Ten Easy Steps to a Watchable Oscar Telecast
by John NolteLast night’s Oscar show was so stunningly awful that even though I had to be up and out of the house by 4 AM this morning, the stink of the whole program couldn’t be allowed to stand before I hit the hay. Washing it off took a double feature of “Annie Hall” and Manhattan” that lasted long after midnight but was well worth it after that embarrassing catastrophe. To no one’s surprise, last night’s viewership was 7% below an already anemic 2010. Worst still, the youthful 18-49 year-old demographic Oscar hosts James Franco and Anne Hathaway were specifically hired to lure, dropped even lower, a full 15%.
The problems with last night’s show were legion, and much of the media agrees that what we might’ve witnessed could well rate as the worst Oscar telecast ever. My memory isn’t good enough to say that for sure, but that the show was dreadful isn’t in dispute and while a post-mortem isn’t what this write-up is about, I will say that James Franco’s arrogant, sleepy, cooler-than-thou attitude that forced the usually delightful Anne Hathaway to over-compensate with the cute factor, was only half the problem. The other half was in the producing (and writing). This was a horribly produced three-plus hours. But rather than complain further, I’m going to offer constructive suggestions. No one cares what I think. I get that. But I’m going to offer them anyway.
1. The Host
The host is crucial, not only to the success of the overall show but also to the ratings. The cynical grab of Franco and Hathaway in an effort to attract younger voters was beyond stupid. Neither is a standalone box office draw, neither has captured America’s imagination, and both are inter-changeable as a dozen or so other actors in that same age range. I hate to tell Hollywood this, but (and the ratings back me up) young people aren’t stupid. They really don’t want to “watch people their own age” host the Oscars. Like the rest of us, they want to watch a good show. Upon hearing Franco and Hathaway were hosting this year, even the squealiest of teenagers was likely as confused by that choice as the rest of us.
There’s two ways to go with a host.
You make the Oscar telecast the host’s show — The Billy Crystal Show or the The Johnny Carson Show or The Whoever Show. Whoever the host is, the Oscars should become their program. When Johnny Carson or Crystal hosted, our affection for them was one of the main reasons we tuned in and kept watching. We couldn’t wait for them to return to the podium between awards and quip on what just happened or extend a running joke. Now it seems as though we have a host for the first half hour before the program dissolves into a structure-less hodgepodge of famous faces and various awards. It actually feels more and more out of place when the hosts appear closer to the end of the show.
Or…
Find an Ed Sullivan to take us through the evening. Instead of a bad variety show with truly awful comedy writing and musical numbers, have a steady, warm, familiar, charismatic figure glide us through the evening. Ed Sullivan wasn’t an entertainer and yet Americans young and old tuned in because Americans young and old liked Ed. Rather than demand our host perform (and risk the ever-increasing likelihood of a flop), have him or her serve as our guide for the night, walking us through the various awards. Morgan Freeman would be perfect for this. America loves him, he’s classy, has a wry sense of humor, a warm presence, and who wouldn’t want to spend a few hours with Morgan Freeman?
How about TCM’s Robert Osbourne? Or Ellen Degeneres?
2. Structure
A well-structured show that actually feels like it’s building towards something will solve a ton of problems. There might well be some sort of structure in place now, but we in the audience can’t sense or feel it. As it stands now, the show feels episodic, messy and plodding. There’s no rhyme or reason as to how the three-plus hours unfold: a big award! an obscure award! a song! Celine Dion sings for the dead! What the hell is that about? Structure is KEY to making a successful film or television show, to telling any kind of story, and someone needs to grab all the disparate elements involved in the yearly Oscar giveaway and turn them into a cohesive whole that gives the audience a sense of momentum.
3. Pacing
For years, and for good reason, people complained about the length of the telecast and the pacing. But from where I sit, the remedy applied to this problem has been exactly the wrong one. Speeches are truncated, songs are shortened, and the show feels hurried in too many places. Cutting and trimming is not an instant cure for pacing. “Gone With the Wind” is nearly four hours long but if you cut an hour out of it, you’ll hurt the pacing because the story is so well-told and perfectly — here comes that word again — structured.
The Academy Awards don’t lag because the show is too long, the Academy Awards lag because the show sucks. Stop worrying about time and worry more about compartmentalizing each segment of the telecast and making them better. Last night no one spoke longer than Kirk Douglas and yet no one was bored. We couldn’t get enough of him. He was charming and funny and we adore the guy. I would’ve also liked to have seen a longer and more dignified tribute to Lena Horne. With an eye towards allowing the audience to make an emotional connection to Ms. Horne, to miss her and appreciate her and feel the loss of this great talent — as opposed to rushing Halle Berry off the stage — the moment could’ve been a truly memorable one.
