Jump to content
thuganomics85

The Annual Academy Awards Topic

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, JAYJAY1979 said:

I think Gaga shouldn't have been nominated because she was overshadowed by Bradley Cooper and I think she only got the nomination because of the hype and not because of any sort of acting ability.  I still recall Bjork's sole acting role.. and I thought she did leaps better than Gaga in terms of acting and didn't get nominated.


And I think five nominees for acting awards is fine.. and this thing about being snubbed makes me laugh because I'm sure there were movies/performances that weren't nominated that deserved to be since the start of the Oscars.  Not everyone will get recognized, or even win and that's part of life.  

Bjork was luminescent in 'Dancer In the Dark', a brilliant performance. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I would be tickled if Black Panther wins best picture.  It probably won't but I'll giggle like a loon if it does,

However I rooting hard for Ruth Carter to win for costume design because the costumes for BP were sublime!  Also for Production design because it was a breathtaking movie to look at.

I am also rooting for Spike Lee.  Glad to see he got his directing nom finally.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/25/2019 at 1:59 PM, JAYJAY1979 said:

I think Gaga shouldn't have been nominated because she was overshadowed by Bradley Cooper and I think she only got the nomination because of the hype and not because of any sort of acting ability. 

I thought she was better than competent, but when the film was at the height of its "inevitability" period in its first month of release, expected to sweep major categories, I thought I had seen a different film from most people. The reception for Gaga's performance was part of that. She does have some acting ability. She's very good at playing the surface quality essential to whatever scene she's doing. She's certainly better at it than Jennifer Hudson, who delivered one of the stiffest Oscar-winning performances in history but was great in a musical number.  

But since she (Gaga) isn't a full-time actor, she isn't well honed enough to link things up and convey much in the way of subtext, which great actors can do with a flawed script...and the script of this one was flawed, to put it charitably. The fact that I ended a long movie having no idea what the film wanted me to think about Ally (other than (1) really talented and (2) loved her man) was mostly the screenwriters' fault, but she couldn't bail it out.

Quote

And I think five nominees for acting awards is fine.. and this thing about being snubbed makes me laugh because I'm sure there were movies/performances that weren't nominated that deserved to be since the start of the Oscars.  Not everyone will get recognized, or even win and that's part of life.

Agreed. Directors too. How it ever became a talking point that no women were nominated for directing this year eludes me. None was even in the "possibles" of the predictors anywhere I was looking. Some years there's going to be a Greta Gerwig or a Kathryn Bigelow who helms one of the best-received films of the year, and it will be a big shock if she's not nominated. One hopes there will be a year soon when there are two, or three. But this was not one of those years.

Edited by Simon Boccanegra
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I'm disappointed that the nominated song from Mary Poppins Returns won't be performed. (Neither will 3 other nominated songs, apparently.)

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, Milburn Stone said:

 

I'm disappointed that the nominated song from Mary Poppins Returns won't be performed. (Neither will 3 other nominated songs, apparently.)

 

Let me guess - we’ll still hear from Lady Gaga, though, right?  Infuriating.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, Milburn Stone said:

 

I'm disappointed that the nominated song from Mary Poppins Returns won't be performed. (Neither will 3 other nominated songs, apparently.)

 

Let me guess - we’ll still hear from Lady Gaga, though, right?  Infuriating.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Crs97 said:

Let me guess - we’ll still hear from Lady Gaga, though, right?  Infuriating.

But of course. Apparently only Shallow (by Gaga) and All the Stars (by Kendrick Lamar/SZA) will be performed at the show. That might change though since they're getting some backlash for this and Lin Miranda, performs on the Mary Poppins Returns song which was nominated, tweeted his disappointment in the decision. I'm also surprised they would boot a Diane Warren nominated song as well. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

This Oscars is a clusterfork.

I'm of the belief that if you watch the Oscars on a regular basis, that you are well aware that they are long. You are also aware that you will need to watch awards being given out for sound, cinematography, editing, costume, screenplay, etc (you might even watch the end credits of a movie all the way through). Movies are not all done by the actors and actresses (newsflash!). Cutting out the distribution of the more technical awards is shameful. Those people worked hard and deserve to be recognized. I'm not sure why ABC or the Academy (or whoever is  really in charge of the telecast) are fearful that people won't watch. I saw a tweet the other day that no one ever worries about the Superbowl being cut for time, and I thought this was a brilliant comparison.

