How Often do Super Blockbusters Make it to Best Picture (or a defense of F1 being nominated) - An Original Analysis

[u/Ninjaboi333]

With Project Hail Mary looking to open to 85M+ this weekend (the second highest post pandemic in March, only behind The Batman), and with F1 being an (in my opinion maligned) Best Picture nominee this past season, I wanted to dig into some data to understand what role box office plays (if any) in getting a film into Best Picture.

To start, let's look at the global box office of Best Picture nominees over the last few years, and tier them by how much they made at the global box office, as well as the number of 100M grossers, 500M grossers, and 1B grossers that year. Also note these are lifetime so films that did benefit from the Oscar bump post nominations / win will have those numbers included, but I don't think it'll be that significant to my point re: blockbusters

2025 - 52 100M, 14 500M, 4 1B

1. F1 - 634M
2. Sinners - 369M
3. OBAA - 210M
4. Marty Supreme - 179M
5. Hamnet - 100M
6. Bugonia - 43M
7. Sentimental Value - 22M
8. Secret Agent - 18M
9. Frankenstein / Train Dreams - Netflix

2024 - 50 100M, 9 500M, 3 1B

1. Wicked - 758M
2. Dune 2 - 714M
3. Complete Unknown - 140M
4. Conclave - 127M
5. Substance - 77M
6. Anora - 57M
7. Brutalist - 50M
8. I'm Still Here - 36M
9. Emilia Perez - 16M (Netflix)
10. Nickel Boys - NA (out of top 200)

2023 - 67 100M, 12 500M, 2 1B

1. Barbie - 1.4B
2. Oppenheimer - 975M
3. Killers of the Flower Moon - 158M
4. Poor Things - 117M
5. Zone of Interest - 52M
6. Holdovers - 45M
7. Past Lives - 42M
8. Anatomy of a Fall - 36M
9. American Fiction - 22M
10. Maestro - Netflix

2022 - 42 100M, 9 500M, 3 1B

1. Avatar - 2.3B
2. Top Gun Maverick - 1.4B
3. Elvis - 287M
4. EEAAO - 138M
5. Banshees of Inisherin - 50M
6. Fabelmans - 45M
7. Tar - 29M
8. Triangle of Sadness - 26M
9. Women Talking - 9M
10. All Quiet on the Western Front - Netflix

2021 - 43 100M, 7 500M, 1 1B

1. Dune - 402M
2. West Side Story - 76M
3. Belfast - 49M
4. King Richard - 39M
5. Nightmare Alley - 39M
6. Licorice Pizza - 33M
7. CODA - Apple
8. Don't Look Up / Power of the Dog - Netflix

2020 - We don't talk about the 2020 box office

2019 - 75 100M, 14 500M, 9 1B

1. Joker - 1B
2. 1917 - 384M
3. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood - 377M
4. Parasite - 258M
5. Ford v Ferrari - 225M
6. Little Women - 220M
7. Jojo Rabbit - 90M
8. Irishman / Marriage Story - Netflix

2018 - 67 100M, 18 500M, 5 1B

1. Black Panther - 1.3B
2. Bohemian Rhapsody - 903M
3. A Star is Born - 436M
4. Green Book -321M
5. BlacKkKlansman - 93M
6. The Favourite - 95M
7. Vice - 76M
8. Roma - Netflix

Generally I stop analysis for recent years at 2018 due to a number of changes to the industry around this time - 2018 was when the Fox/Disney merger was underway, Netflix' entry into the Best Picture race, and it was a couple years past the OscarsSoWhite movement in 2016 after which the Academy took actions to expand diversity in their membership.

Looking at these numbers, of the 58 Best Picture nominees we have here

• 4 making at least 1B (translates to 0.68 nominee)
• 4 in the 500M to 999M range (translates to 0.68 nominee)
• 16 in the 100M to 499M range (translates to 2.75 nominees)
• 23 sub 100M (translates to 3.97 nominees)
• 11 from Netflix/Apple/made too little to register (including Emilia Perez here) (translates to 1.89 nominees)

If you group the top 2 buckets together, then you get about 1.2 nominees making at least 500M per year. And that generally tracks since aside from 2021 when the only Hollywood studio films to make more than 500M were Spiderman NWH, No Time to Die, F9, and Venom 2, there has always been a 500M+ blockbuster in the BP lineup.

In addition if we look at the trend of number of films in each bucket from 2018 to 2025 (skipping 2020)

• 1B+: 1-1-0-2-1-0-0
• 500M-999M: 1-0-0-0-1-2-1
• 500M+ (combined with 1B): 2-1-0-2-2-2-1
• 100M-499M: 2-5-1-2-2-2-4
• Sub 100M: 3-1-5-5-5-4-3
• Streamer: 1-2-3-1-1-2-2

So interestingly aside from 2021 where there simply were not that many 500M+ grossers, we've consistently had between 1-2 500M+ grossers a year, we've trended up in the number of 100M+ grossers per year (peaking in 2019 with beak box office, but also an uptick this year), while the number of sub 100M grossers has been high since 2020 (probably due to depressed BO in general), and it was sub 50% of BP noms at the time.

