In 2011 The King's Speech, probably one of the most Oscar-friendly films of the
last twenty years took home the prize for Best Picture. "The King's Speech!"
It was well-regarded amongst critics and audiences around the country but was it hands down
the best film of the year? Was it good enough to beat out nine other films that
were considered more daring and unique?
back in 2009 the Academy switched from a straight popular vote to instant runoff
voting or preferential voting. The Academy wanted to better ensure that the film
with the broadest support won, but the other side of that coin is that bold
polarizing films get pushed to the side. At its most basic level, instant runoff
voting involves ranking a number of choices rather than choosing just one
Then, the choice with the fewest votes is removed and then those votes for that
candidate have their votes counted according to their second favorite
candidate. Then the candidate that has the fewest votes is removed and so on.
It goes all the way until a candidate has 50% plus one of the vote. This applies to
both the nominations process although that does get a little weedy and the
process of selecting a best-picture winner. So, how would instant runoff voting
ultimately play out in a real-life scenario? Let's look at 2011 where the King's Speech
beat out 127 Hours, The Fighter, Black Swan, Winter's Bone, True Grit, Inception, Toy
Story 3, The Social Network, and The Kids Are Alright. All these films were probably
first place picks on a lot of ballots and dead last on others. It's very possible
that the passionate fan bases of each of these films all had The King's Speech
ranked second or third. When their first place vote wasn't enough to stay in the
game their second-place votes were counted and re-added to the mix
ultimately allowing The King's Speech to come from behind. Because The King's
Speech had the broadest support rather than the most passionate support it took
home the prize. "Wow, what an incredible, incredible honor." The new voting system
seems to favor a certain type of film. "We've had instant runoff voting at the
Oscars for six years.
Fully half of those years have been won by movies about the movies. And I would
count The King's Speech as being sort of adjacent to that. The King's Speech is about about getting
training and speech in elocution and all things that actors have to go through."
Think Birdman, Argo, The Artist. The Academy this year is made of 6,291
film industry professionals who probably enjoy movies about
themselves. They might not rank a film about show business as number one but many
might place it second or third which is precisely where it's most dangerous.
In 2005 before instant runoff voting with instituted Crash won best picture.
"And the Oscar goes to Crash."
It's a film people either despise or love. "I think we really want those movies
that inspire extreme reactions one way or the other.
Sometimes the movie wins that you hate but sometimes the movie wins that you
love, and I'd rather see that than a movie that everybody was just kind of okay with. "
In fact Crash beat out the film that might have easily won in today's instant runoff system: a
period film about entertainment, directed by Hollywood royalty George Clooney.
"Good night, and good luck."