The Oscars are the same every year, and there are always controversies after the awards, and it will take a while to make trouble, and the biggest controversy this year is the Academy's disdain for blockbusters, especially science fiction films.

Ever since Clint Eastwood's Million Dollar Baby in '05, the Oscars have always seemed to be sending a signal that we're going to give more credit to smaller films.

The cost of "Million Dollar Baby" in the 77th class is 30 million US dollars, the 78th "Crash" is 6.5 million, the 79th "Infernal Affairs" is 90 million, the 80th "No Country for Old Men" will never exceed 5000, the 81st "Slumdog Millionaire" is 35 million, and the 82nd "Bomb Disposal Unit" is 15 million. Of these, only the best late film awarded to Martin Scorsese was a major production, and the rest were all small- and medium-budget films.

The four films nominated in the same year as "Infernal Affairs", "Babel", "Letter from Iwo Jima", "Queen", and "Little Sunshine Beauty" are all low-cost and small-production films. The same has happened with the nominations for other Oscars, such as Juno, Milk, La Vie en Rose, and Good Night, Good Luck, among others.

Of course, the amount of these funds is not the whole problem, they are only the most direct reflection of such a phenomenon from one side. On the screen, we don't see the money behind the film, but we do see actors that not everyone knows, and at the beginning and end of the film, we see the names of directors that not everyone knows.

And where have the big productions and famous productions that have attracted countless eyeballs in the past year gone. Gone are the Oscar days when the Golden Man awarded Best Picture to "Braveheart", "Forrest Gump", "Titanic", "Gladiator" and "The Lord of the Rings 3" and "The Dark Knight".

Does the academy mean to shift its focus from big-budget films to small-scale productions? In recent years, the poor performance of Hollywood blockbusters in film art is the real reason why they did not win the Oscars.

Cinema is a product of science, but cinema, as the eighth art of mankind, is essentially an art. A good film work should be a profound reproduction of the human spirit, even if it is the dark side of human nature, regardless of the scale of its production. Such films will continue to be pursued by future generations many years later.

Braveheart, a major production that won the Oscar for Best Picture, has always carried out the spirit of freedom throughout its 177-minute film. From Wallace's secret wedding, to the uprising, to the war, to the final execution, the whole story is in the service of the theme of freedom, and is sublimated in the climax of the film.

Wallace is dead, but the desire for freedom still prompts the chanting, "Freedom!" Another example is the Oscar Best Film "Titanic", the expression of love and human emotions in the face of death shines with the brilliance of human nature.

However, recent blockbusters have made their spiritual themes part of the film's gimmick, serving the storyline, not the other way around. In "Spider-Man", which helped Sony make a lot of money in the past few years, Peter Parker has to say from time to time "The greater the ability, the greater the responsibility!" can be regarded as the spiritual theme of the film. And this kind of smooth theme is just a must-have spice for Hollywood fast food movies, not a factor worth thinking about and moving.

And like this year's blockbuster "Avatar", it can be said to be the culmination of Hollywood fast food movies. The anti-aggression theme of its primitive culture only sets up a thin spiritual framework that underpins the film. Kevin Costner's "Dances with Wolves" in 1991 pioneered this fresh theme, and it has been used as a cliché since today's Avatar.

Cinema is definitely an art, not a science. If Hollywood blockbusters are still focused solely on entertainment and special effects, then on the Oscar stage there will only be the destruction of Hollywood blockbusters.

However, the ratings of the 82nd Academy Awards soared to the highest level in five years. In the past five years, the total number of viewers has exceeded 40 million on two occasions, and this year's 41 million viewers have risen sharply for the second time since the lowest point in 2006. This year's 3% increase from last year's 39 million is also the highest in recent years since 2008, when the audience reached 42.1 million (Mark's year).

The fact that the Oscars have achieved such good results in recent years is a continuation of the recent strong ratings of TV shows. Last month, not only did the Super Bowl get a record 106.5 million viewers, but the Grammy Awards also achieved the best result in 6 years, with 25.9 million viewers tuning in to watch the ceremony that night, in addition, the Quanmi Music Awards also achieved their best ratings of 14.29 million in 7 years, and the ratings of the Golden Globe Awards were also good.

