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

Steven Spielberg's Opinion on Netflix and the Oscars: Thoughts?


animaldoctor
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was curious about what you guys think about legendary director Steven Spielberg's opinion that movies that are released on streaming platforms such as Netflix should not be eligible for nomination at the Academy Awards. Personally, I don't agree with him. If a movie like Roma or a documentary like Icarus is good enough to be eligible to win an Oscar, then I don't see why it shouldn't be, especially since Netflix, in particular, is now a pretty big contributor to new original movies and will probably continue to grow its original catalog for a while. Now, that being said, movies released on platforms like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime being eligible for Oscar nominations brings up the question of where the line should be drawn. It brings up the discussion of whether or not video platforms like YouTube, Vimeo, or Dailymotion would ultimately also count in this category. I personally don't think they should, but opening up eligibility for platforms like Netflix raises questions about what platforms should be eligible and which shouldn't. I think it's an interesting discussion and I would love to hear your thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think the idea that they have to screen in an actual theater to qualify for an Oscar is silly. Technologies change. Venues change. 

Why is it a low-grade flick that screens at a local multiplex is considered eligible for an Oscar, while a top quality feature-length film made exclusively for a streaming platform can't be nominated.

They need to relax the rules on this, stop being so uptight and move forward with the times.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

Yeah, I think the idea that they have to screen in an actual theater to qualify for an Oscar is silly. Technologies change. Venues change. 

Why is it a low-grade flick that screens at a local multiplex is considered eligible for an Oscar, while a top quality feature-length film made exclusively for a streaming platform can't be nominated.

They need to relax the rules on this, stop being so uptight and move forward with the times.

PERSONALLY & LOOK AT YHE RECIPTS FROM HIS RECENT FAILRLY FLOP $$$ READY PLATYER RUIN, GOE FOR ONE OF THE OTHER, NOTABLE BIG SCREEN WORKS

 

HEL:L, HOW CAN HE TOP THE LIKES OF A JAWS, E.T. SCHINDLER'S LIST & OTHERS???

 

Year after year *SCHINDLER IS GAINING IN REGARD TO BEING AMONG THE ALL-TIME TOP TEN GREATEST MOTION PICTURES!!! CASE IN POINT< IN AFI's 1st & MONOLITHIC 1998 POLL OF OVER 250 FINALISTS *SCHINDLER" WAS VOTED 9th, THEN A DECADE LATER VITED 8th.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, spence said:

PERSONALLY & LOOK AT YHE RECIPTS FROM HIS RECENT FAILRLY FLOP $$$ READY PLATYER RUIN, GOE FOR ONE OF THE OTHER, NOTABLE BIG SCREEN WORKS

 

HEL:L, HOW CAN HE TOP THE LIKES OF A JAWS, E.T. SCHINDLER'S LIST & OTHERS???

 

Year after year *SCHINDLER IS GAINING IN REGARD TO BEING AMONG THE ALL-TIME TOP TEN GREATEST MOTION PICTURES!!! CASE IN POINT< IN AFI's 1st & MONOLITHIC 1998 POLL OF OVER 250 FINALISTS *SCHINDLER" WAS VOTED 9th, THEN A DECADE LATER VITED 8th.

Well, all directors have flops. Hitchcock had a few. I know people think of Spielberg as a director, but I think of him more as a producer. He doesn't need to keep directing, he can just produce. But I suspect he likes working with actors and technicians too much to step away from directing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

Well, all directors have flops. Hitchcock had a few. I know people think of Spielberg as a director, but I think of him more as a producer. He doesn't need to keep directing, he can just produce. But I suspect he likes working with actors and technicians too much to step away from directing.

I agree. Sure, he may not have had as many successes recently as he had back in the day, but that doesn't mean his movies today don't have an audience that loves them, maybe even just as much as classics like Jaws or E.T.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So then should theatrical films be eligible for an Emmy? How about a Tony?

The venue is the defining characteristic. I'm with Spielberg. Play it in a theater if you want an Oscar, and if you don't, then submit it to the Emmys. They have a made-for-TV movie category for a reason.

Netflix is in the process of buying theaters in LA and NY in order to screen their films so that they will qualify, so it will soon be a moot point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LawrenceA said:

So then should theatrical films be eligible for an Emmy? How about a Tony?