Anyway, I doubt I'll be watching.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

If they would cut the unfunny, forced banter between presenters, we would all be better off.  Nothing wrong with two presenters coming out and getting right into the nominees.  I don’t need an explanation of why it’s important to recognize the writer who adapted material for the screen before the winner is announced.  Very few presenters can make the intro interesting, and I swear those that do are ad libbing.   Cut that and the dumb gimmicks (FYI- no one in the audience needs food during the ceremony so cut it out!), and the night would go so much faster.

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, Crs97 said:

If they would cut the unfunny, forced banter between presenters, we would all be better off.

I was thinking the same thing while watching the SAG awards.  The moments when the forced banter was eliminated were so much better.  I like to have a good host with a (hopefully) humorous opening and occasional stuff in between awards, but the banter just before the announcement of the nominees rarely works.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

The banter between presenters is often cringe-worthy.  Just announce the presenters and let them present the award.  Next!

I found ALL of the musical numbers from Mary Poppins Returns to be sub-standard.  When I go to a theater to see a Disney movie, live or animated, I fully expect to walk out of the theater humming at least one of the songs from the film.  From MPR?  Not one of them.  And to top it off, I thought every musical number in the film went on for too long.  I wanted to love the movie but I was very disappointed. 

As for the Oscar telecast, personally I think they should just play a 20 second clip from each of the 5 nominated songs and then present the award.  It's definitely wrong to allow 2 of the songs to be performed live, in full.  Should be all or nothing and I'd prefer it to be nothing.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with all of this. Why to the people running the Oscars hate the Oscars? I want to see all 24 awards handed out. I want clips of the nominated movies and performances. I want to hear all the songs.

What can be cut? An overly long opening that mostly just pointing out the famous people in the front two rows. Trips to movie theatres next door. Food delivery. Bringing in people for a surprise tour of the Oscars. A never ending magic trick, especially if the pay off sucks. Group selfies. Food raining for the ceiling. So I'm cool with no host.

Also, if they want to speed up the show, make the stage smaller. The time we spend watching people slowly walk out to microphones is unnecessary. It won't be hours worth of savings, but the stage design slows down the show. Same with the seating. They seat below line nominees way in the back so they can have non-nominated stars up front, have some poor set designer take 90 seconds to get to the microphone and then only give her 30 seconds to give her speech. Maybe rotate the seating so that nominees are up front for their categories?

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/22/2019 at 10:20 AM, Camille said:

It appears that poor Amy Adams (officially the Susan Lucci of the Oscars) will once again go home empty handed, being up against Regina King for Best Supporting Actress.

The Susan Lucci of the Oscars is Glenn Close. She may actually WIN this year.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I remember there was at least one year where they actually explained what each job was before presenting the award.  I'd like to see that again.  Lots of people don't know the difference between sound mixing and sound editing, for example, so having the presenter explain, or the production providing a quick demonstration, wouldn't hurt.  If done right, they could then use that to build to Best Picture and that award would feel more like the culmination of the night rather than the moment we can finally stop watching.

Not having a host should, in theory, also stop some of the random segments but I wouldn't be surprised if they take this as a challenge and go totally bonkers.  But they should still feed everyone.  That's one tradition that needs to stay.  I've enjoyed watching different actors zero in on the pizza, cookies, and other snacks when they show up.  Plus they're all in much better moods when they've had something to eat.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, scarynikki12 said:

Not having a host should, in theory, also stop some of the random segments but I wouldn't be surprised if they take this as a challenge and go totally bonkers.

You would think but they'd probably just up the random montages that have dominated the show recently.  "Random clips of westerns."  "Dancing people in black and white."  "Costumes through the years." 

Just a second or two that you can barely see or recognize honoring the past (where most people are dead) and they're indistinguishable from year-to-year.

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/29/2019 at 3:23 PM, Crs97 said:

If they would cut the unfunny, forced banter between presenters, we would all be better off.  Nothing wrong with two presenters coming out and getting right into the nominees.  I don’t need an explanation of why it’s important to recognize the writer who adapted material for the screen before the winner is announced.  Very few presenters can make the intro interesting, and I swear those that do are ad libbing.   Cut that and the dumb gimmicks (FYI- no one in the audience needs food during the ceremony so cut it out!), and the night would go so much faster.