Shorter isn’t better. Better produced segments is better. Making each segment an individual gem is better. Lena Horne deserved a gem.
4. Suspense
I’m not sure what the Academy can do about this but the biggest bummer, the biggest drag on the show every year, is a numbing lack of suspense. Who wins should not be a foregone conclusion, and this is a problem that only feels like it’s getting worse. What we have now are favorites always emerging from the abundance of awards shows that come before the Oscars and an avalanche of media prognosticators in the entertainment press who know a lot of people in Hollywood and can get the lay of the land as far as who’s voting for whom.
Sitting through a poorly paced, poorly structured show awaiting the inevitable is never fun.
Maybe people just need to shut up about who they’re voting for?
5. Watch the Super Bowl
Year after year, ratings for the Super Bowl embarrass the Academy Awards. Over 100 million people tune in to watch a game involving teams other than their own. There’s a reason for this. Watch and figure out what that reason is. Structure and suspense certainly helps, but there’s more to it than that. People love football. People love the movies. The Academy Awards shouldn’t get less than half the viewership the Super Bowl does. Crack that code.
6. Create Traditions
What the Oscars need most are a few traditions, four or five can’t-miss annual events that we can count on during each and every telecast. The Super Bowl is brilliant at this, from their opening reading of the Declaration of Independence to the big deal made out of the half-time show to the awarding of the Lombardi Trophy. Create some beloved traditions and your audience will come.
Perhaps…
7. More Magic Through the Use of Nostalgia
Hollywood needs to honor its past more. Right now that happens during the program in spots, but again the structure is such a mess and the pace so hurried that these moments always feel shoehorned and perfunctory — like the Academy can’t wait to get them out of the way. Slow down! Take us back, move us, make us cry, remind us why we fell in love with the movies in the first place. Last night, one of the most memorable moments was simply hearing the “Star Wars” theme. But again, by the time I turned my head to watch it was over.
Furthermore, and no one wants to admit this, it’s just a fact that today’s movie stars are lacking in all the qualities that made The Greats great. There’s a reason a 95 year-old Kirk Douglas can steal the show and the sight of a digital Bob Hope puts a smile on our face James Franco never could. The Academy can make up for the lack of star-power today and our lack of affection for most of today’s stars by mining the rich legacy of their past.
8. A Smart Producer
The Oscars need a producer familiar with taking nothing and creating a story or at least a crafting some sort of narrative with some kind of momentum. Reality show producer Mark Burnett would be an excellent choice. His entire career has been built around crafting narratives and a sense of momentum from practically nothing. I appreciate that you want “A SHOW!” so let Burnett be the Executive Producer who crafts the structure and let him hire the Bob Fosse needed to bring the pizazz.
9. Bring Back Billy Crystal
Just do it already.
10. Start with Class and Stop Thinking Outside the Box
Go back and watch the best reviewed and most beloved telecasts.
Rinse, wash, repeat…
The world hasn’t changed all that much. You have.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
135 Comments
I'd LOVE to blame the Awards' low ratings on James Franco… and on Jon Stewart before him. But ultimately, people DON'T tune in to watch the hosts or to watch a variety show. They tune in when they know there's a good chance thatt films they liked will win big awards.
This year, there was no chance of that! The two most popular movies, "Toy Story 3" and "Inception," had no chance of winning, and everybody knew that. "The King's Speech" may be a wonderful, wholly deserving movie, but it's a movie that most Americans haven't seen and that very few Americans are excited about.
You hit the nail on the head with the nostalgia comment, we love movies, this show could be so good!
I had the show on mainly as background noise but definately sat up and took notice when the Star Wars theme was played. Maybe a new tradition where they look back at one movie, or one movie year that really meant something to us. Bring back some of the old actors, remind us of the magic.
I unfortunately missed Kirk Douglas, I guess I will have to see him on You Tube.
"The King's Speech" has made over $100 million at the box office. Many people have seen it – moreso than the winners in many Oscar years.
Remember the single highlight of the David Letterman hosted show? "Uma – Oprah….Oprah – Uma"
5. Watch the Super Bowl
Year after year, ratings for the Super Bowl embarrass the Academy Awards. Over 100 million people tune in to watch a game involving teams other than their own. There’s a reason for this. Watch and figure out what that reason is.
