mikeymikec
Lifer
- May 19, 2011
- 18,604
- 11,305
- 136
OK. So your really bad idea is that we might not give out best actor awards some year and might give out multiple another year. I assume you aren't so naive as to think this only applies to actors, so it clearly gets expanded to the entire set of awards. I'm sure, given your extremely well-thought-out idea, that you're familiar with how both the nomination and final vote works right? So the first reason the idea is complete nonsense is that the entire system for deciding the short list would have to be thrown out the window. What would you like the ballot to look like exactly?
A summary of your first paragraph is this: I don't know how your system would work, so it's a really bad idea.
What you are asking is for a group of actors to collectively somehow indicate that none of their peers did a good enough job to warrant recognition. That will never happen.
Since this already happens to some extent, as a counter-argument this is nonsense. Nominees are formally submitted to the academy, then the academy votes on a shortlist of nominees from those submitted. Therefore it has already decided who doesn't make the cut. The main difference in the possible voting process that could be used to implement my suggestion is that a 'none of the above' option would be included, and off the top of my head it would seem sensible that if the number of votes for that option exceed a certain percentage, the award is dropped for that year.
And clearly this is objective right? It's not like the academy members who vote on actors will all have really different ideas about what's Oscar-worthy, right?
Surely this argument applies just as much to the current system as it does my suggestion.
Now go on and start coming up with how you'd like the ceremony to work. "Here are the nominees for best actor. There are none." "Here are the nominees for best director. There are only 3 and all of them win the oscar."
If you want to pick the most absurd way of doing it, sure, but the fact of the matter is that in the scenario I'm suggesting, it would be known well beforehand which categories are going to be awarded before the ceremony, so categories that had no winners would simply be skipped without comment.
The award names would change a little as well, so instead of "best director", it might be announced as "the winners of the directing oscars are:".
Of course, there's also the fact that we are basing this entire idea on what a random dude on the internet thinks, seemingly without having any idea what it's like to be an actor. No doubt some years, no one really did a great job at this job because it's easy to do what they do and unless they are truly exceptional, their own peers shouldn't be awarding them anything, right?
At no point have I suggested that I am authority on this topic. I presented an opinion, just like you have. Instead of saying that my justifying logic is faulty in some way, you seem to have decided to focus on how it would be implemented, even though your opening argument was that it was like the world cup in some way, which it clearly isn't.
The only point that I can think of that has merit against my idea, and again it's related to the implementation is how mind-numbingly boring and long the oscars ceremony is already, and if each winner out of potentially multiple winners for each category had a chance to make a speech, it could take many times longer