Respectfully, I disagree with the bolded comment. The Oscars (actual ceremony) starts at around 5:30PM Pacific Time. But the nominees & other attendees have to arrive who knows how much earlier than that, so the nominees can navigate through the red carpet interviews & the others can just get to their seats, or in the venue, before airtime. So, let’s say most nominees/attendees will be leaving home or their hotel perhaps between 3:30 & 4PM Pacific. Then the ceremony could last 3 to 3 & a half hours, or longer. Unless they ate breakfast or tried to eat something while getting ready (& hoping they don’t spill on their fancy duds while doing that)—& many nominees may be either too nervous (or superstitious) to eat before the ceremony—if they don’t bring munchies from home, or the bar doesn’t have hors d’ oeuvres to go with the drinks, they won’t be eating until the Governor’s Ball, other after parties they may attend, or until they hit up In and Out Hamburgers or their other favorite junk food joint after the awards. That could be around 8:30/9PM, or even later. Some people who go to this either can’t wait that long to eat, once their nervousness about winning or not ends, or perhaps they need to eat at a certain time for medical reasons, & they can’t change it just because of the Oscars. So, some people may need food during the ceremony, I think. Plus, like @scarynikki12said, they’re all in much better moods when they’ve had something to eat (&, I hope, less likely to get drunk if booze were the only thing available to consume). If having a food-related bit in the ceremony helps, I’m all for it.

Edited by BW Manilowe · Reason: To fix a spacing issue.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Mileage definitely varies.  I loved hearing afterward the awards show that Melissa McCartney snuck in sandwiches.  Unfortunately, I have no doubt that we will have a long gimmick at this ceremony involving her and food.  I won’t think it funny because it will be a retread of past stunts, she already did it, and it will take away from winning speeches.  Someone who has dedicated his or her life to perfecting his/her craft finally gets recognized and gets played off stage so we can chuckle yet again at some exaggerated “hoagie” cannon.  Not my thing.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Irlandesa said:

You would think but they'd probably just up the random montages that have dominated the show recently.  "Random clips of westerns."  "Dancing people in black and white."  "Costumes through the years." 

Just a second or two that you can barely see or recognize honoring the past (where most people are dead) and they're indistinguishable from year-to-year.

God, do I agree with this. I'll never forget the year a while back when there was that montage of "children in film." No reason for it, no topical thing going on in the news related to children, just because. Someone in production had the earth-shaking realization that a lot of movies over 100 years had featured children, so we got a time-wasting montage. Hey, remember Shirley Temple? Remember Paper Moon? Remember those kids on bicycles in E.T.? Remember Robin Williams's kids in Mrs. Doubtfire?  

I would like all such things cut except for the in memoriam montage. Unless Harrison Ford or someone else associated with Raiders of the Lost Ark is getting a lifetime achievement award, I never want to see Indiana Jones running from that boulder again.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

There was a time--I'm going to say as recently as the early years of this century--when the montages actually worked to remind me in a visceral, emotional way how central the movies are to our culture, to our very psychologies. But the montages don't work on me that way anymore. I can think of three reasons this might be so, and I really don't know which of the three it is: 1) The montages are not being put together by people who themselves understand the importance of movies; 2) The montages are being put together as well as they ever were, but the show that surrounds them robs them of impact; or 3) The movies actually don't occupy the central place in our culture and psychologies that they once did, and no amount of art or craft in the creation of montage can change that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think it can be another reason in that anyone can get a montage these days---done better than anything the Oscars have done.

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
On 29/1/2019 at 6:22 PM, truthaboutluv said:

Apparently only Shallow (by Gaga)

I wonder if she’ll ham it up as much as she did in Vegas last week. Oh who am I kidding of course she will.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Regarding the nominated Original Songs, as predicted, because they were getting called out, the Academy announced yesterday that a shorter version of all the nominated songs will be performed on the night. 

 

4 hours ago, Chas411 said:

I wonder if she’ll ham it up as much as she did in Vegas last week. Oh who am I kidding of course she will.

It's funny how different people can view the same thing because I saw so much gushing about that Vegas performance (I assume you're referring to the one where Bradley joined her on stage) with people going on about their amazing chemistry, etc. I mean I'm going to assume these were fans of the movie so they may be biased. But honestly I watched the performance and felt the same way I have felt whenever Gaga goes on about Bradley - slightly uncomfortable. Like I feel like if I was his girlfriend, I'd have told Gaga to take a seat already. She's just so overly dramatic with it all. 