The venue is the defining characteristic. I'm with Spielberg. Play it in a theater if you want an Oscar, and if you don't, then submit it to the Emmys. They have a made-for-TV movie category for a reason.

Netflix is in the process of buying theaters in LA and NY in order to screen their films so that they will qualify, so it will soon be a moot point.

Ooh, good point, to be honest. I think that also raises the question: Do Netflix movies, Hulu movies, etc., count as made-for-TV movies? I honestly didn't realize that Netflix was planning to buy theaters. That's interesting. That would actually be kind of cool to see Netflix films like Roma on the true big screen. Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, animaldoctor said:

Ooh, good point, to be honest. I think that also raises the question: Do Netflix movies, Hulu movies, etc., count as made-for-TV movies? I honestly didn't realize that Netflix was planning to buy theaters. That's interesting. That would actually be kind of cool to see Netflix films like Roma on the true big screen. Interesting.

We could have had this conversation two years ago about "Bright".  (Anyone remember that one?  Embarrassed show of hands?)  But we didn't.  Suddenly, a lot of Roma fans get vocal about it not winning, and all of a sudden, streaming is being "persecuted".

If Netflix wants to be a "new TV network", then how are their movies NOT "Made-for-TV movies"?...Why, just because they don't have Joan Collins in them??

For some reason, we're also not arguing about Amazon, eg. Woody Allen's "Wonder Wheel", being "cruelly barred" from the Oscars.  This is a tempest being stirred up SOLELY in Reed Hasting's narcissistic teapot, and whipped up by rabid cable-issued Roma-ntic fanboys, as he seeks to make Netflix something it never was, and then throw industry temper tantrums when it doesn't become that.

(Just think what Netflix would be today if Reed had been allowed to create "Qwikster" without the mail-service fans' tantrum that they thought they were supposed to get Instant Netflix "free" with their disk service.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, animaldoctor said:

I agree. Sure, he may not have had as many successes recently as he had back in the day, but that doesn't mean his movies today don't have an audience that loves them, maybe even just as much as classics like Jaws or E.T.

THANX FOR FAST REPLY, SWELL, TO ONE ANYWAY??? JUST MESSI'N WITH YA  HOWABOUT *FORD THOUGH??? Can you nme (5?)

 

(TRIVIA: I've WRITTEN MANY :

 

EXAMPLE OSCAR CHAMPION *JOHN FORD's 1953's THE SUN SHINE's BRIGHT"

*JOHN HUSTON'S "Red Badge of Courage"

*WYLER: *"BEST YRS F OUR LIVES"

GEORGE STEVENS OWN FAV>  "DIARYOF ANNE FRANK"

HITCH  "SHADOW OF A SOUBT"

CAPRA: "IT'S A WNDERFUL LIFE"

CHAPLIN'S:  ??? HAD IT IN FILES, BUT OVERWHELMED

EASTWOOD: "BIRD"

 

you want just write ne no (jeffshannon5-0@gmail.com)  FRANK SHANNON, IV & Spencer Shannon always loved 3 aliaias

 

 

 

 

ARTICLES ON DIRECTORS OWN FAVORITE'S?" (anyone ese recall it?)  Takes awhile, but fun

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, spence said:

THANX FOR FAST REPLY, SWELL, TO ONE ANYWAY??? JUST MESSI'N WITH YA  HOWABOUT *FORD THOUGH??? Can you nme (5?)

 

(TRIVIA: I've WRITTEN MANY :

 

EXAMPLE OSCAR CHAMPION *JOHN FORD's 1953's THE SUN SHINE's BRIGHT"

*JOHN HUSTON'S "Red Badge of Courage"

*WYLER: *"BEST YRS F OUR LIVES"

GEORGE STEVENS OWN FAV>  "DIARYOF ANNE FRANK"

HITCH  "SHADOW OF A SOUBT"

CAPRA: "IT'S A WNDERFUL LIFE"

CHAPLIN'S:  ??? HAD IT IN FILES, BUT OVERWHELMED

EASTWOOD: "BIRD"

7 minutes ago, spence said:

THANX FOR FAST REPLY, SWELL, TO ONE ANYWAY??? JUST MESSI'N WITH YA  HOWABOUT *FORD THOUGH??? Can you nme (5?)

