Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Spielberg /Scorsese & Netflix oscars?


mr6666
 Share

Recommended Posts

Steven Spielberg to Express Netflix Oscar Concerns at Upcoming Academy Meeting

".......in the wake of three Oscar wins for Netflix’s Roma, including Best Director, Spielberg is prepared to propose a rule change that would rule Netflix films ineligible at an upcoming Academy Board of Governors meeting (he represents the Directors branch on the board). The news comes courtesy of Indiewire, though it’s unclear specifically what rules Spielberg would propose to be changed, and whether Netflix increasing the length of a theatrical window ahead of a streaming release would ease his concerns.

roma-alfonso-cuaron

Image via Netflix

A spokesman for Amblin had this to say:

“Steven feels strongly about the difference between the streaming and theatrical situation. He’ll be happy if the others will join [his campaign] when that comes up [at the Academy Board of Governors meeting]. He will see what happens.”

This puts Spielberg in direct conflict with his friend and fellow filmmaker Martin Scorsese, whose new film The Irishman will debut on Netflix later this year. The streaming service has already committed to a theatrical release for the film, but Scorsese reportedly wants them to give the film a wide release. That poses a challenge. Roma was released in theaters three weeks before it hit the streaming service—a first—but only in limited release, and it followed a smaller platform rollout in the ensuing months. ..........

So while that whole issue remains in flux, Spielberg’s taking steps to prevent Netflix from gaining even more ground at next year’s Oscars—but not all filmmakers are in agreement. ...........

http://collider.com/steven-spielberg-netflix-oscars-rule-change/?utm_

:unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spielberg and Scorsese (and many others) may seem like dinosaurs railing against the inevitable tide of change, but I also see where they're coming from. What's the delineation between the Oscars and the Emmys? If Netflix is television, then why aren't their films considered TV movies, and thus compete in that category during awards season? I don't think providing a 4+ week window of theatrical exclusivity is too much to ask if Netflix/Amazon/whoever wish for their films to compete against other theatrical films.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further slide down the slippery slope that started with the "let's expand the number of nominee slots" and then "Dark Knight should've won for its year" movement  I applaud his reaction. The restriction should be implemented. Screw everything Netflix, they're the last outfit I'd ever want to see a movie from.

They don't allow plastic kazoos in symphony orchestras, right? If they did so, then eventually no one would even know what a symphony is; or how to tell when its being played correctly.

Keeping film criticism sharp is one way to keep filmmaking sharp. Don't lower the bar for these digital troglodytes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sgt_Markoff said:

Further slide down the slippery slope that started with the "let's expand the number of nominee slots" and then "Dark Knight should've won for its year" movement  I applaud his reaction. The restriction should be implemented. Screw everything Netflix, they're the last outfit I'd ever want to see a movie from.

They don't allow plastic kazoos in symphony orchestras, right? If they did so, then eventually no one would even know what a symphony is; or how to tell when its being played correctly.

Also, it's the same complaint I had a few years ago about the analysts rhapsodizing about "the future of DIGITAL!", which turned out to be no future at all:
The loudest praises of "But made-for-streaming studios are the FUTURE, because everyone can see them!" seem to come from those who don't actually use it.  And the most angry defenses of "You're just jealous of the change of a new century, and the new riches that are available to an audience through streaming!" usually come from those who just started streaming about five minutes ago.

It's not "jealousy" or "Luddism" to say that we need to get over our tech honeymoons first before applying a few solid ground rules for establishing just what exactly merits getting the awards.  Those who grew up watching network television, and knowing how a TV-movie used to differ from a theatrical movie know that if you release your movie on streaming, or you release it in theaters, you've forever made your choice about what category that movie will be perceived to have been made for--If you get enough 10's-TV hubris to think "It's good enough for the theaters", then maybe you can get an independent release, but tough beans, you're still a TV-movie, and so was "Killdozer".  (Thanks, Lawrence, for reminding me of that one. :D )  If it was in the opposite direction, and Paramount decided they'd rather have a Best Animated nomination for "The Little Prince" after dumping it to Netflix instead of theaters at the last minute, the beans would be equally tough.

