I find there are dozens of new films every year I thoroughly enjoy. Many of them aren't Oscar nominated (Silver Linings is a great example, a film that left me lukewarm the first time and left me feeling icky the second time), therein lies the problem. You really have to search for them. It's a big reason why I'm trying to get acquainted with more foreign filmmakers-- to open my world up that much more, as I'm starting to see so much terrific work I missed from the last several years because I'm too focused on exclusively American cinema.

I also disagree that watching more films leaves me more jaded about new films. If anything, they only reinforce to me the staying power of strong storytelling and imagery. I just saw for the first time Bob Le Flambeur, from 1956. That didn't make me think at any point, "Man, they don't make em like they did in in 1956 anymore," it made me appreciate that nearly sixty years later, this film still feels as fresh as it probably did then. Hundreds of movies were made in world cinema in 1956, and only the few greats remain remembered by most. I think that's how every years is: sure, not every year has a Bob Le Flambeur or a The Searchers... but 1956 didn't have a Spring Breakers, a Before Midnight, a Computer Chess, a Pacific Rim. I don't want filmmakers to "make em like they used to," since I think that's sort of bullshit fueled by revisionist history and selective memory. Fifty-seven years from now, I bet they'll look at the greats from this year that have stood the test of time, forget about the Getaways and the Hangover 3s, and say, "Man, they don't make em like they did in 2013 anymore."

And to further reinforce the point about the Oscars being a lousy indicator of greatness, 1956 lives on in The Searchers and Bob Le Flambeur, who didn't win big Oscars. Few people still cyse Around the World in 80 Days anymore, yet at the time, the voters embraced the film with the big cast and the spectacle. Maybe the present Academy isn't so different from the old Academy after all.