ScriptOhio;1099918; said:
It's all about the money. I believe in a "conspiracy theory" here. They don't need to nominate the popular shows because you have already seen them. They nominate shows that you haven't seen (i. e. not made much money or are still in the "red") so you will spend more money and to go see them.
I found this article:
Oscar Contenders Cashed In at Box Office
There's good reason why the Academy gets thanked so much at the Oscars.
From Jan. 22, the day this year's Oscar nominations were announced, through Sunday, the five Best Picture hopefuls combined to gross a blockbuster-esque $111 million, per numbers crunched by Box Office Mojo.
"This year, I think, the movies were better primed to take advantage of the awareness raised by the Oscars," the site's Brandon Gray said Sunday.
Juno, the biggest hit of the Best Picture pack, was the biggest postnominations movie, adding an estimated $43.3 million to its nine-figure haul.
But even
Michael Clayton, a disappointment when it opened last fall, managed to tack on nearly $10 million and bring its overall take to just under $50 million.
Then there was
There Will Be Blood, which made 75 percent of its overall $35 million after Jan. 22. Per Box Office Mojo, that's the best such performance since a little 1982 Best Picture hopeful called
The Dresser did nearly 90 percent of its business after the nominations came out.
Entire article:
E! News - Oscar Contenders Cashed In at Box Office - Jack Black | Larry the Cable Guy
)