Edited by truthaboutluv

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/2/2019 at 12:55 PM, truthaboutluv said:

honestly I watched the performance and felt the same way I have felt whenever Gaga goes on about Bradley - slightly uncomfortable.

Yup. While I’m delighted most of Hollywood has copped how insanely dramatic she is about their relationship (not to mention. That She keeps trying to imply the relationship mirrors that form ASIB). I’m surprised nobody has called out how inappropriate she acts around him considering he’s supposed to be in a committed relationship.. but also the fact that he lets her and until he finally realized at the Golden Globes everyone was laughing st them he seemed Just as into the act as her.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎2019‎-‎01‎-‎29 at 6:27 PM, BW Manilowe said:

Respectfully, I disagree with the bolded comment. The Oscars (actual ceremony) starts at around 5:30PM Pacific Time. But the nominees & other attendees have to arrive who knows how much earlier than that, so the nominees can navigate through the red carpet interviews & the others can just get to their seats, or in the venue, before airtime. So, let’s say most nominees/attendees will be leaving home or their hotel perhaps between 3:30 & 4PM Pacific. Then the ceremony could last 3 to 3 & a half hours, or longer. Unless they ate breakfast or tried to eat something while getting ready (& hoping they don’t spill on their fancy duds while doing that)—& many nominees may be either too nervous (or superstitious) to eat before the ceremony—if they don’t bring munchies from home, or the bar doesn’t have hors d’ oeuvres to go with the drinks, they won’t be eating until the Governor’s Ball, other after parties they may attend, or until they hit up In and Out Hamburgers or their other favorite junk food joint after the awards. That could be around 8:30/9PM, or even later. Some people who go to this either can’t wait that long to eat, once their nervousness about winning or not ends, or perhaps they need to eat at a certain time for medical reasons, & they can’t change it just because of the Oscars. So, some people may need food during the ceremony, I think. Plus, like @scarynikki12said, they’re all in much better moods when they’ve had something to eat (&, I hope, less likely to get drunk if booze were the only thing available to consume). If having a food-related bit in the ceremony helps, I’m all for it.

A protein bar, in the purse or in the pocket, that is how the rest of us survive in food-deprived situations.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

I put a poll up on Twitter to try and convince The Academy (AMPAS) to change the day the Oscars are held to a Friday or Saturday so that we don't have to stay up so late on a work night.

So far, I only have 1 vote. This is why I'm posting a link here (hoping to get more votes because I feel very strongly about this).

Thank you.

Click here to vote

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Jul 68 said:

I put a poll up on Twitter to try and convince The Academy (AMPAS) to change the day the Oscars are held to a Friday or Saturday so that we don't have to stay up so late on a work night.

So far, I only have 1 vote. This is why I'm posting a link here (hoping to get more votes because I feel very strongly about this).

Thank you.

Click here to vote

Good lord. You're NOT joking?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Jul 68 said:

I put a poll up on Twitter to try and convince The Academy (AMPAS) to change the day the Oscars are held to a Friday or Saturday so that we don't have to stay up so late on a work night.

So far, I only have 1 vote. This is why I'm posting a link here (hoping to get more votes because I feel very strongly about this).

Thank you.

Click here to vote

I don't know if you're aware of this or not but through 1998, the Oscars were held on a Monday night at 9 p.m.  In 1999, they were moved to Sunday night at 8:30 p.m.  Sunday was the compromise, specifically because it's not on a workday which means no L.A. traffic jams, but even that was not a preferred night as producers feared a Sunday night telecast would cut into weekend box office.

Sorry, but they're not changing the night of the awards.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, ProudMary said:

I don't know if you're aware of this or not but through 1998, the Oscars were held on a Monday night at 9 p.m.  In 1999, they were moved to Sunday night at 8:30 p.m.  Sunday was the compromise, specifically because it's not on a workday which means no L.A. traffic jams, but even that was not a preferred night as producers feared a Sunday night telecast would cut into weekend box office.

Sorry, but they're not changing the night of the awards.

Thanks for the info. I didn't remember all of the changes over the years. But hey, a girl can dream. 💫

Maybe it would help if they simulcast it in theaters. They really need to toss some actual creativity into the broadcast to keep it relevant. This idea would bring people back into the theaters (which they've been begging for) and get them off the couch/streaming (no offence to Netflix and Roma intended).