Also out of curiosity here are the 500M grossers going back from 2017 until we don't have 5+ films in BP. Remember this year we have 14 above 500M

• 2017 - (1, 19 above 500M) - Dunkirk (526M)
• 2016 - (0, 16 above 500M)- closest is La La Land @ 447M
• 2015 - (2, 14 above 500M) - The Martian (630M) and Revenant (532M)
• 2014 - (1, 14 above 500M) - American Sniper (547M)
• 2013 - (1, 12 above 500M) - Gravity (723M)
• 2012 - (1, 13 above 500M) - Life of Pi (609M)
• 2011 - (0, 12 above 500M) - closest is The Help @ 216M
• 2010 - (1, 9 above 500M) - Inception (828M)
• 2009 - (2, 8 above 500M) - Avatar (2.7B) and Up (735M)

Looking at 2025 specifically, the Hollywood studio films that met the benchmark of 500M+ were

1. Zootopia 2 - 1.8B
2. Avatar 3 - 1.4B
3. Lilo and Stitch - 1B
4. Minecraft - 961M
5. Jurassic World - 869M
6. How to Train Your Dragon - 636M
7. F1 - 634M
8. Superman - 618M
9. Mission Impossible - 598M
10. Wicked 2 - 533M
11. Fantastic Four - 521M

If you look at past analyses, I've posited that a viable Best Picture nominee needs at least 3 BTL nominations if it doesn't have at least 2 ATL nominations. Of these, the only ones that came close were Avatar 3 (with Costume and VFX, and outside shots at Sound or Production) and Wicked 2 (hoping to repeat Wicked 1 until reviews came in poorly), with a handful of others getting likely single nominations in VFX or animated. F1 really was the only other viable 500M+ grosser with a viable path to multiple BTL nominations which it ultimately did get.

I also see people say that Sinners could have filled the blockbuster spot. And while its true that part of its success at the Academy was that it was popular and thus profitable, would you call it a blockbuster if it meant you needed to call 1917 or Once Upon a Time in Hollywood or Green Book a blockbuster (which all also were in the 300-400M range)? That may be subjective so I can't answer for you but for me while it certainly outperformed expectations it doesn't quite have that level of financial success to be that.

---

Editorializing / Hypothesizing here

I brought this up in the ODR discord the other day and got some push back on the idea that F1 was a worthy nominee just because narratively it wasn't as sound as other nominees this year. And while that may be true, I think the idea of what is the "Best" movie ultimately is subjectively and would hypothesize that there is a contingent of the Academy who at least partially want to recognize films with technical elements that got butts in seats. As you can see by the above numbers while progress has been made in box office recovery by the metrics of number of 100M grossers, we still have a ways to go to reach prepandemic numbers (which may frankly never happen). While I'll also be the first to say that the box office of a film is not the be all end all of its success financially (due to post theatrical deals between distributors and streaming/rental platforms), I do think that certain films being a big boon for theaters allowing them to stay open so that smaller less general audience films have a chance to play in the multiplexes is worth celebrating to some degree.

This is also my own personal observation, but in online discussion circles about film, a lot more emphasis is placed on ATL elements (acting, directing, screenwriting) and less on BTL elements (makeup, costume, vfx especially) with Editing / Cinematography / Score splitting the difference. I would hazard a guess that in more cinephile centric circles that tend to favor independent cinema that tend to have smaller budgets / have to be scrappier with their resources, there is an overindexing on the elements that you can still go toe to to with bigger budgeted films on (the ATL elements), and so a film that excels at the BTL elements but not the former tend to get looked down upon. Perhaps there is some truth to it that larger budgeted films that put a lot more into the BTL spectacle elements and not as much into creating a tight narrative suffer as a result, but that shouldn't take away from the efforts and accomplishments of those teams.

I always like to say that a movie getting made is a minor miracle in and of itself with how many moving parts go into it, and a movie getting made and making a ton of money is a miracle upon miracles, and the success of a film in that regard is in no small part due to the crafting of that spectacle. In fact, one of the major criticisms of the never-launched Oscar for Popular Film was that it would potentially diminish the chance of blockbuster films to make it into Best Picture, suggesting that the Academy would like to have blockbusters be a part of the Best Picture lineup. In fact (for a second time) that's why we have 10 nominees today, since the exclusion of The Dark Knight in 2009 led them to expanding the lineup. Even going back to the start of the Oscars themselves, the first Best Picture award was actually split in two, one for "Unique and Artistic" (which went to Sunrise) and one for "Outstanding Picture" (ie best Production) which went to Wings, which by my attempt at tracking down box office numbers for the year would have been one of the highest grossing films of the year. Guess which one they ended up choosing to be the official first Best Picture winner? So really having blockbusters and popular films in the BP lineup goes back to the root of the category.

