Academy squeezing out Apple TV+ movies with new Oscar rules

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV

Rules that can impact the ability for Apple TV+ movies to be entered into the Academy Awards have been formalized, in a move to make it harder for streaming services to qualify and win a Best Picture Oscar.

The cast of 'CODA' at the Oscars, as posted to Twitter by Tim Cook
The cast of 'CODA' at the Oscars, as posted to Twitter by Tim Cook



Apple has achieved considerable success at the Academy Awards, with multiple wins including Best Picture for "Coda" in 2022. However, rule changes that were floated earlier in the year that could make it tougher for films by streaming services to be included have now been codified by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

Under current rules, a qualifying run is for a one-week theatrical release in one of six U.S. cities. From the 97th Academy Awards for films released in 2024, the rules will change.

For a start, there has to be the initial qualifying run of one week in one of six cities, but then it has to be followed by an expanded theatrical run of seven days in ten of the top 50 U.S. markets no later than 45 days after the initial release.

For late-in-the-year films with expansions after January 10, 2025, distributors are required to submit their release plans for verification by the Academy. Those release plans must also include a planned expanded theatrical run to be completed by January 24, 2025.

In the case of non-U.S. territory releases, they can count towards two of the 10 required markets. The qualifying non-U.S. markets include the top 15 international markets, as well as the home territory of the film itself.

"As we do every year, we have been reviewing and assessing our theatrical eligibility requirements for the Oscars," said Academy CEO Bill Kramer and Academy President Janet Yang. "In support of our mission to celebrate and honor the arts and sciences of moviemaking, it is our hope that this expanded theatrical footprint will increase the visibility of films worldwide and encourage audiences to experience our artform in a theatrical setting."

The rule changes only apply to the Best Picture award, with eligibility for individual disciplines remaining unchanged.

The rule structure, and the commentary of the Academy CEO, doesn't really impact traditional film studios that rely on theatrical releases instead of straight-to-streaming releases. Though Apple does already implement theatrical releases for its movies, it could make such release programs more expensive or tougher to produce than at present.

It may also be an issue for streaming service viewership, as there would be an incentive to encourage watching via a theater to justify the cost and distribution of the film. This would mean fewer views for the film on streaming services themselves.

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 17
    XedXed Posts: 2,860member
    Overall I find any requirement for a theatrical release silly, but this extra hurdle isn't even close to being insurmountable. An extra 7 day run in the top 10 cities isn't a big deal in terms of cost or logistics. This doesn't really impact the online viewership, either, because any Oscar worthy level content would likely gain via word of mouth more streaming viewers from someone having seen it in a theater.
    edited June 2023 bonobobwatto_cobraMeteortht
  • Reply 2 of 17
    Are streaming movies qualified to compete for Emmy awards as TV movies have always been able to do?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 17
    AppleishAppleish Posts: 711member
    We stopped going to theaters years ago, even before the pandemic. People treat the experience like they are in their living rooms (talking, using their phones, horse playing, etc...).

    We put together a home theater with a big Dolby Vision capable screen and a 13 channel Dolby Atmos sound system.

    Don't miss theaters at all.
    edited June 2023 mobirdiOS_Guy80watto_cobrakkqd1337lollivermagman1979FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 4 of 17
    badmonkbadmonk Posts: 1,328member
    They better be careful with decisions like this, the reality is that movie watching is being uncoupled from the theater experience.  The academy awards have been on a downward slide of relevance and decisions like this seem to be more about protecting their theater business than promoting access.  In the end, the larger forces of technology and culture will prevail over their self-serving decisions.
    tmaywatto_cobraradarthekatMeteorlolliver
  • Reply 5 of 17
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,571member
    I love cinemas and the movie-going experience generally, especially with film festivals and theatrical “revivals” of previous films, but also when a compelling new film comes around.

    That said, the Apple Vision Pro is going to do at least as much damage to traditional cinemas as streaming services and “home theatres” have done. Technically, you can view a film on a bigger screen than any non-drive-in could possibly manage, and with better sound and your popcorn just how you like it. :)

    For those poo-pooing the cinema experience, get your head out of your … er, multiplex … and find one of the old-fashioned cinema palaces of bygone days, like the Fox Theatre in Atlanta or similar. I’ve seen films there including some silent classics with live orchestral or choral accompaniement … now THAT is an experience you will never forget.
    iOS_Guy80watto_cobraJP234dewmewilliamlondonkurai_kageSpitbathFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 6 of 17
    AlanWynnAlanWynn Posts: 23member
    If Amazon or Apple decide they care, they will just abide by the rules. Unlike NetFlix which needs to make money from streaming, neither Amazon nor Apple care about making money on this content. However, none of them need to make money from the theatrical release, and would just treat it as a cost of marketing.

    They will also use these as locations for Guild “For Your Consideration” screenings, so it is not even that much of an expense (they have a public screening early in the evening followed by a screening with a reception for one or more of the guilds later in the evening).
    edited June 2023
  • Reply 7 of 17
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,901moderator
    So will the academy add a huge asterisk next to future winners?

    Best Picture: [movie name]*

    this may not actually be the best movie
    Meteorkkqd1337
  • Reply 8 of 17
    AlanWynnAlanWynn Posts: 23member
    So will the academy add a huge asterisk next to future winners?