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/29/2019 at 12:22 PM, truthaboutluv said:

But of course. Apparently only Shallow (by Gaga) and All the Stars (by Kendrick Lamar/SZA) will be performed at the show. That might change though since they're getting some backlash for this and Lin Miranda, performs on the Mary Poppins Returns song which was nominated, tweeted his disappointment in the decision. I'm also surprised they would boot a Diane Warren nominated song as well. 

I think there was a backlash and now all of the songs will be performed.  It was announced that a "special guest" will perform the song from "Mary Poppins Returns".  Does anyone NOT think it will be Dame Julie Andrews?  I know she had issues with her voice, not sure what the status of it is now, but I do think she will make an appearance (maybe with Emily Blunt) on this song.  If it's not her, or Blunt, maybe Angela Lansbury or Dick Van Dyke.  As long as no Meryl Streep!  We don't need to find a way to shoehorn her into everything even when she's not nominated.

I guess I am one of the few that is very unimpressed with "Shallow" and don't understand the fuss.  I find it very boring.

I also just read that winners will get a total of 90 seconds from the second their name is announced to the end of their speech.  Good.  Less time to read a laundry list of names, less time to proselytize.  The winners need to make every second count and decide what is most important to them.  

Edited by blackwing

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, blackwing said:

I think there was a backlash and now all of the songs will be performed. 

I know. I mentioned it a few posts above. Speaking of, word from insiders is that the Academy really wants Kendrick Lamar to perform but so far, he hasn't committed to it. So All The Stars may not be performed after all, unless SZA somehow does it herself. I'm not surprised Kendrick's not rushing to commit to this. Everyone and their mother know Gaga will win and this isn't really his scene so why bother going through the process of planning a performance and all that only to lose. 

 

Quote

I also just read that winners will get a total of 90 seconds from the second their name is announced to the end of their speech.  Good.  Less time to read a laundry list of names, less time to proselytize.  The winners need to make every second count and decide what is most important to them.  

There have been time limits for speeches for years and that hasn't stopped plenty of people from just speaking over the music. My money's on at least one or two doing the same this year. 

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, truthaboutluv said:

I know. I mentioned it a few posts above. Speaking of, word from insiders is that the Academy really wants Kendrick Lamar to perform but so far, he hasn't committed to it. So All The Stars may not be performed after all, unless SZA somehow does it herself. I'm not surprised Kendrick's not rushing to commit to this. Everyone and their mother know Gaga will win and this isn't really his scene so why bother going through the process of planning a performance and all that only to lose. 

 

There have been time limits for speeches for years and that hasn't stopped plenty of people from just speaking over the music. My money's on at least one or two doing the same this year. 

Good for him.  I can't really say I blame him.  I'm sure they want him on the show because... "diversity" and to show they are on the cutting edge.  I agree with you, why would he want to bother.

If they really want to enforce the time limits, then they need to actually enforce them.  Not like the Golden Globes where that dick from "Green Book" said "No!  No!" and just kept talking.  I think they should just turn off the microphone, have the orchestra play loudly, have the announcer start speaking, and cut away to commercial.  But I'm with you, I think they will probably cave.  Especially to a winner deemed "socially important" like Gaga for song or Regina King.  

Share this post


Link to post

I love Shallow and hope it wins. Who knew Cooper was such a fine singer.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/29/2019 at 7:52 PM, scarynikki12 said:

I remember there was at least one year where they actually explained what each job was before presenting the award.  I'd like to see that again.  Lots of people don't know the difference between sound mixing and sound editing, for example, so having the presenter explain, or the production providing a quick demonstration, wouldn't hurt.  If done right, they could then use that to build to Best Picture and that award would feel more like the culmination of the night rather than the moment we can finally stop watching.

Yeah, I like when they do that with the more technical awards.  I appreciate the little bit of knowledge.  My ideal telecast would just be no cringey patter, no stand up set, no schtick like ordering food or man-on-the-street shit.  It would be nice to have a witty host to move things along.  But an announcer can do that.

For the acting awards show a clip of each actor in a scene.  Then announce the winner.

For the song awards, perform the songs.  I do like them dispersing them throughout the show.  And then awarding the winner after the final song.

For the tecnhnical awards, explain a little of what they are, give and example or show  scene showcasing., e.g. screenwriting show a shot of the screenplay om  page then a little clip of the words on translated to the scene screen.  etc.etc.

They could cut an entire hour out of the telecast by shedding the extraneous crap.