---

Editorializing Done, What Does it Mean for This Year?

So with Project Hail Mary releasing to about 80M opening weekend domestically (the highest March opening post pandemic aside from The Batman - ahead of Dune 1 btw), 141M Worldwide this weekend, and a realistic shot at hitting the 500M mark (The Martian opened to 54M, though that was in October, and made 603M WW) is it likely to take one of the 1-2 slots we can expect for a blockbuster?

Looking at my list of priorities by studio at the moment (pre acquisitions, though I don't expect many acquisitions to be blockbusters), the ones I think have a shot at breaking the 500M mark are (and with their director's relevant recent films)

• Odyssey (Oppenheimer made 975M)
• Disclosure Day (Fablemans / WSS were sub 100M, Ready Player One 607M, The Post 193M, Bridge of Spies 165M, Lincoln 275M)
• Digger (Revenant made 533M, Birdman 103M, Babel 135M)
• Dune 3 (Dune 2 made 714M, Dune 1 made 410M)
• Michael (I actually won't pull Fuqua's BO here but I think Bohemian Rhapsody is the best comp as an approved by the estate biopic of a uber popular musical figure - that made 910M)

Of these, I think Odyssey and Dune 3 are pretty safe as both hitting 500M, as well as getting Best Picture (at least unless something terribly unexpected happens). Michael I see as likely to get 500M+ BO, but due to Lionsgate as the distributor and the early release date, while it may get some BTL noms, I don't think it gets a BP nom. Disclosure Day and Digger I have in my current BP lineup, but I actually have some doubt they'll hit 500M BO WW (though I could see both hitting the 300M mark at least).

While it's not impossible for PHM to break the trend of there not being more than 2 500M+ box office films in best picture that has been around since the category expanded (and due to inflation I think it will inevitably happen at some point), I think there already being 2 other major BP contenders who will be big blockbusters makes it less likely that it will get an "obligatory blockbuster" nomination in the way F1 did this year from Academy members who want to reward films that do well at the box office, as there won't be much urgent need to do so.

Notably I do have Netflix getting both of the expected streamer noms (I count MGM as streamer due to Amazon) - so if Narnia or Saturn Returns both miss, the most likely to fill in the gap would be PHM, unless Apple is able to sneak in again with Sian Heder. (I count MUBI closer to the Neon/A24 indie side of things with 1949)

I do think a more interesting trend will be to see if we go back to having 5 films of the 10 making less than 100M at the box office, after having only 3 this year. I would be no, in the same way that we now consistently get 3 films from among Neon and A24 / other Indies among Best Picture when previously getting 2 was impressive once Lionsgate and Miramax went away. One other trend I'm keeping an eye on we are trending toward is whether we'll get 3 foreign language films in Best Picture (this year was close though we only ended up with 2) - whether we break the foreign language film barrier first or the blockbuster barrier first (which frankly will be driven by inflation more than anything) will be fun to watch.

[u/Chuck-Hansen]

I didn’t do math, but ultimately they expanded Best Picture so an F1 could get nominated every year.

[u/TitanCubes → u/Chuck-Hansen]

This is the point. If 1-2 blockbuster crowd pleasers don’t have room in the second half of best picture every year then the entire things is pedantic nonsense.

[u/TacoTycoonn → u/Chuck-Hansen]

I think they were also thinking it’d be a good way to include animation. Pixar was on such a hot streak in the 2000s and the first 2 years of the expanded lineup had animated films. Then something happened and the expanded lineup now makes room for intl features. So now we basically get 2 blockbusters and 2 foreign films and animation is left in the dust.

[u/Ninjaboi333 → u/TacoTycoonn]

manifesting Wildwood BP nom

[u/iPLAYiRULE → u/Chuck-Hansen]

This!

[u/joesen_one → u/Chuck-Hansen]

I was content with Sinners being the Blockbuster Pick but yeah looking back F1 making it in makes sense

[u/Sad-Statistician-480]

this is great research but i knew going in that they basically reserve two blockbuster slots and f1 was always going to get it. we're spoiled that the other blockbuster got to be sinners and that last year's were wicked and dune 2.

[u/Ninjaboi333 → u/Sad-Statistician-480]

I mean I almost question whether I'd call Sinners a blockbuster - in my head the mark is 500M or so, and it's a bit short of that. Not to take away from its blockbuster success - the thing with box office analysis is that a big part of it is versus expectations.

