Jump to content

Talk:Oscar bait

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Refimprove

[edit]

I've tagged this for refimprove; we need sources (preferably multiple for each film named) saying that it was Oscar bait for these reasons. It's not enough to say "source says historical films are Oscar bait, Shakespeare In Love is a historical film, therefore it is Oscar bait" - that sort of syllogism is WP:OR. –Roscelese (talkcontribs) 17:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This can be much better

[edit]

Properly developed, this article could be as rich as (tooting my own horn alert) dump months. There's a lot of interesting discussion in the cited sources. We could have a lot more than just lists of films here. I think we have a shot at a DYK nomination if we act fast. Daniel Case (talk) 03:34, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possible earliest use

[edit]

This New York Times article from 1955. Beats the 1968 one we have at Wiktionary. Can someone look behind the paywall? Daniel Case (talk) 05:21, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Beat it. The New Republic in 1948 [1]. Daniel Case (talk) 05:29, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I beat that one too, here are some 1942 mentions: [2][3] (subscription is required to view full pages but can't do anything about that) Tehonk (talk) 01:49, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of films considered "Oscar bait"

[edit]

Is the list of Oscar bait films that failed to receive nominations truly needed? My reasoning is that it reveals little about the meaning of Oscar bait, its characteristics, etc. It can also give the impression that films perceived as Oscar bait never actually win anything (and there have been, i.e. Shakespeare in Love, Green Book, All Quiet on the Western Front, etc). I expect the list will get longer, and it is already such a specific topic.

Also, the list is almost word-for-word a list of episodes from the podcast This Had Oscar Buzz. The list could simply be removed and replaced with a reference for the podcast. @Espngeek Spectrallights (talk) 15:49, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least, as the main contributor to this article, I think it could be spun off into a separate list, as it has the potential to get very long. Daniel Case (talk) 18:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar bait list

[edit]

I'm bringing this up again, but is the List of films considered "Oscar bait" that failed to earn any Oscar nominations section truly warranted in this article? The article is ostensibly to explain the concept of Oscar bait, its usage and history in awards culture, which it already did without the list. The list itself reads more as trivia without actually being informative of what is considered Oscar bait. By focusing on shutouts, the list gives the inaccurate impression that Oscar bait-type films do not win, when there has been much considerable bait (i.e. Shakespeare in Love, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, Green Book) that not only managed to get nominated but even won major categories.

Furthermore, it appears that any film that had/has a degree of buzz but failed to score nominations is being added to the list. Sources are provided, but they are usually from listicle-type articles mostly noting shutouts on nomination day. Any film that gets shut out will commonly be referred to as "Oscar bait" by entertainment news websites, listicles, or content mills, but does that justify their inclusion in the article? The sources themselves are not about the concept of Oscar bait, it's just a passing mention. Thus, the list veers into WP:OR and WP:SYNTHESIS.

To @Espngeek and others who created the list, I propose removing it. The use of sources to infer a conclusion not directly stated by the sources (which there are examples of here and here) is a violation of WP:SYNTH. Spectrallights (talk) 16:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Come See the Paradise, a 1990 WWII film about Japanese internment camps which failed to get nominated in any category, was mentioned as Oscar bait according to a study done by UCLA and would you consider that a passing mention? Espngeek (talk) 16:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Come See the Paradise was already discussed in the article before the list was incorporated. Again, my concern is about the list. Spectrallights (talk) 16:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted it already, so you don't have to worry about it again. Espngeek (talk) 16:53, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]