldn't trust him to take a picture of my table at a restaurant, let alone direct a movie. Jesus.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He's the vanguard of the meta-post-modernist school, or whatever they exactly call it these days. I think he's liked not for the quality of the directing, but for what it symbolizes. Sort of like a lot of "modern art" or "conceptual art."
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, supposing I didnt enjoy his movies I'd at least respect him for being one of the few directors to be still consistently making original, written for the big screen movies. Hollywood does so little of this nowadays I'll celebrate anyone who does so with a flic that a lot of people like even if I dont.
Of course Henry Sugar is not an original as it is based on a short story by Roald Dahl but all of Anderson's full length movies are.
gotta laugh (Score:2)
Netflix movies look like Gemini search results, but that didn't win the prizes -- it went to a thing about cis white males. Hey, cisters are doing it for themselves!
Just traditional Hollywood being traditional (Score:2)
The Oscars are Hollywood's celebration of the FILM industry - an industry that makes MOVIES (not TV shows) and shows them in THEATERS (not on laptops/tablets/TVs). Yeah, Hollywood allows its products to end up on the smaller screens later, but they initially show in theaters on big projection screens. Also, while it's true that Hollywood and the studios have a huge overlap with TV, the Oscars is about FILMS and the awards and show are the top event of that industry. The Emmys are about television and are mo
If streamers are such a force (Score:2)
Streaming companies should agree to cooperate on this one thing rather than compete: if the prestige (code for 'publicity') is worth it to them, collectively fund a new annual awards show that prioritized streaming releases. Make it arms-length so it has some credibility and have the resulting streaming rights shared among all participating streaming platforms.
It's time for the dinosaurs to accept that the meteor heading their way can't be stopped.