What does it take to win

1
What does it take to win?
By Anna Curtis
Analysis (graph to the right)
This graph indicates the proportion of actor
winnings over actor nominations compared to the
year. The years that have zero did not have a
significant amount of actor nominations in one
film during that year. This graph seems to
suggest that it was more common years ago for
many actors in one film to be nominated and win
awards. According to this graph only the years
54, 57, 63, 67, 74, 76, and 02 had
significant actor nominations in a single film.
Chicago received 4 actor nominations, only
winning one in the 2002 Oscar Award ceremony.
Study When it comes to the Oscars, do the chance
s of a movie or actor winning have anything to do
with the year its nominated? Were movies more
likely to win all of their nominations in the
40s than they are now? Are an actors chances of
winning affected by the number of actor
nominations received by an individual film? By
comparing the proportion of the number of
wins/number of nominations by the year the film
was a candidate for an Oscar, I discovered
whether or not the award year has any correlation
with the amount of winnings the film received. I
also studied if actors chances of winning had
anything to do to with the number of nominations
their film received...
Analysis (graph to the left) As you can see in t
he graph above, there doesnt seem to be much
relation between the year a movie was in the
running for an Oscar and whether or not it
actually won an award. While the graph may be
slightly skewed to the right, there are still
movies such as The Last Emperor, which was in the
award ceremony in 1987 and won all 9 of its 9
nominations. Gigi, another blockbuster hit, won
all 9 of its nominations, however, this occurred
in 1958, a good 29 years prior to The Last
Emperors sweep. When conducting a correlation
comparison between the two, it is shown that the
correlation between Wins/Nominations and the Year
of the award ceremony, the correlation
coefficient is -.294 with a p value of .109. This
clearly demonstrates that there is little
association between the year of the award
ceremony and the number of awards won.
Two Sample T-Test and Confidence Interval
Two sample T for total win/total nom vs actor wi
n/actor nom N Mean StDev
SE Mean total wi 11 0.414 0.189 0.05
7 actor wi 11 0.309 0.231 0.070 9
5 CI for mu total wi - mu actor wi ( -0.084,
0.293) T-Test mu total wi mu actor wi (vs not
) T 1.16 P 0.26 DF 19
The two sample T -Test above tested the
relationship between the mean proportions of
total wins/total nominations vs actor wins/actor
nominations. With a p value so high as .26 it is
shown that there is not enough evidence to reject
the null hypothesis which stated that the mean
proportion of total wins/total nominations is
equal to the mean proportion of actor wins/actor
nominations.
Descriptive Statistics Variable N
Mean Median TrMean StDev SE
Mean Wins 31 7.742 7.0
00 7.593 1.570 0.282
Year 31 1970.3 1970.0
1970.3 18.8 3.4
Nominati 31 11.290 11.000
11.296 1.811 0.325
Wins/Nom 31 0.6986 0.7000
0.6950 0.1522 0.0273
Variable Minimum Maximum Q1
Q3 Wins 6.000 12.000
7.000 8.000 Year 19
39.0 2002.0 1954.0 1987.0
Nominati 8.000 15.000
10.000 13.000 Wins/Nom 0.4286 1.0000
0.5833 0.8000

Descriptive Statistics Variable N
Mean Median TrMean StDev SE
Mean Total Noms 11 11.455 12.000
11.444 1.572 0.474
Total Wins 11 4.909 6.000
5.111 2.427 0.732
Actor noms 11 4.818 5.000
4.889 0.405 0.122
Actor Wins 11 1.455 1.000
1.444 1.036 0.312 Variable Mi
nimum Maximum Q1 Q3
Total No ms 9.000 14.000
10.000 13.000 Total Wins 0.000 8.0
00 4.000 6.000
Actor noms 4.000 5.000
5.000 5.000 Actor Wins 0.000 3.00
0 1.000 2.000
Top Movies used in this study (in order of most
winnings) Ben-Hur 59, Titanic 97, West Side Sto
ry 61, Gigi 58, The Last Emperor 87, The
English Patient 96, Gone With the Wind 39, From
Here to Eternity 53, On the Waterfront 54, My
Fair Lady 64, Cabaret 72, Gandhi 82, Amadeus
84, Going My Way 44, The Best Years of Our
Lives 46, The Bridge on the River Kwai 57,
Shakespeare in Love 98, Dances With Wolves 90,
Schindlers List 93, Out of Africa 85, Star
Wars 77, The Sting 73, Patton 70, Lawrence of
Arabia 62, All About Eve 50, Chicago 02, An
American in Paris 51, Forrest Gump 94, The
Godfather Part II 74, A Man of All Seasons 66,
Mrs. Miniver 42, A Place in the Sun 51
Did not win Best Picture
The movies used in the above graph, the two
sample T test and the descriptive statistics to
the left were the films in the history of the
Oscars who have received the highest number of
actor nominations Mrs. Miniver 42 Actor Noms 5
, Actor Wins 2 All About Eve 50 Noms 5, Wins 1
A Streetcar Named Desire 51 Noms 4, Wins
3 From Here to Eternity 53 Noms 5, Wins 2 On t
he Waterfront 54 Noms 5, Wins 2
Peyton Place 57 Noms 5, Wins 0
Tom Jones 63 Noms 5, Wins 0 Bonnie and Clyde 6
7 Noms 5, Wins 1 The Godfather Part II 74 Noms
5, Wins 1 Network 76 Noms 5, Wins 3 Chicago
02 Noms 4, Wins 1
Conclusion Based on the information collected, t
he graphs presented, correlation coefficients and
two sample t tests, there does not seem to be any
relationship between the year of a film and the
results of the Oscar award ceremony. Films made
today have as much a chance of receiving many
nominations and winning awards as they did back
in the 1940s. A similar situation is true for
actors. While it seems in the graph that it has
become less frequent for many actors in one film
to be nominated the proportion of actor wins over
actor nominations is not associated with the
proportions of total wins over total nominations,
therefore if a film is lucky enough to get many
actors nominated, that does not seem to affect
its chances of winning or losing any particular
award. From the data presented here, the Oscars
appear to be a rather fair ceremony so all of you
actors and actresses out there, stay confident,
your chance is just as good as any...