The "code" is simple, the Superbowl is a competition of the best of the best that earned their place in the Superbowl through merit and deserve to be there. The Oscars is crap that only Hollywood Insider types like not the best movies (in fact likability is a sure fire way to NOT get an Oscar).
Boy the way Glen Miller played
Songs that made the hit parade.
Guys like us we had it made,
Those were the days.
And you knew who you were then,
Girls were girls and men were men,
Mister we could use a man
Like Herbert Hoover again.
Didn't need no welfare state,
Everybody pulled his weight.
Gee our old LaSalle ran great.
Those were the days.
I'm worried they'll see a spike in viewership around the time of the digital Bob Hope and think that desecrating the dead is the way to go. I can just see them inserting political garbage into the mouth of Humphrey Bogart, or have James Cagney telling a tasteless joke. It's time for Hollywood to try to get something called "talent" back in their neighborhood, along with a little thing they may have forgotten called "class."
- Ugh! Hollyweird celebutards patting each other on the back for doing their job. I love movies, but refuse to give those narcissistic knuckleheads any more of my time. The last year I watched was in 2004 to catch the win for Peter Jackson and LOTR. The rest of the show was painful.
My favorite movie of 2010, “Inception,” will be watched and discussed for many years while most of the other 2011 Oscar winners, like “Black Swan” are piled up and forgotten in the Wal-Mart $5 bin. “Inception” deservedly won for cinematography, sound mixing, sound editing and visual effects. It should have also won best picture, director, original screenplay, editing (“The Social Network”!?!), art direction and score…
It seems too easy to mock this telecast every year, but dear Lord was last night awful. Amateur hour on steroids.
Disagree about Kirk Douglas. He's an undisputed Hollywood legend, but that was painful to watch. Sorry, no one is amused for more than a few moments by grandpa fumbling around in an enfeebled state.
The right host is key. Most actors, no matter how charming they may be, don't have the chops of a comedian to work off the cuff, or the timing to make flat, obvious jokes hit the mark. Hugh Jackman is the only recent exception I can think of that worked.
Agreed about pacing, structure, and tradition. The producers try to mix things up year to year in terms of where certain awards and segments fall, and sometimes the broadcast falls flat specifically because of this. They should look back at the structure of shows that worked and follow those as a template.
The problem with the Oscars broadcast really isn't the broadcast. If the nominated movies are crap that nobody went to see, who's going to care about the show–no matter who hosts?
Didn't watch it!!! YAY!!!!!
Watched Midnight Run… with my daughters… what a great movie! They learned how to use the F word properly in all 167 variations. …. well except THAT one….
Nothing new was on the other channels(network) during the awards.If there was a new Simpsons or Family Guy viewership would have dropped by at least 1/3.AWARD SHOWS SUK, ALL OF THEM(unless you're receiving the award LOL)
I think Ellen Degeneres is a great suggestion. Last night was truly painful. I only stuck it out because the Big Hollywood live blog was so much fun. Honestly, I'd like to see the idiot political thank you speeches make a comeback. At least its interesting. Last night was a dud, and I felt embarrassed for Hathaway and Franco, both of whom seemed painfully aware that the show sucked. Looking back on all their interviews leading up to the big night, I think they may have realized it was going to be some serious suckage quite a while back. Poor dears. I wouldn't blame Franco for engaging in some huff n puff to get through that awful mess. I like that the "main event" awards get unlimited time for their speeches, but perhaps we don't need to see awards for sound editing and make-up. I realize they are very important jobs, but the Oscars is broadcast for fans, not industry. And fans don't tune in to see the best art direction Oscar. Cut some more of the lesser known awards and replace it with something entertaining, or nothing at all. Do the Oscars really *need* to be 3 plus hours? I can't emphasize enough how truly awful this broadcast was. Truly, truly horrible. Opening sequence started out promising. After that, crash and burn.
I've said this for years if you are going to go with a comedian, Dennis Miller. That man LOVES movies. (But Hollywood would never put politics aside.)
The nostalgia parts are best because they speak to people's love of movies. I used to work in the film industry but I just don't watch anymore. Even if I had been home last night I wouldn't want to watch, I probably would have put on the show and done something else at the same time so I would know what people were talking about. I don't watch because I don't care. It's not a celebration of movies, it's a celebration of self.
I have this theory that nobody in the film industry actually goes to the movies, not like the rest of us. They go to free industry screenings or watch screeners. Would they actually watch this crap if they had to pay for it?
