• Xenforo is upgrading us to version 2.3.7 on Tuesday Aug 19, 2025 at 01:00 AM BST (date has been pushed). This upgrade includes several security fixes among other improvements. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Spielberg says Netflix films shouldn't win Oscars

I love Speilberg, but I disagree with his statements.
 
Netflix has gotten slack for their recent films lately, but they also written checks for:

Beasts of No Nation
Mudbound
Okja
New Scorsese project
Saved Annihilation from the scissors cut studio machine.

Them snobs can live in the past.
 
If the Oscars stick to theatrical releases, and the theater experience dies out in favor of streaming, the Oscars will become obsolete. I do see the point that it's unfair to make Netflix eligible and not literal TV movies, but I'd say the solution is to make TV movies eligible, too. If they're good enough to get nominated, why not?
 
I kind of agree with him. I think they should probably be up for Emmys instead, like HBO movies.
 
The only thing Netflix films get nominated for are Razzies anyway :funny:
 
Yeah that's stupid. A movie is a movie whether it is shown on the big screen or little screen. If it is good then it's good.
 
Sure. Movies at the end of the day are a business.
Oscar bait movies, for the most part, aren't aiming to make as much dough as a Netflix title.
Oscar bait movies are more for recruiting and advertising talent.
Talent go to Netflix when they can't find business in traditional Hollywood.
 
It's a silly argument IMO. Sometimes the big Oscar winners or nominees were barely even in theaters or only had limited theatrical runs. So what qualifies really? If they meet the Academy's requirements and have some showings in theaters to justify the nomination process, then they have met the requirements.

Also, here's my other problem with what Spielberg said. A lot of the Academy voters don't even go to see these films in theaters! They are allowed to watch them on screeners. That's ridiculous. If that has to be a rule for Netflix features, then I want a rule that all Academy voters have to go to a theater for films that are eligible for votes.
 
A movie is a movie is a movie. Whatever qualifies one should qualify all. At the end of the day the Oscars (and Spielberg) need to adapt to modern filmmaking and filmgoing habits. If Netflix/Amazon etc is the future, why wouldn't you want to get on board?
 
Traditional business model vs the new one(s). Basically the old model is slowly dying and the new one is growing quick. Change is the price of survival so if the Oscars want to have any chance of staying relevant moving forward they'll embrace it all.
 
Well some filmmakers are very particular about their style and how they do things. Nolan for example only shoots on film, never say never, but he doesn't appear to be changing his mind anytime soon.

To me it's simply a matter of the AMPAS has requirements for films to become nominees. If a film meets those requirements, than it is eligible. If they change the rules, then it is no longer eligible. So why can't Netflix features receive the nominations if they meet the requirements?

Even if a movie made for TV can scrounge up the minimal distribution necessary for an Oscar nomination, those should also be allowed.
 
Netflix has gotten slack for their recent films lately, but they also written checks for:

Beasts of No Nation
Mudbound
Okja
New Scorsese project
Saved Annihilation from the scissors cut studio machine.

Them snobs can live in the past.

No they didn't. The producer had final cut and he gave final cut to Garland. Netflix just served as a dumping ground for the film when the studio decided it wasn't worth the risk to release internationally.
 
A movie is a movie is a movie. Whatever qualifies one should qualify all. At the end of the day the Oscars (and Spielberg) need to adapt to modern filmmaking and filmgoing habits. If Netflix/Amazon etc is the future, why wouldn't you want to get on board?

Oscar's qualifications are pretty minimal all things considered. The movies have to be above 60 minutes and they have to screen for one week in LA and NY.

Amazon has been more apt to commit to that and in general give most of their films fairly wide releases.

Netflix's CEO openly flouts the entire theatrical industry. With that being the case, why shouldn't the film industry regard his product primarily as TV?

Yeah that's stupid. A movie is a movie whether it is shown on the big screen or little screen. If it is good then it's good.

Okay but the Emmy's have their own TV movie award. No one seems to concerned that HBO's films aren't eligible for Oscars.
 
