Oskars transition to tournament-style voting process branded ‘March Sadness’

In a Monday press conference, Academy of Moving Pictures Across Your Little Screen President Cineema Isded suggested the Oskars are planning to switch things up.

Isded remarked that “while the Oskars are worthless from a revenue perspective, without the validation provided by them, the industry would be lost.” According to Isded, plummeting Oskars viewership has made the industry self-conscious and even led them to believe that “as ludicrous as it sounds, the American public may think there are things more important than the Oskars, like having health care or a job.”

To increase viewership and salvage the Academy’s feelings, the Oskars turned to March Madness for inspiration. After all, Isded said, “at a time when audiences have found our format stale and uninteresting, the obvious solution is to copy someone else’s work rather than try to revitalize our own content with something innovative and original.”

The new format, dubbed “March Sadness,” will take the form of an elimination contest with pairwise voting. A total of 64 films will be nominated for each award — which Isded said would “let us make the awards seem more diverse” — and will then compete in a set of six successive voting rounds until an ultimate winner is crowned. The process will take around two weeks, though the results of the final vote will not be revealed until an official ceremony months later. This way, the Oskars can generate sustained interest from the American public and still get all dressed up for their big, lavish party where they get to take lots of pictures and give the everyday citizens something fun to watch from afar.

However, while the public will long be left in the dark, winners will be informed in advance. Isded said the change is because “we care less about authentic reactions than we do about poise and well-prepared speeches.” 

The world at large will also be allowed to vote in the competition, a change from the current system where only the Academy gets a say. However, their votes will be weighted differently, which Isded attributed to the fact that “we don’t trust the hoi polloi to truly understand what makes a good movie. After all, none of them went to expensive film schools or had a rich parent who could subsidize them while they broke into the movie business.”

The move is not without its critics, however. A member of the Academy, granted anonymity due to fears of tarnishing his nepo baby clout, voiced his concern that “nominating a larger swath of films could encourage the movie-going public to watch a larger variety of movies instead of just the ones we push on them.” Another remarked that “any amount of voice given to non-Academy members is too much. After all, how can we trust them to pick the movies we already decided would win when no one actually likes those ones?”

Despite the controversy, the decision has won the support of enough Academy members to move forward. Isded attributed this support to “the beauty of the idea,” while also mentioning that he sweetened the bargain by allowing the Academy to auction off 48 of the 64 nominations to the highest bidders in exchange for the “Academy Award Nominee” label. These funds will be used to provide every Academy member with their very own weekend allowance.