Watched "Treasure of Sierra Madre" with my wife instead of the Oscars
Moammar Gaddafi has just announced he'll be free to host the oscars next year. I say book him.
How about not watching the show and then get the results on breitbart?
- Ricky Gervais would be the perfect Oscar host. He would roast Hollyweird and we would be entertained…
Maybe they can get rid of the Globes, SAG awards, WGA, Critics Awards, Independent Spirit Awards and all that other crap. That way, we only have one award show, and therefore more tolerable?
1 Easy Step:
Set the building on fire once everyone's inside and lock the doors. Now THAT'S something I would watch.
Edit: Everyone who thumbed me down is a PUSSY
Seriously folks….With the Mid-East and Libya in turmoil, gas prices over $3.50 a gallon and the public sector unions finally telling us that we work for them and not vice-versa we have bigger fish to fry than the Academy Awards.
My modest suggestion is this – Treat them the same way that ESPN treats routine sports news when they broadcast a football or basketball game. Just have a "crawl" at the bottom of the screen with the Oscar winners as they come in. You can be watching "CSI" and suddenly there will be messages at the bottom of the screen like…"Temple 65 – Villanova 72", "Portland State 66 – Utah 81", "Yankees place Joba Chamberlain on DL", "Melissa Leo wins Best Supporting Actress ", "Bears extend contract of head coach Lovie Smith." , "Guy who wins cinematography Oscar makes fool of himself in acceptance speech"…..You get the idea.
I second #9. BRING BACK BILLY CRYSTAL!! He was the best part of last night's show and I loved the montage of Bob Hope oscar hosting highlights that he introduced.
Last night's broadcast was filled with Oscar's legacy in an effort to distract the viewing audience from the fact that, even with ten nominated movies, the current state of the art pales in comparison with the "good old days". With barely enough time to highlight the important awards, somebody decided it would be a good idea to take up precious minutes showing clips of Gone With The Wind, scratchy black and white footage of older Oscar events and playing songs from movies decades old. Even old hosts, real and virtual, were trucked out. Why? Because even they cannot hide the fact that there is precious little going on in the industry that is worth staying up late for. So, instead of motion picture arts and sciences, it becomes all about the dresses, the faux pas' and the anticipated political statements.
Please no ellen degeneres
I was going to spill a hundred words here, but I will just say this is by hollywood and for hollywood, and outsiders are not universally interested–and yes its boring. The determination of winners has been more and more goofy, and movies just don't capture the public's attention like they used to.
I will read some reviews of the awards, but will never watch them to see if franco was really that bad or not. I think its unfair to blame it on him–like the batter who gets the third strike in the last inning, its not all his fault the game was lost.
Excellent suggestions! (Well, except for the Billy Crystal one, but ……)
The last suggestion, to "stop thinking outside the box," may seem counter-intuitive to the TV suits, but it is especially spot-on.
It lost me when I saw three things: THe bizarre expressions Anne Hathaway has mastered. Sorry darlin I know you think you are Judy Garland the second but give it up and go home. The smug, ridiculous mug of that twerp James Franco…tool boy. And WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH SCARLETT JOHANSEN'S HAIR?!
I think Jay Leno would be a good host.
The reason "Toy Story 3" didn't win was because they seem to have some unwritten rule that a Best Animated Film can't also win Best Picture. This is of course wrong, as proved by the pure magic that Pixar spins out of pixels every time they make a movie. Not all Pixar films are worthy of Best Picture, but more than a few are… "Monsters, Inc.", "The Incredibles", "Toy Story 3".
The Academy probably sees it as an opportunity to spread their favors to other films… which can boost ticket and DVD sales. Why give "Toy Story 3" two Best awards (especially since the film came out last Summer) when you can give them the obvious award for animation, and give the other award to a film still running in theaters?
I liked "The King's Speech", but it was simply a good film with good performances from reliably good actors. Those folks don't turn in a mediocre performance.
They couldn't give Jeff Bridges another Best Actor award… only rarely does the Academy dole those out, and you usually need to play a minority of some kind to get a two-fer. Not only that, but giving Bridges an Oscar for "True Grit" would remind people of the Mighty John Wayne… and the lefties in Hollywood certainly don't want to do that.
I continue to avoid watching them… instead I watch a decent film from the past year or a great classic. This year: Billy Wilder's "Stalag 17" and "The Seven Year Itch". Great and great.
