Needs Help: Oscar Bait

Ok, now that we know it's broken, let's see what we can do about it.

I made some edits to Sandbox.Oscar Bait to clarify the core trope and remove the negative tone. I added a note reminding examples to focus on the work not the awards show. I also made sure to say that Tropes Are Not Bad in this case.

For the Tactics and topics folders, I'm not sure what to do. I want to add them to the description, but I don't want to clutter the core trope. What if we made them Internal Subtrope style and whittled them down to 3-4 broad topics/tactics?

Feel free to take a stab at the sandbox.

I'll go ahead and make a motion for a single prop to approve the rewrite and cleanup. I don't think we're ready for it just yet, but I'll leave the motion here for when we are ready.

I still think this should be In Universe Examples Only. The wick check shows that over 50% of the legitimate examples (11 of the 20 "good") are parodies, so there's definitely some proof showing that it's considered a negative label to give of a work if it's being made fun of that frequently.

The ~50% general misuse also does not bode well.

edited 4th Apr '17 6:20:55 PM by Karxrida

IUEO still feels like the too much right now. Yes, that's a large amount of misuse, especially usage as parodies. However, that would be changing the trope to fit usage, instead of trying to see if the non-parody usage can be fixed.

I think IUEO should be on the table as a last resort. I want to see if there's first a way to fix the bad usage and the description. If we can't come up with a reasonable way to repair what we already have, then IUEO might be appropriate.

Suggestion: once the Oscar Bait description is clarified, we split off Oscar Bait Parody and clean the wicks. There's clearly enough usage to support that subtrope, making it easier to see misuse if we must revisit this trope later.

I'll second that suggestion. Good idea.

Wouldn't the ratio of parody-to-straight examples imply this has become a Dead Horse Trope? That is, rather than needing to change the definition of this trope. (I do recall news stories a few years ago complaining about film length, with the explanation being that a film must be at least 2(-ish) hours to qualify for an Academy Award...)

idk it's just an alternative option to making Oscar Bait Parody.

I would prefer to see Oscar Bait remain as a trope. I don't think that it's really a Dead Horse Trope yet — producers do still try to gear films toward what the Academy seems to look for. But "what the Academy seems to look for" is changing as it's changed in the past. In the fifties, one way to get a nomination was Spectacle —either lush location filming or eye-popping visuals ^like  An American in Paris, Greatest Show On Earth, Around the World in 80 days, Gigi, or Ben-hur or gritty Triumph of the will ^{for instance}  Marty, On the Waterfront, From Here to Eternity, or both if you could figure out how to dget them both in one film ^witness Bridge Over the River Kwai. The 60's wanted big spectacular Musicals — five of the ten Best Picture winners fit that category even though only 8 of the fifty nominees did. And two of the the three that were nominated and didn't win lost to one of the five. Hello Dolly is the only musical that lost to something other than a musical from 1960 and 1969.

Anyway, I think that maybe what we need to do is work on the definition; what was Oscar Bait ten years ago may not be anymore and what we're listing as qualities that flag a film as Oscar bait may no longer be the things to look for.

edited 4th Apr '17 8:22:14 PM by Madrugada

Updated the sandbox to add that the topics of the day change. Borrowed your examples for that paragraph, thank you (although what was the specific year in the 60's you mentioned about musicals?).

On that same note, are the "current" topics accurate? Currently, it mentions in the description:

• Introspective Dramas
• Inspirational Films
• The depravity of man
• The Holocaust
• Inspirationally Disadvantaged
• and just added Minority Focus.

I feel like these are broad categories for the current trends. Are they accurate and how can they be more specific?

• Films that paint the heyday of Hollywood in a good light, aka real pandering to the audience.
• Musicals

That's it. None of those appear to be current bait. As best I can tell now, Oscar bait is

• It's visually impressive
• It's about a social issue, either directly or by inference or analogy.
• it's though-producing, rather than "fun" or "fluffy".

That's it. That's the only trends I can spot that are currently operative.

I'm sorry, I miscounted. Anyway:

• in 1960, no musical was nominated.
• 1961: West Side Story was nominated and won.
• 1962:The Music Man was nominated, but lost to Lawrence of Arabia
• 1963: No musical was nominated
• 1964: My Fair Lady and Mary Poppins were both nominated, My Fair Lady won.
• 1965: The Sound Of Music was nominated and won.
• 1966: No musical was nominated
• 1967: Dr Doolittle was nominated, but lost to In the Heat of the Night
• 1968: Oliver! and Funny Girl were both nominated, Oliver! won.
• 1969: Hello Dolly! was nominated but lost to Midnight Cowboy.

In 10 years — that's fifty nominees — 9 of them were musicals. Five of them won. Of the four that didn't win, two of them lost to another musical.

From 1970 on, not only didn't win, they didn't even get nominated much anymore: in 1971 Fiddler on the Roof was nominated and lost. In 1972, Cabaret suffered the same fate. The next time a musical was even nominated wasn't until 1979, when All That Jazz was nominated and lost. Then the dry spell continued until Disney's Beauty and the Beast was nominated and lost in 1991. Fast Forward another ten years: in 2001 Moulin Rouge was nominated and lost. In 2002, 44 years since the last time a musical won Best Picture, Chicago finally scored. Then another 10 years to the next nomination — Les Miserables in 2012. Then La La Land, in 2016.