 

(TRIVIA: I've WRITTEN MANY :

 

EXAMPLE OSCAR CHAMPION *JOHN FORD's 1953's THE SUN SHINE's BRIGHT"

*JOHN HUSTON'S "Red Badge of Courage"

*WYLER: *"BEST YRS F OUR LIVES"

GEORGE STEVENS OWN FAV>  "DIARYOF ANNE FRANK"

HITCH  "SHADOW OF A SOUBT"

CAPRA: "IT'S A WNDERFUL LIFE"

CHAPLIN'S:  ??? HAD IT IN FILES, BUT OVERWHELMED

EASTWOOD: "BIRD"

 

you want just write ne no (jeffshannon5-0@gmail.com)  FRANK SHANNON, IV & Spencer Shannon always loved 3 aliaias

 

 

 

 

ARTICLES ON DIRECTORS OWN FAVORITE'S?" (anyone ese recall it?)  Takes awhile, but fun

 

 

ou want just write ne no (jeffshannon5-0@gmail.com)  FRANK SHANNON, IV & Spencer Shannon always loved 3 aliaias

 

 

 

 

ARTICLES ON DIRECTORS OWN FAVORITE'S?" (anyone ese recall it?)  Takes awhile, but fun

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, LawrenceA said:

So then should theatrical films be eligible for an Emmy? How about a Tony?

The venue is the defining characteristic. I'm with Spielberg. Play it in a theater if you want an Oscar, and if you don't, then submit it to the Emmys. They have a made-for-TV movie category for a reason.

Netflix is in the process of buying theaters in LA and NY in order to screen their films so that they will qualify, so it will soon be a moot point.

Netflix shouldn't have to do that. It's like saying all e- businesses should still have a store in a physical location for customers who turn their noses up at e-commerce. It's silly. An old-fashioned view.

Also, online streaming is not the same as television. It's really a separate venue.

Some telefilms were intended as feature films but because of reduced budgets or because the subject matter wasn't deemed commercial enough, the stories wound up being screened on television. But it doesn't make those scripts or the performances any less excellent.

It really should be about how a feature film is defined (as opposed to a short film or episodic television series) not how a venue is defined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, EricJ said:

 

We could have had this conversation two years ago about "Bright".  (Anyone remember that one?  Embarrassed show of hands?)  But we didn't.  Suddenly, a lot of Roma fans get vocal about it not winning, and all of a sudden, streaming is being "persecuted".

If Netflix wants to be a "new TV network", then how are their movies NOT "Made-for-TV movies"?...Why, just because they don't have Joan Collins in them??

For some reason, we're also not arguing about Amazon, eg. Woody Allen's "Wonder Wheel", being "cruelly barred" from the Oscars.  This is a tempest being stirred up SOLELY in Reed Hasting's narcissistic teapot, and whipped up by rabid cable-issued Roma-ntic fanboys, as he seeks to make Netflix something it never was, and then throw industry temper tantrums when it doesn't become that.

(Just think what Netflix would be today if Reed had been allowed to create "Qwikster" without the mail-service fans' tantrum that they thought they were supposed to get Instant Netflix "free" with their disk service.)

I highlighted the two most interesting points above. You're exactly right with the first statement. They can't continuously position themselves in the marketplace as the "new" television and then complain when their product is considered television.

And we don't hear the same complaints about Amazon because they release their films theatrically. As such, many of their films have been nominated or have won Oscars, including Manchester By the SeaThe SalesmanI Am Not Your Negro, and The Big Sick, with none of the attendant complaints that plague Netflix. And The Big Sick ended up being a sizable theatrical hit, as well.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I neglected to cover in my previous post--

Live television broadcasts are considered for Emmys. But technically, shouldn't they be considered for Tonys, since they are live performance and more like theater than television? 

There are "gray areas." Defining things by venue, instead of by how the story is structured, is where it gets tricky.

My opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, EricJ said:

 

We could have had this conversation two years ago about "Bright".  (Anyone remember that one?  Embarrassed show of hands?)  But we didn't.  Suddenly, a lot of Roma fans get vocal about it not winning, and all of a sudden, streaming is being "persecuted".

If Netflix wants to be a "new TV network", then how are their movies NOT "Made-for-TV movies"?...Why, just because they don't have Joan Collins in them??