Bastard… I had nicely forgotten it until you mentioned it.
I think a lot of the comments last night sounded like they were spoken in a Junior High School cafeteria by people trying too obviously hard to be funny. Not every moment needs to have a joke, and they are best left to the people that know how to deliver them.
Yeah, Ellen Degeneres…guaranteed way to make half the country stay away right off the bat. The woman is the walking embodiment of the liberal side of the culture war. Maybe you like–I find her annoying–but the fact is, she'll drive away half the show's potential audience.
ABC has a perfectly good host in Jimmy Kimmel. He's generally liked, not hated by anyone, and has enough sense not to sh** on his hosts or audience.
Glad to say that I didn't watch this year. Seems like the three hours spent trimming my toenails was well-spent time indeed.
On the host thing, knew KNEW that these two would fall flat. The key to a good host is someone with lots of experience…..hosting. Have either of these two ever hosted anything with a live audience before? That's why the best hosts, Hope, Carson, Crystal etc. are often comedians. They made their bones in front of live audiences, with years and years of experience. I suspect that Franco and Hathaway don't even have much live theater in their CV, but even that isn't the same as interacting with an audience the way a comedian has to.
I think the major problem is sheer overexposure of the talent. The Oscars used to be our only opportunity to see a lot of these stars with anything like entertaining candor. Conversely, while we are overly familiar with the talent, we are not all that familiar with the movies. Of the 10, I saw 4 (two of them on DVD). I went to the theatre fewer than 6 times in 2010.
I do recall the wonderful hosting of Billy Crystal and Johnny Carson, but also recall that in the year that "Crocodile Dundee" was the film to see, Paul Hogan hosted, and was absolutely delightful. His opener, on youtube, may be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_KpNWCjgCc&pl...
All you need is a Piano and Edith.
If they did that then everyone wouldn't get an award. Remember, everyone is a winner regardless of how they placed in the race. It's all about protecting the fragile egos.
Couldn't disagree more. Even after the stroke, the man exudes charisma. I was thrilled to see him (probably) for the last time.
I agree with a lot of this, especially the part about nostalgia. You can take that nostalgia and make it a celebration of the movies people love. Look at how many people perked up with the playing of Star Wars, and Star Wars won no awards. If the nostalgia bits are about popularly loved movies, then even if some obscure drama no one watched wins at least maybe everyone can feel connected.
Craig Ferguson.
Mr. Nolte:
Being a little late with your Oscar rundown is fine, as we all know the best movie wasn't going to win. We still expect those essays!
Does it seem to anyone else that the Oscars are being played to a cast of extras, with some exceptions
of course? Between stints in rehab, a years probation, waived, with 300 hrs of public service, not
monitored and extreme political views, just in case you weren't paying attention, along with the
declaration that, quote "I just had dinner with Chavez last night, now there is a guy that understands
what we are lacking in America." unquote. All the things that make the award shows so attractive.
A few movies to match and we got ourselves a real turkey here. No one watches, I can't understand it!
Miller would be the flipside of Degeneres. He would turn off a large section of the blue-state audience, and he'd probably have to deal with some heckling from the crowd. It would look bad.
Didn't they already do that to a lot of high ranking socialists in Inglourious Basterds?
Great suggestion. I'd watch Miller if the show went for six hours.
Ellen has very good 'middle America' ratings… her daytime show is doing quite well. She's really funny, but not vulgar and as long as she stays away from politics, she is generally non-offensive… like Rosie before Rosie couldn't hold in the crazy anymore. But Jimmy Kimmel is also a good suggestion. Geez, at this point pretty much anybody would do better than what we were given last night. What an utter failure.
Yep, the worst ever. A train wreck.
1. Expanding Best Picture category to 10 nominees to interest more people backfired. It diluted the honor. Made it dumbed down, which is a liberal specialty.
2. Kirk Douglas is Spartacus. Trying to cash in on him at this stage of his life is pitiful. Painful to watch and not the way a legend should be used.
3. Showing Billy Crystal and Bob Hope just served to remind us how bad, how unfunny, and how disconnected from reality Hollywood is now.
4. Safe to say the Hollywood's leftist politics, which peeks through even when they try to control it, has damaged if not destroyed the Hollywood brand with Main Street USA.
5. Obama has no place at the Oscars. It was forced and inappropriate, and I'd be willing to bet he doesnt know the Casablance movie well…maybe about as well as he knew the White Sox players.
6. For many of these movies, the trailer is as entertaining, if not more so, than the movie. No one cares about most of these movies or the people in them.
