The best picture nominations at the Oscars always follow the same 5 tropes - this year's movies fit the pattern

• Each year, the best picture nominations at the Oscars seem to fall to the same type of movies.
• There is always space for a film backed by Disney and a Spielberg-produced movie.
• Below Insider breaks down how this year's films fit the mold.

The Oscars are meant to reward the very best that Hollywood and, to a much smaller extent, international cinema has to offer. But the Academy Awards are also a clear reflection of the people who are given the privilege of voting for their favorites in cinema.

That's why, after years of controversy over diversity and inclusion, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has attempted to encourage diversity amongst its ranks. But despite all efforts, the Academy's top prize, the best picture, still seems to follow pretty rigid entrance requirements.

Below, Insider breaks down how this year's best picture nominations fit into the same established mold.

The Academy always finds space to reward films by the independent American filmmakers of the 1990s

The 1990s were a uniquely fruitful moment in international cinema - the period saw the apex of the Hong Kong New Wave with filmmakers like Wong Kar Wai beginning to find wide international acclaim; new hubs of rich political filmmaking popping up in Iran and Latin America; and in the UK, filmmakers like Sally Potter, Derek Jarman, and Mike Leigh were producing some of their most adventurous work.

In the US, a similar resurgence occurred with a new generation of filmmakers who burrowed a route from the independent scene to the studio system. Quentin Tarantino, Paul Thomas Anderson, Wes Anderson, Sofia Coppola, Richard Linklater, Christopher Nolan, and Noah Baumbach all emerged during this period with clever debuts starting what at the time was described as a new golden age.

Ever since there has been a space reserved for the work of these filmmakers or the Sundance Kids as they have been dubbed by critic James Mottram (since almost all of them participated in the indie festival) at the Oscars.

This year, the spot was assumed by "Mank," directed by '90s alum David Fincher ("Fight Club"). Despite middling reviews, the movie picked up a best picture nod along with nine other nominations - the most of any film. This is perhaps the best example of the charm the '90s auteurs still hold over the Academy. Although it is unlikely "Mank" will win.

Despite their acclaim, the '90s filmmakers have never really found favor when it comes to winning actual awards. Between the group, there are three Oscars: two belong to Tarantino (best screenplay, of course) and the other is Coppola's (also screenplay).

Disney is Hollywood's most powerful company and produces many best picture-winning films

The Walt Disney Company's monopoly on Hollywood is unprecedented.

In 2019, the company purchased 21st Century Fox for $71 billion. The deal included the acquisition of all Fox's TV and film assets, including the art-house label Fox Searchlight and National Geographic. In 2012, Disney acquired Lucasfilm, which housed Star Wars and Indiana Jones for $4 billion, and dropped the same amount in 2009 for Marvel Studios.

Thanks to this buccaneering spirit, it is quite impossible for a year to go by without Mickey Mouse's paws all over the best picture race. This year by way of the newly rebranded Searchlight Pictures - "Fox" was promptly slashed from all the doors and email addresses - Chloe Zhao's "Nomadland" is representing team Disney.

In this way, the Disney spot is the most unique on this list. Unlike the others, it has little to do with cinema. It's solely a consequence of money and power. That doesn't mean "Nomadland" isn't a fine movie. It is. The film is also the current best picture frontrunner following wins at the BAFTAs and the Golden Globes earlier this year.

But perhaps this should propose deeper ethical considerations. Would it be better if the awards love and more importantly the box office profits were shared more equally?

Steven Spielberg is an Oscars favorite and so are the films he produces

Steven Spielberg is one of the greatest film directors in the history of cinema. There is simply no alternative to that statement. Whenever he releases a movie, it is likely to be nominated. As such, he has the most best picture nominations of any director with 10.

