menu_open Columnists
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close

The Oscars aren’t a meritocracy – there’s a complex formula for winning

14 0
10.03.2026

Every January, Hollywood is overtaken by a massive Oscar prediction game, with studios, critics and commentators all playing a role in shaping the debate.

But choosing a winner is more complicated than acknowledging a film’s artistic merit. The Oscars are decided on by a large peer group of some 10,000 Academy members, who confidentially vote for their colleagues in their specialised field. All eligible members, however, can vote on Best Picture.

In an era where nearly every major film is carefully packaged and marketed for profit, predicting an Oscar winner seems like a complex science.

The most crucial way a film positions itself as a contender relates to its status as a “prestige” picture. This is earned through highbrow themes, strategic release timing, critical acclaim, and plenty of lobbying.

What gives a film prestige?

Prestige pictures typically examine subjects that hit a nerve with Academy voters, such as injustice, intense relationships, and the triumph of the human spirit.

This thematic preoccupation is amply demonstrated through previous Best Picture winners including The King’s Speech (2010), 12 Years A Slave (2013), Philadelphia (1993) and Schindler’s List (1993). The only recent winner that seemed to deliberately reject such tropes was No Country for Old Men (2007).

This year’s top contenders also have these recognisable tropes. Hamnet, for instance, focuses on the misfortunes of William Shakespeare’s tragic family........

© The Conversation