My point was that it's pretty clear that in the 1960's, "a film of a major Broadway musical" was pretty good bait to put on your hook if you were fishing for an Oscar. Since then, it hasn't worked for shit as Oscar Bait.

So I think that at least part of the problem is that we're listing specific things that worked when the page was originally written. But what works as Bait changes over time...

edited 5th Apr '17 9:01:16 PM by Madrugada

Here's the list, nominees and winners, from Oscar #1 to the ones for 2016. Don't look for a trend that runs through the whole list, (aside from "visually impressive" there aren't any) look for shorter trends — five years and up.

edited 5th Apr '17 8:58:35 PM by Madrugada

The Holocaust was never Oscar Bait. Schindler's List won, but no other movie that I recognized as being "about the Holocaust" was even nominated. Musicals were, but aren't anymore. There hasn't been a movie "glorifying the heyday of Hollywood" nominated in decades.

Right now it looks like the best Bait is "Inspiring Biopic" and "Triumph of human spirit against adversity".

edited 5th Apr '17 9:11:07 PM by Madrugada

The more I think about it, the more I think this needs an analysis page. The trope isn't specific to the Oscars, but we're only including information on the tastes of the Oscars on the Main/ page. Moreover, with an analysis page, I think we could describe the trends in more detail.

Also, I think the phrasing "loved the Holocaust" should be "wanted to see the Holocaust" or something like that. (?) I also suggest changing "critics first, then you" to "critics first, then the customer" for both alliterative appeal and the emphasis on the disparity between "these people don't pay as much" and "us people do pay." le shrug

edited 5th Apr '17 9:11:10 PM by WaterBlap

I think an analysis page would be good for discussing the trends and history, it would help keep the description focused. If you want, you can dump the commented out history and tactics on a new sandbox.

Thanks for clarifying on the 60's. I wanted to include that paragraph in order to show how the topics can and will change over time. I left placeholders for the 80's and early 2000's if anyone wants to add that.

Also tried a new format on the sandbox for the "current topics". It should be easier to update the topics instead of rewriting the description. I left the three topics in the first paragraph as broad topic examples.

Looking through the list since 2010, I see: "True Stories" (Historical, biopic, war), "Psychological" (Thriller, drama, handicap, etc), and "Hollywood".

edited 5th Apr '17 10:29:14 PM by pokedude10

You guys are making this sound like something more akin to a Useful Note.

Nah, Useful Notes are not about devices used by writers to win an Oscar. That's what we have tropes for.

Except they're talking about what devices have won Oscars, not which devices the creators intended to win them an Oscar.

Oscar Bait is kind of an index that creators use: "This sort of movie wins awards, how can I make mine more like that?" I'm not sure that it's a trope itself, since, as noted above in some detail what used to work as Oscar Bait doesn't necessarily keep working. So as a trope, the description would be necessarily vague.

edited 6th Apr '17 8:01:47 AM by Madrugada

I think of this more like an Evolving Trope than a Useful Note, where the trope continually changes every X number of years.

The sandboox made two things something clear to me, that may be the core of the problem.

The first is that the description is talking about elements of a film that that make a work more likely to be nominated for an award. But the examples are calling the films themselves "Oscar Bait".

The second is more insidious: the description is incredibly judgemental and dismissive. Some films that use Oscar Bait elements are all artsy-fartsy and elitist and aimed at the critics, but most aren't. They aren't fluffy, but they aren't too highbrow for the average movie-goer to appreciate and enjoy.

Hmm. Interesting points. I think I see what you're saying about the theme/work disconnect, but I'll have to think on that for a bit. It doesn't sound right yet.

The only thought I have right now: "movies made to win awards" is the superset to "themes which win awards". A movie can be Oscar bait simply because it's "goal is to win." Not all Oscar nominees are Oscar bait, it's possible for a wide appeal movie that doesn't use the themes to be nominated or win. This trope is when the movie clearly is trying to appeal to critics using a theme. Again, I'll have to think on this.

As for the description in the sandbox, I worked hard to make it neutral, not judgemental. What stuck out that sounds dismissive/negative? I want it to be clear that Oscar Bait is not bad. Remember, I'm not planning to touch or use the tactics or themes folders. Those might work better in the analysis page.

edited 6th Apr '17 11:40:40 AM by pokedude10

Thought that I just had; would this be a form of Follow the Leader? A movie wins the Oscars, and subsequent creators try to incorporate similar themes to increase their chances of success.

If we reorganized it to match that, we'd be listing the winning movie and then some imitators as examples, rather than trying to figure out all the themes in the description.

What struck me as negative was the emphasis on "these movies aren't made for the audience to enjoy" and the unstated implication that they've almost got to be heavy-handed or anvilicious about a "message" to be Oscar Bait.

It's not overtly stated but I can't read "Sure the dialog might be a little on the nose and the morals may be heavy handed, but it can still be a good movie. The only difference between this and your average blockbuster is that this is made to entertain critics first, then you. " any other way.

I think what we should consider is that most people use the term "Oscar Bait" as a pejorative about a movie that is just swamped with the elements we're talking about, not a neutral term about the elements themselves, so we're going to run into bad wicks because editors will see the name and know what it means (at least, what it means everywhere but here...) and not even look at the page to check the definition.

edited 6th Apr '17 1:26:08 PM by Madrugada

Its more like 'they are not made for the masses but made for the hollywood elites', real bait movies do not make big box office numbers however are flat out adored by hollywood itself.

Memers, that's simply not true.