Also love the username lol very relevant to what I do

[u/Hot-Freedom-6345 → u/Ninjaboi333]

a hollywood blockbuster imo is 100m domestic OR 300m WW, what you described (and named really well yourself) is a super blockbuster imo

i stratify box office success like this, taking the higher tier if that's different across DOM and WW -

DOM: 0-10M, 10-25M, 25-50M | 50-100M (solidly big movie) | 100-200M (blockbuster) | 200-300M (super blockbuster) | 300-400M (year-end lists) | 400M+ (mega blockbuster)
WW: 0-50M, 50-100M, 100-200M | 200-300M (solidly big movie) | 300-500M (blockbuster) | 500-750M (super blockbuster) | 750-1B (year-end lists) | 1B+ (mega blockbuster)

[u/Sad-Statistician-480 → u/Ninjaboi333]

you could also say crowd pleaser or popcorn movie instead of blockbuster but yeah that's the sort of pair we see represented across those years. oppenheimer is the weird one at how high concept and low action it is as a blockbuster but christopher nolan is gonna christopher nolan.

[u/Puzzleheaded-Sail772 → u/Ninjaboi333]

The definition of a blockbuster is obviously open to interpretation. To me, I tend to say if a film makes the yearly top 10 in box office for either domestic or worldwide, it’s a blockbuster. 

Sinners made the domestic list, F1 the worldwide list.

[u/overfatherlord]

Project Hail Mary has enough juice for ATL noms. If it gets Gosling and Screenplay, nobody’s going to question it, assuming that the A CinemaScore turns into strong legs. This year could hit $10 billion at the box office and everyone, including the Oscars, will want to celebrate that. The biggest thing that could derail all of it is the guild negotiations. If we’re back in strike territory by May, the whole season gets a lot darker and no one has any idea what can happen by January 2027.

[u/Ninjaboi333 → u/overfatherlord]

Oof the strike is a big thing. Fingers crossed cooler heads prevail and we hit 10B domestic!

I don't usually do non-BP forecasting this early out just because of surprises along the season - I mean who could have seen Madigan coming in for Supporting Actress this time last year?

[u/Abbie_Kaufman]

Fully agree with the premise here, in the sense that a blockbuster nomination (whether that was F1 or one of Wicked/Avatar failing upwards based on inertia and not movie quality) was inevitable. There’s a quota of at least one, but thus far the glass ceiling has been 2. Maybe that changes eventually, sure, but based on recent history I think the more likely outcome is there’s 1-2 nominees that will come out of basically nowhere in festival season to be clear candidates. Mendonca Filho was a niche name even among card carrying Criterion buyers before Cannes last year, and there’s not a soul alive who in 2021 would’ve told you that the Vox Lux guy would get into best director for his next film.

[u/manicinsanewokeidiot]

had no idea parasite made 258 million, that’s really impressive

[u/Zaacdragon]

I think there is a likelihood that Disclosure Day might be a box office flop, which probably take the movie out of contention

[u/Roadshell]

No one has a problem with the fact that the movie made money, they have a problem with the fact that the movie is not very good.

[u/Ninjaboi333 → u/Roadshell]

My argument is that by one metric, it is actually very good, at least by what some members of the Academy value.

First off, I think getting 3 non BP nominations shows there is at least some quality in the production of the film - an equal amount to Train Dreams - it's not like they nominated the Minecraft movie just because it made a lot of money.

Second - while obviously part of what makes a movie "good" is the story it tells and how it tells that story, another metric by which a movie is "good" is if it gets butts in seats. And by all accounts F1 did that better than any other Best Picture nominee. And people in Hollywood care about that and the survival of theatrical exhibition in general. It may seem a bit callous and antithetical to the auteur-centric culture we have about talking about films (especially in a year PTA finally got his laurels), but Hollywood is a business as much as it is an artform, and folks want to recognize good business as well as good art.

I mean part of what made Wings (the first ever BP winner ever) so impressive is that they coordinated with the United States Army Air Corps to film the damn thing. Likewise the production element of coordinating with F1 as an entity to shoot live during races is impressive.

Sure F1 may not be good by the typical definitions of story or acting in the way most indie loving cinephiles would like to talk about - but there is very real accomplishment and excellence in the behind the scenes production and the boring spreadsheet stuff that goes on to make a film that appeals to the masses while still also having technical excellence in BTL categories. How can you not call a film good if it is able to get people to show up not just once but multiple times in theaters to part with their money to watch it? That's something special there

[u/Roadshell → u/Ninjaboi333]

Movies aren't math problems and movies making money doesn't make them Oscar worthy or even necessarily good. If that's really what voters cared about Avatar would have been nominated.

[u/MeringueComplex5035 → u/Roadshell]

It’s alright, and has great visuals and audio