    Best Picture: [movie name]*

    this may not actually be the best movie
    What makes you think that any winner was ever the best movie? To be considered, one always had to follow rules, this is less onerous than the “diversity” rules that they put in place primarily to benefit the major studios (much easier for them to follow than for smaller independent productions) while claiming to foster “diversity”.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 9 of 17
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,297member
    What chaps my hide is when "patriot" factions attempt to restrict my right to vote. Or my eligibility to vote by mail ballot.

    I am in another country where the right to the franchise is protected by enrolment, verification when voting, including preventing serial voting. I  find the whole process in the US shambolic and ripe for abuse, almost like it is designed that way. 
    Of course you should have to prove who you are and registered to vote before so doing.  An absolute no brainer. Mail in voting happens a lot in my country, but must be accompanied by evidence of who voted and marked off the roll to prevent voting more than once. Which of course requires up to date, electronic electoral rolls. Before every major election there is a campaign to get everyone registered and their records on the roll up to date a few weeks before the voting day to ensure the rolls are as up to date as possible come voting day. If you aren’t, well tough. You aren’t voting. Make sure you are registered for next time.
    The franchise is precious. And only those eligible should have it.
    williamlondonFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 10 of 17
    XedXed Posts: 2,860member
    AlanWynn said:
    So will the academy add a huge asterisk next to future winners?

    Best Picture: [movie name]*

    this may not actually be the best movie
    What makes you think that any winner was ever the best movie? To be considered, one always had to follow rules, this is less onerous than the “diversity” rules that they put in place primarily to benefit the major studios (much easier for them to follow than for smaller independent productions) while claiming to foster “diversity”.
    Because it was the best movie. Full stop. There were also countless other best movies based on countless other ways to devise how you come to this conclusion, including whatever movie you personally pick as best.

    To be considered the best is a loose descriptor and opinion. It's not saying that you'll think it's the best picture of the entire year. It's saying that the Academy Awards have determined it is the best picture of the year. 

    Even IMDb lists awards under an opinion category.



    For the year 2022, the Academy Awards felt that Everything Everywhere All At Once was worthy of the best picture of the year, while for BAFTA that was merely a nominee with All Quiet on the Western Front being the best film of the year.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 11 of 17
    kkqd1337kkqd1337 Posts: 464member
    Apple should just turn 10 of their stores into ‘theatres’ for a week. 
    kurai_kage
  • Reply 12 of 17
    XedXed Posts: 2,860member
    kkqd1337 said:
    Apple should just turn 10 of their stores into ‘theatres’ for a week. 
    I wonder if there are rules about what defines a theater, the size of the theater, and ow often there is a showing in that week (and now 2 weeks).
  • Reply 13 of 17
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,568member
    kkqd1337 said:
    Apple should just turn 10 of their stores into ‘theatres’ for a week. 
    Yeah, but with blackjack and hookers!
    williamlondonkkqd1337
  • Reply 14 of 17
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,718member
    badmonk said:
    They better be careful with decisions like this, the reality is that movie watching is being uncoupled from the theater experience.  The academy awards have been on a downward slide of relevance and decisions like this seem to be more about protecting their theater business than promoting access.  In the end, the larger forces of technology and culture will prevail over their self-serving decisions.
    Aren’t all awards, prizes, award shows, halls of fame, etc., at some level, designed to promote, attract, and encourage broader appeal for the subjects, causes, and interests that they serve? Of course it is in their own self interest to support and preserve everything within their domains and ecosystems, including partners and outlets, that they believe contributes to their overarching cause.

    The movie industry has always been extremely supportive and proactive around adopting and taking advantage of the many benefits of emerging technology in the creation (e,g., CGI, animation, computer based editing) and delivery of content in different formats (e.g., VCR tapes, laser disks, DVDs, streaming). They are obviously not yet ready to totally write-off the traditional theater going experience, not quite yet, so they are trying to preserve as much of it going for as long as they can by providing incentives for movie studios to continue to support those traditional outlets and to serve a (dwindling) market of movie goers who don’t subscribe to streaming services as well as those who enjoy the theater experience.

    The form and method of the incentives used for preservation of the traditional movie outlets may seem heavy handed, but what other cards does the Academy have to play, other than controlling eligibility in what is actually a very narrow category? What they’ve imposed seems quite innocuous for the studios who really care about competing for the award.
    FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 15 of 17
    croffordcrofford Posts: 98member
    JP234 said:
    I couldn't care less what self-congratulating award ceremonies do to restrict eligibility. I'm going to watch what interests me.

    What chaps my hide is when "patriot" factions attempt to restrict my right to vote. Or my eligibility to vote by mail ballot.
    I agree, I think voting should be decided by whichever side cheats the best.  That apartment complex down the street that has four floors has magically become a 30 floor complex and all of those additional floor have already registered with my preferred party and are queued up to vote for my chosen candidate.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 16 of 17
    interesting, but I’m pretty sure Apple TV+ already has many films that would qualify for Oscar consideration under these new rules. they have been among the most theatrical-release-friendly of all the streamers.
    kurai_kage
Sign In or Register to comment.