Needs Help: Oscar Bait

Well, I suppose this statement is exactly why this trope is highly subjective. People probably have different ideas of what constitutes as a pretentious inspirational drama against a genuinely inspiring story. Calling something "pretentious" is also inherently complaining in its nature, and that's not something we want in this wiki.

@Memers: I haven't seen Moonlight (and I don't intend to), but how does your write-up qualify the movie as an Oscar Bait, besides the fact that it's released on the "prime Oscars window period"? If it's an adaptation of a true story, then I don't see how that counts as a substance-less dramafest that's only there to squeeze out feels out of the audience (which, based on the last few post, is what I assume this trope is about).

edited 12th Mar '17 9:29:48 PM by Adept

Criticism is not complaining and calling it thus is just a way to shut-down opinions that aren't Gushing and butcher tropes that tend to be critical by nature.

Pretentious simply means something that's ultimately shallow, but tries to use common True Art tropes to make itself seem profound.

edited 12th Mar '17 9:30:33 PM by shoboni

Most of your posts concerning the topic are laced with an underlying negativity and disdain for these films (e.g. "emotionally manipulate the viewers instead of to represent or appeal to disabled people") and do little to convince me that this trope shouldn't be IUEO.

Well it could be a truly great movie or it might not, 'pretentious' itself might be too strong of a word but it certainly wont be a movie meant to appeal to the masses.

I honestly don't consider pretentious inherently negative. I mean shit, William Shakespeare's Romeo + Juliet is a Guilty Pleasure of mine that I actually own on Blu-Ray because it's so enjoyably absurd and over the top. Who wouldn't enjoy a mash-up of Shakespeare and gritty modern gangster movie that's hilariously artsy on top of it all?

I don't think award-bait is inherentitly negitive either, it's that there's a overlap between this trope and movies that handle sensitive subjects in an offensive fashion.

I mean, I am an autistic man so it's natural I'd have a disdain for movies that use the disabled as cheap award bait. It's also a common sentiment among people with disabilities the attitudes of such movies are patronizing and borderline offensive.

edited 12th Mar '17 9:55:08 PM by shoboni

It seems like Oscar Bait might be a Trope in Aggregate, a combination of several factors, like the timing, being typically drama and arguably a case of some of the True Art tropes (Like True Art Is Angsty). What do you think are the other factors are?

edited 12th Mar '17 10:33:59 PM by MorningStar1337

I don't think it's even common enough to qualify for Tropes in Aggregate.

x5 While I agree with Shiboni that this is not Ymmv and does exist, it is not inherently negative nor does it focus on exploitation.

By definition, Oscar Bait is created to appeal to award show judges and film critics by using a common set of themes and topics (disabilites, millitary, race, gender, sexality, etc.) It is not mutually exclusive with wide appeal.

Making Oscar Bait Ymmv opens it up to misuse and shoehorning by making it an opinion rather than a statement. Right now, a work either fits, or it doesn't. It either uses the set of themes, styles, and topics to apparently appeal to awards, or it doesn't. If it becomes YMMV, I see it being misused to any work that seems like it fits.

Again, as others have mentioned, I would like to see some actual proof this is causing problems.

On a side note, I'm going to start on a potential rewrite on Sandbox.Oscar Bait. I think part of the issue is that the description is unclear, and others see Flame Bait and complaining.

edited 12th Mar '17 10:49:02 PM by pokedude10

Doubling second the causing problems part.

NOBODY has presented proof any misuse is bad enough, not any complaining prevalent enough to call for action more drastic then clarifying the criteria and running a quick clean-up.

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.

And that's actually kind of exactly my point. Because Moonlight is one of those movies where I think should get Oscar Bait as a YMMV Audience Reaction but at the same time I don't think really is Oscar Bait. Most people I know of who have actually seen the movie don't think it's Oscar Bait, it may tick a lot of superficial "Oscar Bait bingo" checkmarks but it doesn't actually come across as bait-y in the movie. Especially since it comes across as writing off peoples' life stories as being Oscar Bait. And especially especially because those tick marks are ridiculously broad. Seriously, based on the page anything that doesn't have a fart joke, explosions, and The Rock can probably be considered Oscar Bait by our loose definitions.

So is Chocolate Oscar Bait? It's a foreign movie released in September in the US at a film festival about an Autistic girl trying to raise money for her mother's chemotherapy and ultimately meeting the father she grew up never knowing.

And again, if something is subjective or an Audience Reaction, it doesn't matter if it causes flame wars or not. It still would be YMMV.

edited 13th Mar '17 8:20:33 AM by Larkmarn

As we've established.

Oscar Bait doesn't have to be a bad thing (it just has a large overlap with groan-inducing pretentious art films) so those movies can be good while still being this trope.

Tropes Are Not Bad

... yeah, see, that doesn't change the fact we've got an inherently negative name and people keep attaching "pretentious" as a basic part of the trope (indeed, because of how poorly defined the trope is, it's pretty much the only consistent part of the description). Tropes Are Not Bad but no one is saying that So Bad Its Horrible is a good thing.

And again, part of the problem is that this is a subjective audience reaction because really, the truest definition of Oscar Bait is a gut "well, this seems Oscar Bait-y feeling" because the definition is so hopelessly broad.

The page itself makes no attempt to disguise the fact this is an audience reaction.