7. That opening Inception parody was lame. Long, trite, uncreative. Set a bad tone tone as it guided many fingers to start twitching on the 'change channel' button of the remote.
8. They are trying too hard with too little talent, and it shows. When your marketing strategy is on the surface (hey, lets attract younger viewers; let's have a best picture nominee for EVERYONE) its tragically uncreative.
9. This entire generation of movie stars, writers, producers is out of ideas and too dependent on CGI spedial effects to create great stories. Fire them all. Third and fourth generation Hollywood people all have the same DNA, and there's too much interbreeding, and incest never strengthens the species.
10. Yes, get a Billy Crystal to do it and stick with him. Or get Billy Crystal. He's still younger than Hope and carson were when they did it. Frankly, I think Conan O'Brien may be up for it in a way that Letterman or Leno could never be. But it needs consistency, not flavor of the year.
What a waste. Hollywood really has blown it for themselves.
Many of these other things matter, but nothing beats a good host. The reason stand-up comics make good hosts is that they have been performing on a stage alone before live crowds for years. They quickly learn how to command a crowd by themselves or they drop out. They're also generally more capable of ad-libbing funny lines. Actors, on the other hand, especially film actors, read lines that are fed to them by scripts and they do 20 takes of a scene.
Btw, a lot of people are giving (relative) props to Anne Hathaway. I think she was, if anything, more annoying than James Franco. Her horsey giggles and loud clapping and whoops whenever somebody else stepped on the stage drove me up the wall. She probably amped up her spasticity in reaction to Franco's Cheshire Cat on heroin, but it was an embarrassment. I used to imagine that Hathaway had some of that old-fashioned Hollywood grace, like a modern-day Audrey Hepburn. Boy, was I wrong.
Hollywood constantly makes the mistake that audiences are only interested in seeing people their same age. What people like is talent, humor, and charm. Too bad Hollywood has such a shortage.
The biggest problem is not the show, but the industry. When an industry consistently produces product that alienates the public, it's ridiculous to expect an audience to tune in to watch the denizens of said industry celebrate themselves. Hey, Hollywood, your movies stink and your stars are (at best) dull. Mr. Knolte mentions suspense as a missing element, but one crucial ingredient to suspense is rooting interest. Without good movies and glamorous stars, the audience has no rooting interest. As for the "young demographic", I remember the Oscars being a grownup show, and staying up to watch it meant you were becoming a grownup. That in itself was a little magical, but Hollywood is so invested in the war against adulthood, that they cannot fathom what that used to mean.
Absolutely. Miller could do it, and I'd watch him. but the Hollywood – NYC – Chicago/Obama crowd would put a contract out on him. He'd scare them Sh$$less.
OK, I guess somebody needs to say something positive.
I DID think the opening, "Inception"-inspired montage was halfway clever.
Its because of asswipes like LEFTerman and that Oprah Uma crap that the Oscars have suffered-he made it about HIM, NOT the ceremony! Kirk was stellar, and seeing Bob Hope only made me wish there was more of him, and more like him! Bring back hosts who know how to make magic out of mud, and come up with a witty comeback like they should have after Ms Leos F-bomb! E.g. Franco could have said that she has just been cast to star in the new Sopranos movie, and they dont even have to change much from her speech! THAT would be comic gold! Unfortunately, the last few hosts-Steve Martin excepted-couldnt come up with a Billy Crystal-style retort if their lives depended on it!
Badges? We dont need no stinking badges!
Knew someone was going to suggest that's where I got the idea. But c'mon.
Sorry, Ms Davis, but Im not into Ellen, nor would half the rest of the country! And Kimmel annoys me, and hes a big lib. Dennis Miller would be EXCELLENT for the awards, cause he knows humor, pacing, and would have so many comebacks hed put Crystal to shame,,but, TPTB in Follywood would NEVER go for him, even if he hid the politics, But Chris Rock and Stewart could do liberal stuff, and no one would complain!
Also, next year, they should do a duo of hosts, with Gadaffi and Mubarek free, so that could be fun, lol!
Im all for that!
Great point, Ill,,the reason these hosts fail, as well as most SNL hosts, is that theyre film actors first, and live performers about tenth! Most movie actors have never perfromed live for real people, just their yes men, and the best hosts are stand up comedians, live TV performers, and stage actors, but theyd never go for the latter, so lets get some comedians who woud also know how to tell a joke to breathing individuals!
