I have a problem with splitting the categories because there is simply too much gray area between what is comedy and what is drama. The Best Picture award should be just that...the year's best movie regardless of category. However, AMPAS has managed to step up to the plate and come up with the most ridiculous possible solution to a problem that really didn't exist in the first place.

What am I doing that is wrong? People always predict what's going to be nominated for the Oscars, even though some have not been released yet. *sigh*

I actually rated Star Trek a 10/10. It's an excellent film but I didn't put it on my list because I don't think the Academy will nominate it. They usually never nominate these type of movies. And by "these type," I meant popcorn movies that the majority enjoyed. 

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Everyone (with the possible exception of moviewizeguy) has tacitly acknowledged that the the main point of expanding this year's Best Picture Oscar race to 10 titles was to accommodate "popcorn movies" as well as the "art-house" titles which have tended to dominate the Academy Awards for at least the last decade... 

Also, your retort to JoBloMovieGoer doesn't address the issue he raised -- How is your presuminmg something is "Oscar caliber" sight unseen any more defensible than Forum members predicting something is a contender for our awards, usually based on at least seeing promotional materials for the film being discussed? At least half of the films you listed earlier are not only months away from release, some of them are actually still in production -- In other words, you obviously can't have seen even a single frame of footage from any of them, yet you seem to have already formed an opinion about them...

It's called a prediction. Duh.

Originally posted by JoBloMovieGoer Once again, moviewizeguy is engaging in behaviors he has endlessly (and falsely) criticized other Forum members for: Only one of the titles he listed above as supposed Best Picture contenders has even been released yet (let alone completed production). He can't possibly have seen even 10% of the films he is, in essence, endorsing as 2009's very best -- Pardon me for asking, but doesn't that consitute "pre-judging movies sight unseen"?

I agree with what saturnwatcher said. If there's ten movies, chances are the catagory will be watered down to the point that the most deserving movie is not going to win at all. This is why I sugguested they divide the catagory into drama and comedy. That way, the most deserving drama can win, as well as a crowd pleasing blockbuster.

As for MWG's picks, most of which haven't even be released to the public, unless you can illlegal downloading, well much like the Joker from "TDK", MWG doesn't have a plan when it comes to posting on this board, he just does things.

Not necessarily. Consider this scenario: Movie A and Movie B are the front runners for the Oscar. Suppose that there are 100 voters. Of those 100, 28 people consider Movie A to the the best movie and Movie B to be the second best. Movie B is the favorie among 27 voters who regard movie A as second best.  Movie C has sort of a cult appeal which will get it a lot of votes, but the majority consider it a distant 3rd and almost nobody likes Nominees D or E that much. So, Movie A gets 28 votes. Movie B gets 27 votes...had either one of those not been in the running, it would have garnered all 55 or nearly all 55 of the votes cast.. However, Movie C pulls in 30 votes...less than a third of the total and well over half of the voters don't like it all that much...still, it manages to win Best Picture simply because two better movies split the vote and the other 15 votes are divided among D and E. I suspect that this precise scenario has played out at least twice before, and may have been a factor in both Rocky and The Greatest Show on Earth receiving Best Picture honors.

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I am disappointed (though not surprised) that moviewizeguy omitted from his list of possible Best Picture contenders the one 2009 film that is most analogous to last year's most blatantly over-looked title (and the film many people in the industry believe directly led to the new "10 Nominees" rule-- DARK KNIGHT).  I am speaking, of course, about the movie that is (as of this posting) both 2009's biggest-grossing movie and one of its best reviewed: STAR TREK.

FYI: Here is a LINK to see B.O. MoJo's list of 2009's top-grossers, and a LINK to check out Rotten Tomatoes' compilation of the year's highest critically-rated titles...

Once again, moviewizeguy is engaging in behaviors he has endlessly (and falsely) criticized other Forum members for: Only one of the titles he listed above as supposed Best Picture contenders has even been released yet (let alone completed production). He can't possibly have seen even 10% of the films he is, in essence, endorsing as 2009's very best -- Pardon me for asking, but doesn't that consitute "pre-judging movies sight unseen"??

Here ate some possible Best Picture choices for 2009:

The Road
Nine
Public Enemies
UP
Shutter Island
The Lovely Bones
Avatar
Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire
Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea
The Invention of Lying

Honorable mention: Julie and Julia

And I don't get your second reason. If two or three movies are close to winning, wouldn't one of those three movies win, since people are voting for them and not for another undeserved or inferior movie? 

Originally posted by saturnwatcher The first thing that came to my mind, as Michaels pointed out, is how are they going to find 10 movies worthy of nomination. The second problem is one that I've noted before that will become more accute: The best picture is almost certain not to win, particularly if there is a fairly close race between 2 or 3 really good movies. Those films are going to split the vote and a much less well regarded film is probably going to win every year.

The first thing that came to my mind, as Michaels pointed out, is how are they going to find 10 movies worthy of nomination. The second problem is one that I've noted before that will become more accute: The best picture is almost certain not to win, particularly if there is a fairly close race between 2 or 3 really good movies. Those films are going to split the vote and a much less well regarded film is probably going to win every year.

A "Mr. T Fact" perhaps?

Good luck finding 10 good movies this year. It's a year too late after they decided to turn their backs to "Dark Knight", "Wall*E" and "The Wrestler". Does this mean we, too will add 5 more Worst Picture nods?

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: At this time, my answer would be "No." Among the downsides of the Academy's decision are that it dilutes the number of votes necessary to win the award -- And, having 10 titles competing for the top prize instead of just 5 also makes an already too-long ceremony (by having to introduce and show 5 additional Best Picture clips) even longer...

Next Year's 82nd Annual Academy Awards®

to Feature TEN Best Picture Nominees