Needs Help: Oscar Bait

Flame bait it may be, but no one has demonstrated that this page is causing flame wars. This is clearly a subjective trope, and arguing over what is and isn't Oscar bait is the bread and butter of film fans everywhere. But because this debate is so essential to casual film discussion, I think this wiki needs to maintain a catalog of what fans commonly consider Oscar Bait, and that includes examples. Thus, I am against deletion or an example sectionectomy.

Personally, I think this page needs a cleanup and move to YMMV. Rewrite the description so it's more clear about what might make something Oscar Bait, and remove complainy examples. I would be willing to put some work into this and maybe write up a draft if that's what the thread decides on. If and only if there's evidence that this is causing lots of complaining and flame wars, I would support moving the page to Darth Wiki. If we can have So Bad Its Horrible, we should be capable of having discussions about this comparatively less controversial topic.

I'm against moving it to YMMV because the term generally has negative and even accusatory connotations, and we don't need more avenues for complaining. It is an actual thing worth keeping a page for, but it probably needs an Example Sectionectomy or only allow parody examples or something.

I'd say make it IUEO. There are examples like that — Tropic Thunder and "You went full-retard. You never go full-retard!" springs to mind and I've never even actually seen that movie.

edited 7th Mar '17 5:16:30 PM by Madrugada

Eh, IUEO seems like overkill. That really defeats the core point of of the trope.

So, I've got another interpretation after mulling it over for a while: Oscar Bait is a meta-trope when certain tropes or tactics are invoked by creators for the purpose of winning awards.

Not all works seek to win awards. The Avengers is fun and awesome, but it was not made for the purpose of winning awards. It was made for audiences and a good box office. La La Land or Moonlight dealt with serious subjects such as minorities, career failure, and honest romance. Were they made to win an award? Unless Word of God confirms, we can't be sure. But we can be sure they fit into the pattern of films that win awards.

Honestly, I wouldn't be against having this be YMMV, but I also feel like that's playing it too safe. It's not causing flame wars, it's not really causing problems, and it's not really an Audience Reaction or YMMV trope.

edited 8th Mar '17 6:52:23 PM by pokedude10

Pages have been locked preemptively before though (paging Dr Rodham Clinton).

Something to bear in mind is that, even if the creative team behind a movie didn't design it with the goal of winning awards, the film studio may have greenlit it with that goal in mind, so we should be careful not to suggest that listing a film as Oscar Bait indicates what the filmmakers' intentions were.

"creators' intentions".

Maybe this trope can just be limited that way? Word of God only and thus trivia?

I also agree that doing anything as drastic as limiting examples to In-Universe or adding Word of God requirements is overkill.

Especially when there's no clear proof the trope is causing problems or evidence of it being flamebait.

edited 10th Mar '17 5:10:40 PM by shoboni

and . Creator intention is only part of the equation, we don't need Word of God, whether by writers or the studio, to confirm a work is Oscar bait. The trope is about the work fitting a certain pattern, creator intention may fit in, but it focuses on the work itself.

It's not complaining that a work seemed custom built to win awards, just making a statement that it fits the general pattern of works that do.

edited 11th Mar '17 11:26:11 AM by pokedude10

I was thinking the same. There's also the factor most people making these movies aren't going to admit that were fishing for awards.

That was kinda my point, actually: a film can be Oscar Bait even if the creative team behind the film weren't trying to make it Oscar Bait. They could have just been trying to make a good movie. That their idea of a good movie lines up with what award shows tend to recognize may have been what got the movie funded, but doesn't require a deliberate attempt to court award show voters on their part.

Huh. Didn't realize we agreed. I guess I misread your gist.

Edit: Honestly, I think the trope's fine as it is right now. Sure, the description could use some clarifying, but there's no proof that this requires drastic action such as requiring IUEO.

edited 11th Mar '17 5:01:33 PM by pokedude10

I like that interpretation that's just a specific kind of movie that may or may not have been made with intent to court the awards shows.

It would also remove any reason for someone to accuse it of being complaining.

edited 11th Mar '17 12:46:25 PM by shoboni

So what are we going to do? Nothing? Move to YMMV?

If there's no clear misuse, just fix up the description to reflect this is about a certain style of movie and just the creator's intent and leave it be.

I don't see much to do here.

edited 11th Mar '17 6:06:53 PM by shoboni

We still need to properly define it because it's currently very broad.

I'd also prefer making it purely IUEO now that I've thought about it. Leaving it it as-is isn't a good idea for reasons already stated.

I once again state my firm objection to anything that drastic.

Well the release window generally is the biggest sign the movie is aiming for an Oscar, they usually all get released in a limited release just before the Oscar deadline.

As for requirements umm I think Honest Trailers really set it out with their video on this years Best Picture noms [1] A pretentious DRAMA filled overacted downer film with a 'message' is just prime material.

edited 11th Mar '17 6:41:26 PM by Memers

Don't think has to be a PURE drama, but that award-bait, almost pretentious "inspirational drama" element is a dead giveaway.

Inspirationally Disadvantaged is a trope that's commonly a red flag of award bait. Especially since it's common for it crop up as a way to emotionally manipulate the viewers instead of to represent or appeal to disabled people.

edited 12th Mar '17 11:56:49 AM by shoboni

That works.

I'm sure there's other red flags but that trope is just a common one that jumped out at me.

See, that's kinda why this would be YMMV because everything you're discussing is super subjective or super broad. Unless any work about "overcoming adversity" is award bait.

The thing is that this is seriously a subjective thing. Oscar Bait is more a "I cannot define it but I can tell when I see it" thing.

I think you misunderstand what Inspirationally Disadvantaged actually is.

Speaking as an autistic man, it's when a work fetishizes and patronizes people with disabilities by acting like so much as a remembering to put on pants and lift the toilet seat before shitting is is a great achievement and tale of us overcoming our disability.

edited 12th Mar '17 6:04:28 PM by shoboni

Not really, look at Moonlight its like the perfect example of an Oscar Bait film.

To quote Honest Trailers its about "a young gay black guy struggles to escape from poverty and drug addiction told across 30 years. Based on a play. Based on the life story of the author." Released in the prime Oscar window of October to December.

These kind of things are oscar bait qualities really.

I feel bad for laughing but that sounds like an Onion parody of tragic award bait movies.