Oscar nominees 'Moonlight,' 'Manchester' will screen in more theaters – do Oscar nods help bottom line?

Multiple best picture nominees will be screening in more theaters now that they've received Oscar nods. Can awards season attention help a film's box office success, too?

David Bornfriend/A24/AP
'Moonlight' stars Alex Hibbert.

Films including “Moonlight” and “La La Land,” both of which received multiple major Oscar nominations including nominations for best picture and for some of their actors, will screen in more theaters following the Academy Award nominations announcement. Will the attention from the Oscars benefit their box office results?

Several of the movies nominated for the best picture Oscar will be appearing in more theaters in the future. “Moonlight,” which received a limited release on Oct. 21, will expand the amount of theaters in which it’s screening on Jan. 27. Also increasing the amount of theaters where moviegoers can find them will be “La La Land,” “Manchester by the Sea,” and “Arrival,” all of which were nominated for best picture.

Studios are of course considering the financial implications of a plan like this, and so they are likely guessing that more moviegoers will be aware of these films after they received Oscar nods and will want to seek them out. 

Can receiving Oscar nominations help a movie that would otherwise perform on a small scale at the box office?

Variety writers Dave McNary and Brent Lang are guessing that films such as “La La Land,” “Moonlight,” and “Lion” (also a best picture contender) will see an increase in revenue after the Oscar nods.

“Oscar nominations can be worth their weigh in gold,” Mr. McNary and Mr. Lang wrote. “…For art films, Oscar attention can turbocharge ticket sales.”

However, the movies that are nominated for the best picture Oscar are often ones that gross less than the biggest Hollywood hits. For example, last year’s best picture winner, “Spotlight,” came in at number 62 for the ranking of the highest-grossing films released in 2015 domestically.

The nominees last year did include box office hits such as “The Martian,” for example, which was the eighth-highest-grossing film of the year domestically. 

But the winners are often the lesser-grossing films, as pointed out by Fortune writer Chris Lee last year following the win by “Spotlight.” “In recent years, the statuette has gone home with lesser-seen movies, often from off the mainstream radar – offbeat or 'prestige' titles that captured the imagination of Academy voters if not the American public – to the near-total exclusion of big budget Hollywood blockbusters,” Mr. Lee wrote. 

And “Spotlight” actually made more at the box office than the best picture winner the previous year, “Birdman.” A recent exception to this was 2013 best picture winner “Argo,” which was also the twenty-second-highest-grossing film of the year, grossing more than $136 million domestically.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.