Mr KNOLTE? When did John become Slavic, lol?
You forgot #11 — fire Bruce Vilanch; it doesn't matter how young the puppets are if the puppetmaster can date himself back to the times of the Roman Empire. Hell, he probably has a T-Shirt noting his support for Maxentius.
Even so, he at least had more comedic timing that the hosts. "You know……"
No! Amateur Hour on Ludes…
"Uma – Oprah….Oprah – Uma"
I thought that was hilarious. I never understood why Letterman was lambasted so for that one joke.
Or…does that say something about me that I thought it was so funny?
I love the Morgan Freeman idea. That's exactly the kind of thing the show needs. A host who acts as the center while all else revolves around him/her.
Potential good hosts of that kind:
1. Freeman
2. Robert Downey Jr.
3. Ellen Degenerous
4. Bill Cosby
5. Jack Nicholson
6. Ben Affleck (yes, I think he could be a genial, non-variety show style host)
There are a lot who might be able to host it that way. Some might be too unstable (like Jeff Bridges and his occasional drugged out demeanor), but there are some solid actors out there who could simply be the glue without the glitz.
…and Leo. Why does Leo never get any love from the Academy. He's a very good actor. It's like they won't forgive him for Titanic. Titanic wasn't his fault. Cameron's dialogue was crap.
People don't watch, and won't watch, no matter who hosts it or how clever it is because some of us don't agree with the overall left leaning in hollywood and don't care to watch them honor themselves.
Someone always works in an annoying political view in their acceptance speech and there is at least one four letter word that has to be bleeped.
I disagree about Douglas. The stroke may have weakened him physically, but it was more than obvious that did nothing to weaken his mind or even affect his comic timing.
Miller would be fab, but his jokes are so cerebral they would be lost on the Hollyweird 'elite'.
Franco acted the way he did because he knew how bad it was. He couldn't hide it.
I'm a little disappointed in him. Hathaway at least tried – though some think she tried to hard. Franco has the talent and humor pull off the hosting job, but he was totally phoning it in….on his bong.
Don't know how old you are, but I'd guess college-age. I say that because there seems to be an epidemic of younger people using certain terms as slurs: worlds like "old," "elderly," "out-of-touch," "enfeebled," and "grandpa."
No one wants to watch "grandpa"? Whether he was up to it, as the writer said, or not, as you did, the remark
was shallow, mean-spirited, and unnecessary.
Stifle!
Does he actually have a steady gig OTHER than the Oscars?
One of the most cringe-inducing Oscar moments I can remember is when Zhang Ziyi was a presenter. Great actress, heatbreakingly beautiful…..but at the time, definitely NOT fluent with the English language. Having her engage in Tracy/Hepburn-esque banter in English is pretty high on the stupid meter. Not her fault, but the fault of the writers/producers.
Dennis Miller's an excellent suggestion. Please, dear writer, not Morgan Freeman. Isn't it enough that he told the Shawshank story and played God? I kinda think he's been sanctified enough. I'm sure he's a nice person, but….he's not the answer to every situation that needs gravitas or class.
thankfully the live chat was so much better than the Oscar telecast!! The show was boring, there was no focus, the writing was abhorrent and the hosts were horrible. They need an entire revamp of the show from host to producer to writers plus they need decent movies to honor. Not sure this version of humpty dumpty can be put back together again.
I heard the broadcast was so bad that even Woody Allen stayed away….
Like I said, it was the highlight of the show. I guess it says something about me, too, because I also thought it was funny. The only reason I watched the Oscars that year was because of Dave. I used to be a fan of his.
Not now, though.
How 'bout Charlie Sheen? Wouldn't be boring….
Hey, my folks were married.
That word always reminds me of a joke: An old man had three grown sons and not one of them remembered his birthday – not a gift or card, not even a phone call. It wasn't long after the old man's birthday that he lay on his deathbed with his sons gathered around. "I've got something to tell you boys." the old man confessed. "Your mother and I were never married." "You mean we're….?" exclaimed one of his sons. "Yes," replied the old man.
"And cheap ones, too."
I believe the youth today, being tech savy, would love to see more how movies a really made.
Behind the scenes, showing FX and green screens, sound editing…
I think this is a totally different generation and more open to the magic.
Just an opnion.
The show really really sucked.
I'd tune in if they made the nominees fight gladiator-style for the award.
So do I. And what about William Shatner? He would make me laugh.
Lock the doors and make them watch Sarah Palin's Alaska and Bristol Palin on Dancing with the Stars.