The reason why the most discussed Oscars ceremony can achieve good ratings is the increase in nominations, more nominated films have helped the awards ceremony attract more audiences, not only box office blockbusters like "Flying House" and "Avatar" have been nominated, but also films like "Warm Rugby" have also been nominated, which has increased the audience's interest in watching this awards ceremony.

In addition to the great efforts of the organizers in nominating films, in order to attract audiences under the age of 35 to watch the awards ceremony, the organizers invited a group of stars such as Miley Cyrus, Zac Efron, Taylor Lott and other stars who are very popular among young people.

Tom Sherrac, the current president of the Academy, was the main driver behind the expansion of the nominations for Best Picture. Scherak said he was very satisfied with the award ceremony and the ratings achieved, and said in an interview with the media: " I think expanding the number of nominations for Best Picture will definitely do more harm than good, but no one can predict whether the new rules will be right or wrong in the first year of implementation, and the Academy has given us a wider selection of films, which has helped the Oscars attract a wider audience, and if you think these films are really great and most of the titles can be blurted out, then hopefully you will create more discussion. ”

Despite the overall improvement in viewership across the country, New York's Oscar ratings were slightly lower than last year's. This is due to the fact that ABC's ABC TV station in New York is competing with the local cable station, and nearly 3 million people cannot watch ABC's program, and it was not until 8:44 p.m. that the cable station was able to connect to the broadcast signal of the awards ceremony that night, so many viewers thought that the station would not broadcast the program and switched to other channels. This directly affected New York's failure to win the Oscar title for the second consecutive year, with Chicago, West Palm Beach, Boston, Kansas City and San Francisco topping the ratings this year. Viewership in Los Angeles is also up from last year.

Once again, the duration of this year's Oscars was in the spotlight, with the three-and-a-half-hour ceremony not ending until 12 midnight.

Given the length of the Barbara Walters Oscar Special, which aired before the ceremony, the organizers considered the possibility of bringing the start of the ceremony at least half an hour earlier.

Tom Schirak said it was a bit early to decide how long the next Oscars would be, but it was certain that the show should be as short as possible, "I personally love the three-hour ceremony, but more importantly we want to leave an impressive night for our audience, so it's not a good idea to have a 2 hour and 58 minutes that all the staff like."

According to ABC television, their "Barbara Walters Oscar Special," which aired before the awards ceremony this year, lasted for an hour from 7 p.m., rising to 15 million viewers from 11.6 million last year, the best result in eight years.

After that, the red carpet session held from 8 o'clock to 8:30 o'clock attracted a total of 25.1 million viewers, which is also the best result in the past three years. After the awards ceremony, the program "Jimmy Kimmel Live: After the Oscars" also achieved the best results in the last four years.

Despite the improvement in overall ratings for the whole meter, the Oscar ratings in New York are slightly lower than last year's. This is due to the fact that ABC's ABC TV station in New York is competing with the local cable station, and nearly 3 million people cannot watch ABC's program, and it was not until 8:44 p.m. that the cable station was able to connect to the broadcast signal of the awards ceremony that night, so many viewers thought that the station would not broadcast the program and switched to other channels.

This directly affected New York's failure to win the Oscar title for the second consecutive year, with Chicago, West Palm Beach, Boston, Kansas City and San Francisco topping the ratings this year. Viewership in Los Angeles is also up from last year.

The timing of the Oscars has always been a big issue for the officials.

At the 74th Academy Awards in 2002, host Uffi Goldberg said: "Tonight's awards will probably last until dawn tomorrow, but it will be shorter than explaining Mulholland Drive." ”

For this reason, the Oscars emphasize every year that the winner's speech should not exceed 45 seconds, and the accompanying music is becoming more and more arrogant, such as the 77th actress Hilas Swank standing on the stage and not leaving, suggesting that the music is actually a classic ending song, "The Magnificent Seven", which forced her off the stage, but the effect is still limited.

This year, the academy finally made a ruthless move, and the ceremony was unprecedentedly crazy to lose weight, and after kicking out the honorable mention ceremony, the live singing of the best song nomination was also taken away.

As a result, we will no longer see Beyoncé's amazing performance of singing five songs in a row, or scenes such as the Indian man singing and dancing in "Slumdog Millionaire", and even Björk will not be able to stand on stage even if he dresses himself up as a turkey next time.