It is not uncommon in Hollywood history for a film to have an absolute advantage in the early stages but be reversed in the end. "Saving Private Ryan" and "Shakespeare in Love" are undoubtedly the best examples.
Before the voting ends, anything can happen.
According to academy regulations, once the Oscar nominations are announced, all public activities of production and distribution companies must cease. They are strictly prohibited from lobbying the voters. However, as has happened in past years, while public relations and lobbying will stop on the surface, behind the scenes and in media, promotion and publicity will not stop for a moment.
Oscar publicity is a massive project, and it naturally requires huge financial support, especially in terms of media promotion. Publications such as Vanity Fair, The Hollywood Reporter, and Premiere, which have a significant impact on Hollywood, will not offer advertising or promotional services for free. What may appear as relatively impartial coverage often hides transactions, with a single page often costing over six figures.
Even though Nancy Josephson and Panny Kallis are conducting a carpet-style telephone campaign, and doing everything they can to meet face-to-face, many members of the Oscar voting committee still won't watch the nominated films. Their voting method is often quite simple—choose familiar names.
Where do these familiar names come from?
This is where the role of media promotion becomes apparent.
It is undeniable that many, even members of the Academy, are influenced by media opinions. Prominent critics with columns in well-known media outlets inevitably affect many voters.
Professional critics have declined, but their influence during the awards season is still not to be underestimated.
This group, often more skilled in undermining than contributing constructively to the film industry, may not have reasonable opinions about its development, but their impact during the awards season should not be ignored.
It's extremely difficult to completely eliminate the influence of critics during awards season. The best way to fight them is through time. Once those old-timers in the academy, who grew up alongside the critics, pass on, even though the new leadership may be more progressive, if they haven't experienced the era when critics were powerful, the influence of professional critics will continue to wane.
Take someone like Duke, Michael Bay, or James Cameron—if they were to become long-time members of the academy, how could they still be affected by critics?
Every era has its own characteristics.
With twelve nominations, Duke's first thought is of winning all twelve awards. If all goes as expected, such an opportunity may never come again.
But the biggest obstacle to winning those twelve awards is not Harvey Weinstein or Miramax, but the professional critics, a group of just over four hundred in North America.
To counteract the negative reviews from professional critics, Duke's team is continually releasing messages and reports to the media, attempting to separate the critics from the audience and the film industry.
"The Lord of the Rings Trilogy is about to cross the $4 billion mark globally, making it the most successful film series in history. Yet, it has sparked debates and controversies outside the film world. On one side, there's praise from audiences and Hollywood, while on the other, critics have unleashed a torrent of negative reviews. Why has The Lord of the Rings caused such a split among North American audiences?"
In the latest edition of Vanity Fair, an article aimed directly at critics was published.
"Since The Fellowship of the Ring sparked a fantasy film craze, audiences and Hollywood have found themselves at odds with professional critics. The vast majority of critics consider The Lord of the Rings to be a complete failure, while the vast majority of audiences hail it as a masterpiece in the history of cinema."
"From the perspective of professional critics, the trilogy is another money-grabbing blockbuster from Duke Rosenberg, following Independence Day, The Matrix, and Critical Emergency. Its critical rating is so low it could be compared to the infamous Batman & Robin. On Rotten Tomatoes, The Return of the King barely scraped past 60% fresh."
"However, the views of general audiences and Hollywood insiders are completely opposite. It is rare for the audience, usually divided, to unify on anything. Yet, in this case, they are all celebrating The Lord of the Rings. Many fans have gone to see the movie once, three times, or even seven times. The bold epic crafted by Duke Rosenberg was a carnival for audiences, and some even expressed anger at the critics' widespread negative reviews, calling them petty and devoid of taste!"
"Duke Rosenberg and The Return of the King might just be the first film to completely split public opinion and Hollywood from professional critics in the age of mass internet access. But how did this divide happen, and where should we stand?"