But Spielberg is also a great film producer and often translates his magic into a broad range of projects across Hollywood, including the controversial "Green Book," which won the Oscar's top prize in 2019, and Sam Mendes' "1917," which was nominated last year. Unsurprisingly, upon release of his latest film "The Trial of The Chicago 7," which is nominated for five Oscars including best picture, director Aaron Sorkin revealed that the project had initially been conceived by Spielberg, who invited Sorkin to lunch in 2006 and suggested he make the movie.

It is unsurprising because like all great filmmakers, Spielberg's distinct voice permeates every project he touches. Alongside his fascination for big fantasy productions, Spielberg has also carved out a space for more serious historical and political work. There is, of course, "Schindler's List" and more recently "Bridge of Spies." (The two films took home a combined eight Academy Awards.)

Spielberg always shapes these broader subjects around the pluck of an individual character casting away collectivity and instead promoting what some may describe as an unfounded optimism in the redemption of America's institutions.

"Spielberg really made a visual language out of the liberal preoccupation with the individual," artist Hannah Black said in Jewish Currents recently, "which stops him from being able to imagine a mass politics of liberation."

Sorkin absorbed these ideological conclusions in "The Trial of The Chicago 7," which for many critics was the film's downfall. But it works well with mass audiences as well as the Academy.

Each year, a film loved only by critics finds itself in the best picture race

The COVID-19 pandemic, which prompted the closure of cinemas across the world, has made it extremely difficult to watch many of this year's best picture nominated films. In some countries, it has been almost impossible. Yet, every year, there always seems to be a film that takes up a best picture spot that most audiences haven't seen. The buzz for the film originates entirely from film critics.

Now, this isn't meant to flatter film critics. There really aren't any must-read critics working today. If anything, this phenomenon exposes the crass position critics hold in awards strategizing: release a film to critics at festivals and private screenings, generate awards buzz, win awards, and then use said buzz to drive box-office numbers upon wide release.

For example, this year's critics' pick "The Father" is an adaptation of an award-winning French stage play of the same name (Le Père in French). The movie, which follows a daughter's relationship with her aging father who suffers from dementia, had its debut at last year's Sundance Film Festival followed by screenings at the Toronto International Film Festival and AFI fest where critics hailed the two main performances by Anthony Hopkins and Olivia Colman.

The film has since been given a very limited theatrical run in select US states and picked up two BAFTAs awards despite currently not having a UK release date.

It is never advisable to look too closely at the inner workings of a Hollywood awards show - once you turn over one card, the whole house falls. But it is true that in other industries this sort of insider trading would be described as morally dubious, but usually, unlike this year, the critics-awards relationship can often be used as a force for good. Smaller films without the weight of previous Oscar winners like Hopkins or Colman can cut through the noise of Hollywood's money-crazed studio system and find a new mass audience.

Regular audiences can also elevate films into the best picture race

The most egalitarian of categories and often a rebuke of either the Hollywood mainstream or the politics of the times, the people's choice movie, as the name suggests, is the film championed by ordinary fans who paid to see the film at their local multiplex and willed it into Oscars contention.

Over the last few years, this spot has become increasingly synonymous with films produced by A24, the indie New York film distributor. In 2017, the company received its first best picture win with Barry Jenkins' groundbreaking film "Moonlight," perhaps the most quintessential people's choice. This year, A24 has presented audiences with an endearing champion in Lee Isaac Chung's triumphant drama "Minari," a measured film about a Korean-American family's attempt to build a life in the midwest.

With these positions set in stone, it is always interesting to see which way the Academy will sway.

In recent years, it has become just as interesting to see how the Oscars broadcast holds up with viewers. Over the last decade, ratings for Hollywood's biggest night have continually dipped, something the Academy initially blamed on a lack of enthusiasm for nominated films and tried to remedy with a failed attempt at introducing a popular Oscar category.

But this past year, a large portion of the population has been at home watching films and TV shows. So, in theory, excitement for a celebration of this year's films should be at an all-time high. Another steep decline in ratings might just signal that the issue isn't with the films nominated, but instead with the idea of a televised show where competitive awards are handed out for filmmaking.

Let's wait and see.