What people don't realize is that "Oscar bait" films aren't released in November and December (if only limited) so they have a better chance at winning Oscar awards; it's that they feel their movies are so good that as long as it gets Oscar-like attention, they want to reap the benefits and get people to go to the theater.
I wouldn't think twice about going to some of the potential Oscar nominees if they were released in March and April, not because they aren't good but because there wouldn't be any Oscar hype surrounding it because it's not during the season. Note that they would still be nominees by the time the season rolls around, but they won't generate more box-office revenue because people didn't go while it was hyped to be what it might deserve to win.
For example, if Lady Bird or something sweeps the Oscars, it would have still swept the Oscars if it was released in March. It would see significantly lower box office numbers, though. Case in point, I wonder if Interstellar made as much money as it did strictly because of possible Oscar hype, or if it was more because it was Nolan (and a good film, etc.).
It's a pretty weird situation, Debruge gave Dunkirk a perfect score and called it a cinematic achievement, while giving Get Out a 9/10. Now guess which one of those titles ended up in his top ten list.£
Master Virgo wrote:It's a pretty weird situation, Debruge gave Dunkirk a perfect score and called it a cinematic achievement, while giving Get Out a 9/10. Now guess which one of those titles ended up in his top ten list.£
Ah politics. It's such a silly thing isn't it?
EDIT: Just checked, Dunkirk didn't even make his "honorable mention." Wtf?