"The rules change could help some of this year's contenders, such as Star Trek, which otherwise could be overlooked for consideration."

Uh, no! ST was good, really good, but it wasn't, IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM, that good.

They may get nominated but does that mean they deserve to win? If Dark Knight had been nominated does that mean it should beat films like Slumdog Millionaire or Milk? As much as I liked Dark Knight, my answer would be no.

This is the same academy that voted Titanic over Good Will Hunting - so anything could happen!

However, if a genre film deserves it (Lord of the Rings) then it will probably get it.

Genre movies have been nominated for best picture before, even as early as "The Wizard of Oz", and of course "Return of the King" was the first genre film to actually win. I'm not sure how much this is going to level to playing field anymore than before. There's EASILY 10 times more sappy drama's that get released every year than there are sci-fi or fantasy films, so this is only going to make it easier for the Academy to include those extra "real-world" movies that wouldn't have a chance otherwise. As we all know the real world is much more "respectable" and praise-worthy than any flighty imaginative non-sense, right?

Science fiction movies almost never win Oscars. They just don't. I'm not sure whether Star Trek deserves one or not, but it's almost impossible that it would receive one. Even after the overwhelming critical acclaim for this latest film, the stigma against Star Trek still remains very great.

This assumes that the Oscars still mean anything, which they don't after 1. Star Wars snubbed for Annie Hall, 2. Ron Howard snubbed for director of Apollo 13, and 3. Dark Knight not nominated.

This assumes that the Oscars still mean anything, which they don't after 1. Star Wars snubbed for Annie Hall, 2. Ron Howard snubbed for director of Apollo 13, and 3. Dark Knight not nominated.

No it doesnt matter if they expanded this to 50 entries, sci-fi will never truly be accepted in Hollywood. Sci-fi (or how about the comic book genre movies) are like the red-headed step child of the movie universe. It could be the absolute best comic book or sci fi movie of all time and it would still not win. Its just how it is.

Let's face it. The Academy will now nominate 10 films no one has ever seen. Rather than the usual five. Their snobbish attitude will still be prevalent, just bigger now.

"Star Wars snubbed for Annie Hall"?!?! Seriously? I really don't see where any SW film could have ever been in the running for best picture -- seems like a fluke that it was even nominated in the first place. (And BTW I happen to love SW as well as Annie Hall.)

I loved Abrams's ST, but the idea that it should be in the running for best picture is kind of a joke to me.

BTW I think we tend to forget that SW is NOT sci-fi, nor has it ever been sci-fi. SW is space fiction and a form of fantasy; there is no "science" in this fiction @ all. This doesn't take away from SW's greatness; I'm simply stating that the category doesn't fit. (And I just reminded myself of John Hodgeman's geek-nerd-jock distinctions this past weekend!)

Sci Fi movies that should have been considered in the past:
BladeRunner
Matrix
Empire Strikes Back
T2
Alien

I'm sure there's a lot more that I'm not thinking of.

Also, Titanic SHOULD have beat GWH. Every best pic has some flaws, but on the whole, well deserved.

Or it just means we get even more indepedent films up for Best Picture, and genre is still snubbed.

Jesus....thats it. I have totally, completely had it with Sci-Fi Wire now. There's been a noticeable decline in the intelligence of "reporting" in recent weeks, but its obvious that the page is clearly being written by a 12 year old now. Star Trek nominated for a best picture Oscar?

Hasta la vista. losers.

I agree with Temmeth. Something fishy is going on with Sci-Fi Wire and this constant bleating on about the Trek film to the point of absurdity. I'm can't help but feel that they're being paid by Paramount to do it. After all, we know Paramount blew an absolute ton of money on promoting the thing....perhaps this is where some of it went.

A Clockwork Orange, Star Wars, Raiders Of The Lost Ark, ET, Apollo 13, and the whole Lord of the Rings Trilogy (including 1 win) were all nominated for the Best Picture Oscar. It's not like genre pictures never get nominated, but most Hollywood sci-fi is junk. Particularly the new Star Trek film.

It mentioned Star Trek as an example is all. Way to blow it way out of proportion.

Nobody talks about ST winning the Oscar. But a nomination, why not? Especially this year it could get a nomination due lack of competition. Half of the year is over but I would have no idea which five movies to nominate. There haven't been that many incredible movies so far. And for the rest of the year I'm only expecting a really incredible experience from Avatar.

Even though they haven't released anything on Avatar, I'm positive that it'll be not only nominated for Best Picture, but could possibly win. And let's face it, even if it doesn't get Best Picture, it's gonna rack up ALL the small awards.

And by "Avatar" I mean the James Cameron film, not the Nick series-turned-film.

The only reason "Return of the King" won is because it was an unprecedented work of cinema-- not only as a beyond-superior adaptation of a beloved and highly acclaimed piece of literature, but as an amazing directorial feat. It was massive in every way, and in every way it was a work of genius. There isn't a single other genre film that has reached such a level of excellence. Cameron's "Avatar" will most certainly, incontrovertibly win best FX and art direction, but best picture? Maybe a nomination, but I believe it's story/direction/acting will all have to SURPASS Cameron's own "Titanic" before that become a possibility...... all merely because it is a genre film. Besides, the Academy sucks. It's politics and BS anyway!

Sci-Fi is, in the minds of critics and the heads of the academy, a bastard form of entertainment. Science Fiction doesn't have the prestigious history of any work by Shakespeare or Faulkner. It won't win a nobel prize or be seen as 'Great' because it's history is pulp books and popular mechanics magazines. It isn't considered 'literary' or' deeply moving' or' epic' or "sweeping', just 'entertainment' with a dash of disdain. .......In short the Academy is too high-minded to sully their good name with the likes of a Science-Fiction movie, unless it is "Outstanding"

This expansion of titles is just a simple way to make more money as movie studios can package the DVD box as Oscar Nominated.

IMHO "Titanic" should have lost to "L.A. Confidential" in 1997. "Good Will Hunting" was okay, but not best picture material.

Hmmm...Howard's current box office leader, ANGELS & DEMONS, plays as if it is based in the "real" real world even though it is science-fiction. Does that mean it has a better shot of being nominated and winning than science-fiction's standard fare? Or does previous Oscar wins for the principals involved raise the bar?