"Perhaps the best way to gauge the situation is through a few numbers. Over 130 million viewers in North America watched The Return of the King. On IMDb, 387,562 users have given it an average score of 9.2, making it the highest-rated film on the site."
"Many Hollywood stars have also expressed opinions, with over 90% praising the trilogy, while 1,056 media outlets in the U.S. have averaged a score of 88."
"Compared to the millions of viewers, the thousands of media outlets, and the hundreds of industry insiders, the professional critics, a group of only about four hundred people, are incredibly small. Can their voices be trusted? Even if they consider themselves 'elite', are millions of viewers really fools?"
"In fact, if you examine the reviews from professional critics, including some well-known names, very few are genuinely insightful. Professional critics have long transformed into attention-seeking provocateurs, relying on harsh attacks and insults to draw attention."
Putting down the newspaper, Arthur Miller took off his glasses but did not speak.
This former Jewish husband of Marilyn Monroe, though retired from the position of academy president, still holds membership, influencing many choices.
"Old buddy, haven't you made up your mind yet?"
A voice called from the lounge chair, and Frank Pearson, the academy's vice president, looked at him and said, "If we let go of our prejudice against Duke Rosenberg, his Lord of the Rings Trilogy truly deserves to be called great..."
Arthur Miller raised his hand to interrupt him. "He's too obsessed with commercial success. The critical reception of the film..."
He stopped mid-sentence and shook his head. "Duke Rosenberg is not a traditional Hollywood director."
"Indeed, he isn't."
What does a traditional director look like? Frank Pearson knew very well. Spielberg is the best example: after achieving commercial success, he desperately tries to squeeze into the Oscar race, attempting to win over the old-timers like us by changing his style and approach to art.
However, among Hollywood's famous directors, two men refused to follow this path. Duke Rosenberg is one of them. And he has been increasingly successful in the commercial realm...
Frank Pearson knew that, without the success of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, even if he helped, Duke Rosenberg would not be successful at the Oscars.
This is not just a matter of film style—it's about their approach to filmmaking.
However, the success of the trilogy is evident. If the academy fails to treat such influential works and directors fairly, where will its authority stand in the future?
Additionally, there are rumors in the industry that if Duke Rosenberg does not receive fair treatment, he might announce a permanent withdrawal from the Oscars.
It may not matter if he declines, but what if he continues to succeed?
From the current situation, it's clear he will be even more successful in the future. He is destined to be remembered in history. If even someone like him rejects the Oscars, what will that do to the academy's reputation?
Many questions had been running through Frank Pearson's mind since The Return of the King was released. The trilogy had been released three years in a row and was a huge success every time, putting the academy in an increasingly passive position.
Arthur Miller handed the ballot envelope sent by the academy to Frank Pearson. "I made my choice a few days ago. Please send it for me. Frank, times have changed. Do it your way."
"I will."
Taking the envelope, Frank Pearson saw Arthur Miller close his eyes and stood up to leave. As he got in the car, he couldn't stop thinking about this year's Oscars.
Perhaps the academy could use this year's Oscars to show its determination to reform, thus calming the media and public that had been constantly criticizing the academy for the past few years.
As for true rejuvenation? Frank Pearson never considered that. If the academy became younger, where would their authority go?
Young people can continue to make films, but what can they, the old-timers, do to prove their relevance and importance, apart from holding on to the academy's core?
The 76th Academy Awards ceremony was approaching, and the time for the academy to collect ballots was drawing near. Oscar voters were voting in their own ways.
....
Hi For access to additional chapters of
Director in Hollywood (20 chpaters)
MV Director (30 chapters)....
Made In Hollywood (50 Chapters)
Pokemon:Bounty Hunter(30 Chapters)
Douluo Dalu: Reincarnated as Yan(30 Chapters)
Hollywood:From Razzie to Legend(30 Chapters)
Join pateron.com/Translaterappu