LOL!
Don't hate me but why not get Ryan Seacrest off the Red Carpet and on the stage? He's so smooth and watchable.
You hit the nail on the head. Except NOT every year. It's why I have no problem with movies like LOTR: The Return of the King winning, or even Titanic. And The King's Speech was hardly the usual boring period piece that usually gets nominated. It had real heart and wonderful humor despite being about otherwise privileged royalty.
The years I don't watch the Oscars are usually because the movies are boring and stupid and only the insiders like them. I've always thought that there should even be categories so that ALL good films have a chance. The Oscars are usually very snobby which is why I was surprised any of the LOTR were nominated and the last one actually won!
I'm closer to grandpa's age than college age, actually. I'm not saying they need to keep Mr. Douglas locked in the house – Oscar has always brought back surviving members of old Hollywood to present and what not – but I'm also not deluding myself into believing that having stroke-addled, 94-year-old Kirk Douglas take a stab at pulling off a comedy bit was riveting television.
Yeah, we should all be so lucky to live to the age Kirk Douglas has and function half as well. No argument there. But once you get past that acknowledgement, let's keep the show moving.
I like the Ellen suggestion, unlike your other "repliers".
;-D
I think many more people like her because as far as I can tell, she's generally non-political.
Kimmel is okay. But I've seen better.
I LOVED Billy Crystal. And since he's the only host I like that's still alive, I say give it back to him. Otherwise, let's clone Bob Hope and Johnny Carson.
Reminds me of the Get Smart movie. The bad guy is going to blow up some event that's full of celebrities and he makes some kind of comment about what a great loss it would be because we would miss their mind-blowing erudite political opinions.
I laughed very hard and very loudly at that line.
I agree 100%.
What's wrong with Billy Crystal!?
"Obama has no place at the Oscars. It was forced and inappropriate, and I'd be willing to bet he doesnt know the Casablance movie well…maybe about as well as he knew the White Sox players."
AMEN! And it scared the crap out of me! AAGHHH, Big Brother!!!!
"Last night no one spoke longer than Kirk Douglas and yet no one was bored. We couldn’t get enough of him. He was charming and funny and we adore the guy."
No. Not just 'no", but HELL NO in 100-point font.
Kirk Douglas was a 94-year old man still recovering from a stroke. If we are to honor Hollywood's past, let us do so with DIGNITY! I saw absolutely NOTHING funny about his "performance" last night
I agree with many of these comments.
The thing about Billy Crystal is that I'm sure they ask him every year, but he doesn't want to host the Oscars anymore. A lot of these comedians don't want to – at least not every year – even though it would probably benefit the show to have someone commit to it like that.
Miller would be awesome!
Sorry, but I totally disagree. (Sorry also if you were being sarcastic.)
I think the proliferation of behind-the-scenes specials and DVD extras has done the complete opposite. They destroy the magic. Sausage is great, until you see how it's actually made.
The line about our old LaSalle running great has always struck me as odd. It should have run great. It was a high-end luxury car, and not some crummy piece of junk. If Archie and Edith drove a LaSalle, they were a lot better off than we were lead to believe.
Billy Crystal….YES!
I was pleasantly surprised at the positive audience reaction when he took the stage.
This year, they couldn't have done worse if they'd hired Charlie Sheen and told him he could bring the hookers onstage.
I think you under state how inappropriate Franco is. All the great hosts of the past – Hope, Carson, and Crystal – were stand up comedians of vast experience. Franco is what would have once been called a contract player and a minor one at that. He plays second leads in big films and only gets to play leads in minor films. He has never been in a big comedy – so who thought he was going to be funny? There are at least a dozen ex-SNL actors working in Hollywood who might (or might not) be funny. But what are the odds that this guy who has never been funny in any venue will suddenly blossom if given the spotlight in front of a billion watchers?
Franco is not even a movie actor at all. His fame comes from his TV soap opera roles. George Clooney also started as a soaper but he advanced. Franco's casting looks suspiciously like an attempt to boost this young guy's career. I think we should give an award to his agent.
Nobody wants to tune in to watch Hollywood masturbate for 4 hours without anybody getting naked.
If they REALLY wanted it to be a ratings boon, they'd book Rickie Gervis next year.Catfights were always a ratings bonanza for Dallas.
Bu, buh, but, it's got to be "hip" and "edgy"! We gotta have someone utter the f-word at least once. We gotta be progressive, c'monnnnnn!
You must be logged in to post a comment.