For some reason, we're also not arguing about Amazon, eg. Woody Allen's "Wonder Wheel", being "cruelly barred" from the Oscars.  This is a tempest being stirred up SOLELY in Reed Hasting's narcissistic teapot, and whipped up by rabid cable-issued Roma-ntic fanboys, as he seeks to make Netflix something it never was, and then throw industry temper tantrums when it doesn't become that.

(Just think what Netflix would be today if Reed had been allowed to create "Qwikster" without the mail-service fans' tantrum that they thought they were supposed to get Instant Netflix "free" with their disk service.)

Yeah, it does seem like this argument has made a new resurgence since Roma, doesn't it? Can't argue with you there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

One thing I neglected to cover in my previous post--

Live television broadcasts are considered for Emmys. But technically, shouldn't they be considered for Tonys, since they are live performance and more like theater than television? 

There are "gray areas." Defining things by venue, instead of by how the story is structured, is where it gets tricky.

My opinion.

Ooh, yeah, that is a really tough one. Huh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that a movie should be restricted to show only at a theater in order to be nominated. The same amount of work (usually) goes into filming/producing a project for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc. as a traditional feature film presentation. There can be good (and bad) films from either end of the spectrum. I think it's fair to nominate original projects from streaming sites; the times they are a-changing. The digital age has been thrown upon us, and there are more means of producing a project than there used to be, even 10 years ago. I find his complaint to be somewhat juvenile. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, NickAndNora34 said:

I don't think that a movie should be restricted to show only at a theater in order to be nominated. The same amount of work (usually) goes into filming/producing a project for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc. as a traditional feature film presentation. There can be good (and bad) films from either end of the spectrum. I think it's fair to nominate original projects from streaming sites; the times they are a-changing. The digital age has been thrown upon us, and there are more means of producing a project than there used to be, even 10 years ago. I find his complaint to be somewhat juvenile. 

Yes, for someone who's considered revolutionary in the film industry, someone who's embraced new technology in the past-- this stance seems very backwards coming from him. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, animaldoctor said:

Yeah, it does seem like this argument has made a new resurgence since Roma, doesn't it? Can't argue with you there.

The rabid "Spielberg's a poopyhead!...Made-for-streaming movies are too 'real movies'!" movement has almost literally become a fanboy tantrum against "Why did Green Book win the Oscar and not Roma?? 😡 "
(Because the stupid messed-up Oscar voting causes the second-place winner to get it, that's why Black Panther didn't win either.)

Apart from Lawrence's list of "properly" theatrical-released Amazon titles, you don't hear any other made-for-streaming movies being mentioned in the debate. ANY.  Go ahead, name another one.

6 hours ago, NickAndNora34 said:

I don't think that a movie should be restricted to show only at a theater in order to be nominated. The same amount of work (usually) goes into filming/producing a project for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc. as a traditional feature film presentation. There can be good (and bad) films from either end of the spectrum. I think it's fair to nominate original projects from streaming sites; the times they are a-changing. The digital age has been thrown upon us, and there are more means of producing a project than there used to be, even 10 years ago. I find his complaint to be somewhat juvenile. 

This is the same "It's new, it's neat, it's digital, which means it's the future!" argument that was thrown around when studios were trying to sell us movies on DRM, and getting us to throw out our Blu-ray disks.  We didn't, and it flopped.  In point of fact, most audience didn't know why they were supposed to fall in love with DRM in the first place, just like most streaming audiences giggle that a studio movie has been "BUS-ted!" if it ends up "exiled" direct to streaming, just like "The Cloverfield Paradox".  (Another title you never hear mentioned in the debate.)

It's also cousin to the same trendy web-article honeymoon that surrounded Bitcoin, self-driving cars, AI, Uber-style Internet startups, and anything else that modern-day adults don't really understand, but want to make a great overcompensating show of being willing to adopt rather than be "crushed" hanging onto the "old" technology.

And what crushed DRM--and Bitcoin, and self-driving cars--is that it didn't solve a need, the rabid evangelists had to create a "need" for it by demonizing the old technology, made themselves vocal jerks in the process, and only created a debate where loyalty to the old system could be newly defended.  The more we hear "Who needs theaters anyway?--They're all stupid cineplexes showing superhero movies, with cellphones in the audience!  The future is being able to sit at home in comfort!", the more theaters will experience a new renaissance.

  • Like 1
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...