I think The Irishman has the potential to be the line in the sand. If Marty absolutely pushes for theatrical release and gets it to qualify for Oscar considerations, streaming will lose this battle for validity for a long time to come. If the movie doesn't get played in any theater and there's uproar that it is better than whatever wins Best Picture, or Best Director, or any other award, than I think we're looking at the same effect The Dark Knight had in 2008. It's March Madness, so I'll liken it to the 1974 ACC championship, and the direct effect that had on forcing the NCAA to allow more than one team per conference into the tournament.

Since we're still ahead of that tipping point and all we have right now is debate and conjecture, I'll just say that I agree with Steven. I believe in film as a theatrical medium, and would like to see that preserved for as long as possible. It's going to change, however, so I also don't see the sense in being ******** about giving nontheatrical mediums their due.
 
Last edited:
its funny when you realize that most oscar members watch dvd screeners on home tv's. and we know from leaked dvd screeners what the resolution is. less than fullHD. :lmao:
 
It's a silly argument IMO. Sometimes the big Oscar winners or nominees were barely even in theaters or only had limited theatrical runs. So what qualifies really? If they meet the Academy's requirements and have some showings in theaters to justify the nomination process, then they have met the requirements.

Also, here's my other problem with what Spielberg said. A lot of the Academy voters don't even go to see these films in theaters! They are allowed to watch them on screeners. That's ridiculous. If that has to be a rule for Netflix features, then I want a rule that all Academy voters have to go to a theater for films that are eligible for votes.

Exactly what I came to say.
 
It's a silly argument IMO. Sometimes the big Oscar winners or nominees were barely even in theaters or only had limited theatrical runs. So what qualifies really? If they meet the Academy's requirements and have some showings in theaters to justify the nomination process, then they have met the requirements.

Also, here's my other problem with what Spielberg said. A lot of the Academy voters don't even go to see these films in theaters! They are allowed to watch them on screeners. That's ridiculous. If that has to be a rule for Netflix features, then I want a rule that all Academy voters have to go to a theater for films that are eligible for votes.

Makes sense.
 
Man some of these old guard types are salty as hell about these streaming companies.

Most of them will bend the knee eventually because places like Netflix and Amazon are willing to put up cash for riskier mid-budget movies the major studios no longer want to bankroll.

The movie industry got overly protective and threatened by television as well back in the day.
 
I think The Irishman has the potential to be the line in the sand. If Marty absolutely pushes for theatrical release and gets it to qualify for Oscar considerations, streaming will lose this battle for validity for a long time to come. If the movie doesn't get played in any theater and there's uproar that it is better than whatever wins Best Picture, or Best Director, or any other award, than I think we're looking at the same effect The Dark Knight had in 2008. It's March Madness, so I'll liken it to the 1974 ACC championship, and the direct effect that had on forcing the NCAA to allow more than one team per conference into the tournament.

Since we're still ahead of that tipping point and all we have right now is debate and conjecture, I'll just say that I agree with Stephen. I believe in film as a theatrical medium, and would like to see that preserved for as long as possible. It's going to change, however, so I also don't see the sense in being ******** about giving nontheatrical mediums their due.

Just pushing for Oscar qualification isn't that big of a hurdle. You only have to play in NY and LA for one week, which Netflix does with several of its films like Mudbound, which received a few nominations this year.

Man some of these old guard types are salty as hell about these streaming companies.

Most of them will bend the knee eventually because places like Netflix and Amazon are willing to put up cash for riskier mid-budget movies the major studios no longer want to bankroll.

The movie industry got overly protective and threatened by television as well back in the day.

Amazon hasn't garnered the same kind of negative attention that Netflix has mostly through high quality control and also committing to actually releasing most of their films in fairly wide distribution.

I know I'm far more excited when I hear a project gets picked up by Amazon than I am by Netflix as most of Amazon's movies play theatrically in St. Louis.
 
As long as they have that qualifying theater run I dont see why he or anyone cares.

If they're released straight to Netflix with no run like say Clovefield Paradox then it shouldn't be eligible.

But that's how it's always been.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
201,996
Messages
22,052,004
Members
45,848
Latest member
Spastermcamb
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"