In short, Tropes Are Not Bad, but this isn't even a trope in the first place.

The name seems to be causing no problems so that's a matter of complaining about a trope title you don't like, and I explained above pretentious isn't inherently bad either. Some people like pretentious things and I pointed I even enjoy it form time to time.

Tropes also don't have to all be hugboxes. There can be tropes that tend to draw a critical eye like Unfortunate Implications or Magical Negro.

Criticism is not complaining.

Yes it is, as several of us have established in this thread. It's a particularly kind of movie or work that the people in charge of award shows are deeply in love with.

edited 13th Mar '17 12:58:52 PM by shoboni

Another issue is that, even without the negative connotation, it's still hard to determine whether a movie qualifies an example because, unless the creators/producers confirm that their aim was to win awards, that's all speculation.

I mean, we can compile "movie formulas/themes that tend to get Oscar nominations" and list everything that checks a lot of those "formulaic boxes" as examples, but I doubt that's really what we're trying to document here.

That could be doable as an index, something like Oscarworthy Tropes perhaps?

That falls under Death of the Author. Word of God is not needed for a trope to have an example. Over on the Feminist Fantasy TRS thread, we determined that while author/creator intention may add more to an example it is not required for us to trope about it.

Really, I think we all need to take a step back, both sides (including myself) are digging a little deep. Yes, Oscar Bait does not have rigid precise criteria for what qualifies; however, unless it's getting misused by people labeling every work this, it's not a problem.

Take a look at College Humor's 21 steps to winning an Oscar. It describes what type of movie Oscar Bait is, yet it's unnecessary to make every single "step" a requirement for what fits. Tropers aren't stupid, they're not going to label South Park/Family Guy/Minions/My baby photos as Oscar Bait. If they do, and it doesn't really fit, then there's a discussion and it gets removed. If they do and it's a good explanation for why it fits, then it stays.

For those who want to cut it, make it ymmv/IUEO, or otherwise say it's bad, the burden of proof falls on you. I'm not pointing fingers, 450 wicks and 9,600 inbounds speak for themselves. I want to fix bad tropes as much as anyone else, but this does not look like a bad trope.

I move to close the thread.

edited 14th Mar '17 9:49:31 AM by pokedude10

Seconded.

Considering the size of the trope and the fact no-one has provided proof anything has gone wrong with it, I support ruling this one as "take no action" and locking the thread up.

That is, to be perfectly frank, not possible.

At the very, very least we'd need something resembling an actual definition and creating a veneer of pretending that this isn't an audience reaction.

That falls under Death of the Author. Word of God is not needed for a trope to have an example. Over on the Feminist Fantasy TRS thread, we determined that while author/creator intention may add more to an example it is not required for us to trope about it.

And see, you keep making this argument but it continues to not make any sense in this context. The page, as-written, explicitly is about works that are intentionally fishing for Oscars. It's not just "works that happen to have these traits"; the description, examples, even folders are very much saying "these are works that are trying their damnest to win an Oscar (and here's some snark about how that makes them worse)."

More inbounds to a bad page is a bad thing and is more impetus to clean it up, not less.

edited 14th Mar '17 2:15:51 PM by Larkmarn

Then re-write the page to remove the requirement of intent, problem solved.

If ya'll want to take a jab at Sandbox.Oscar Bait, that's fine by me. I have a wip rewrite from scratch there to clarify the description. An unclear description is something tangible to work on.

More inbounds to a bad page is a bad thing.

I agree, but more inbounds and wicks means we need to have very good reasoning to change or make drastic action. Now what's that we've been saying about needing actual proof? /s

If the snark is part of the issue, take it out and have it be matter of fact (although snark != complaining). But snark or complaining is not the core of the trope.

edited 14th Mar '17 4:11:28 PM by pokedude10

Of which proof the trope is problematic enough for drastic action has not been provided.

That's the core of the issue here, people wanting the trope carpet bombed when there's no evidence such an action is called for.

Especially not with something this big that almost borders on being a Trope Of Legend

edited 14th Mar '17 4:56:36 PM by shoboni

It has less than 500 wicks. That's not Tropes Of Legend material even if it admittedly has a high inbound count.

I think at this point we need a crowner. The thread's going in circles and no clear consensus has been reached.

edited 14th Mar '17 5:18:22 PM by Karxrida

A crowner to decide what? You're right, we have no clear consensus, but using a crowner to decide what is wrong with the trope does not override a lack of consensus or evidence. If we can't even reach consensus what is wrong, if there actually is something wrong, then that might point to the fact there is not an issue. Especially if there is no evidence backing claims against it.

I don't think it gets close to Tropes Of Legend, but it is still a mature trope. It's not a young trope fresh off of Ykttw.^note  Example: Over on the Everybody Hates Ares TRS thread, it's was ok not to have piles of evidence for figuring out its issues. It was a young trope, fresh-ish off ykttw, and underperforming. It was essentially a crash rescue attempt. It wouldn't be missed if major action was taken. But this is not a young trope; 450 wicks and 9k inbounds isn't something to brush off. That just means we need to have good evidence to take major action with it.

edited 14th Mar '17 5:39:30 PM by pokedude10

There's nothing to have a crowner about. No problem has been demonstrated and looking at the page I can't find any misuse or complaining.