It's more a product of the rapidly and unstably expanding head of Reed Hastings, who's now lost control of his own creation as to what he thinks Netflix is, and if he doesn't get a handle on it soon, it won't be anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, GGGGerald said:

They only say this because they can still get their movies in theaters. When the day comes when Streaming is the only outlet for them, they will think twice about the whole concept.

I agree.

But I also agree "streaming" is television (Emmys) and theatrical release is a "movie" (Oscars) even though what is "screened" in a theater is actually streamed too. Like GGGGerald said, eventually all movies will either become one media or movie theaters will just cease to exist.

No matter how large your TV, viewing movies at home will never be the same as viewing them at a theater, with an audience. It used to be the entire audience was involved, creating a communal experience. Nowadays, people see themselves so individually -as isolated beings- it makes little difference if there's another carbon blob sitting next to you. 

I wonder if those CGI superhero movies and fantasy series like Star Wars/Harry Potter are so popular because they still fire up audience reaction & therefore a communal experience?

I remember the first time seeing a Bollywood movie in a theater-there were jeers & cheers from the audience and teens danced in the aisles for all the songs, it was like being part of a huge party!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a fan of Spielberg, but I think he's just being resistant to change. It's likely too he's fearful of the way streaming has opened up the doors to a lot more competition. I hope it ultimately encourages him to make even better movies to stay in the game!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

But I also agree "streaming" is television (Emmys) and theatrical release is a "movie" (Oscars) even though what is "screened" in a theater is actually streamed too. Like GGGGerald said, eventually all movies will either become one media or movie theaters will just cease to exist.

I'm trying to keep track of which Millennially-overcompensating tech-manifesto is which:
Pretty sure that the "The cineplex is dying!  It's all superheroes and sequels!" comes from the last surviving MoviePass fans, still carrying a torch, and hoping that the service will get its act together and return to them someday, young, rejuvenated and free from bankruptcy...  😛

And that the "Streaming is the new future!  Access and quality entertainment to EVERYONE!  Smash the brick and mortar idols!" comes from the Bingies, who claim we're in the, quote, "Golden Age of TV" right now (seriously??), because they just cancelled their cable subscription and bought an Amazon Fire.

...IOW, the folks new at this.

Quote

No matter how large your TV, viewing movies at home will never be the same as viewing them at a theater, with an audience. It used to be the entire audience was involved, creating a communal experience. Nowadays, people see themselves so individually -as isolated beings- it makes little difference if there's another carbon blob sitting next to you. 

I wonder if those CGI superhero movies and fantasy series like Star Wars/Harry Potter are so popular because they still fire up audience reaction & therefore a communal experience?

Yes.  Also--although I don't approve of it--10's Hollywood has now so fixated its industry on making money on ONE weekend, rather than the month of traveling it would do in smaller three-screen theaters in the 80's, that catching a new Marvel or Harry Potter movie on the weekend audiences are "supposed" to has a rock-concert appeal:  Who would go to a screaming cavernous drowned-out rock concert, when you can hear the song quality better on your iPod?  People who want to leave the house on a certain be-there-or-miss-it date, and go to a place where they can be in the audience with other fans, all experiencing the movie at the same time, that's who.

For literally thirty-seven years, studios have tried to live their dream of making more money on an instant weekend by pursuing the quixotic dream of creating "A new PPV service where audiences can watch the movie at home, the same day it opens in theaters...Only $50-75!"  And every time they've gone as far as actually trying it (once in '83 with "Pirates of Penzance", and once in '11 with "Tower Heist"), it's FLOPPED.  First by theater chains boycotting the idea, and then discovering that the audience just wasn't there to come to their rescue--Home audiences, used to the idea of waiting a few months and renting the disk instead, just didn't want to pay premium prices to "replace the cineplex experience", whether it was "dying" or not.

The irony is, now we actually ARE debating the idea of "Movies that premiere at home instead of theaters", with an affordable, accessible technology that allows customers to do it at a more reasonable price point, and guess what?:  The audience still doesn't want it!  Because they're so used to seeing loser-indies surface on Netflix, they can't tell the "good Oscar-winning" premieres from the K-dramas or the Bollywoods or the Asylum knockoffs.  The audience knows what a "TV-movie" is, they still "smell" a movie that's been "busted" to Netflix, and studios can beat their heads for another thirty-seven years hoping to persuade them otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...