 

And speaking of technical stuff, on a more fun note, I follow Ruth Carter (the Oscar nominated costume designer from Black Panther) and she is doing a daily 28 days of costume design where each day she tweets about the movies she's done work on and give a little snippet about them.  So far she's done: School Daze, Real life Superheros (Malcolm X, Selma, Marshall) and BAPS (don't judge me I love that movie) and today's is Black Panther.  It is a nice daily treat.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, blackwing said:

I guess I am one of the few that is very unimpressed with "Shallow" and don't understand the fuss.  I find it very boring.

It was my least favorite of the three that were submitted for consideration.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Even though they are asking winners to keep their speeches short, I’m sure there will still be a few montages.  I don’t necessarily mind montages but I would prefer if they identify the movies/actors in the clips.   Any guesses on what the montages will feature? 

Let’s see, no doubt they will be political.  So I’m thinking perhaps a montage on standing up for what you believe in, a montage on rebellions, a montage on journalists, and a montage on dream(er)s.

Share this post


Link to post

Because we all talk the next day about how the speeches of the Oscar winners, some of whom have dreamed of this moment for their whole lives, went on too long. We don't complain about the show dragging on for four and a half hours because of the filler that the self-aggrandizing producer added, and the 15-minute stretches in which awards are talked about but never actually given out, and the stilted banter of the presenters. Like, Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone will present a musical category, but only after some painful shtick reminding us that they were both in La La Land, and she pretends to hate his singing, and he pretends to have hurt feelings over it, and there are faint titters in the audience, and it drags on and on, and you start wondering if there's any reason to go on. I don't even mean go on watching the telecast; I mean life itself.  

Once again (to borrow from vibeology), the Oscars seem to be in the hands of people who hate the Oscars. Seeing (and hearing) the winners is the only reason most of us watch, unless I run with a really strange crowd. When you think back on memorable moments in the history of this telecast, do you ever say "I remember that wonderful eight minutes of Debbie Allen choreography, and that beautiful montage of aviation in film"? No. You think of what people did when their names were called, whether you loved it or hated it. Sacheen Littlefeather accepting for Brando and scolding the Hollywood people for their portrayals of Native Americans. Vanessa Redgrave blasting the "Zionist hoodlums" and getting booed. Sally Field expressing relief that they liked her. Tom Hanks rambling about the streets of heaven being too crowded with angels. The 11-year-old Anna Paquin's attack of hyperventilation. Michael Caine paying tribute to every one of his competitors. Halle Berry's full-on meltdown. Et cetera.  

Yes, some of the speeches do turn into a dull list of names, but just as often they are spontaneous and exuberant, and sometimes they are even eloquent. I feel the winners should have as much time as they need.

Not that I expect this 90-second rule to be enforced. Whenever we're told in advance that this is the year they're going to get tough, it turns out only to apply to the people in the first half of the show. That is, mostly the non-famous people in the technical and documentary categories.  

Edited by Simon Boccanegra
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, Simon Boccanegra said:

When you think back on memorable moments in the history of this telecast, do you ever say "I remember that wonderful eight minutes of Debbie Allen choreography, and that beautiful montage of aviation in film"? No.

Well, yes. Maybe not the aviation, but I do recall in years past, talking about what a great opening montage Billy Crystal did that one year, singing and "being" in all the movies that had been nominated for Best Picture. Or how Funny Whoopi Goldberg was in her second turn as host, when she riffed on having a ribbon for every cause. Or how I got all misty-eyed the year Mira Sorvino won and saw her father, Paul Sorvino (who I have loved since Law & Order), break down in tears.

In more recent years, I only tune in for the people I want to see win. Like Daniel Day-Lewis, and yes, Christian Bale. So I'll be tuning in this year to see if Bale gets that Oscar, or if Rami will get it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Honest to goodness, I enjoy the opening monologue. I thought Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin did a great job, and I enjoyed Ellen Degeneres' most recent show. I even enjoyed Seth MacFarlane, forgive me!

There are also times when I thought the montages did a great job, but there can be too many of them. Last year there were too many filmed bits and too long a bit with Jimmy and the "real" people. Cut that stuff short if not cut it altogether. There's no reason to rush everything else.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I enjoyed Seth MacFarlane as well.  I still laugh about "We Saw Your Boobs".  So many people were so uptight about this.  The reactions of actresses in the audience like Charlize, Naomi and Jennifer Lawrence were hilarious, even if they weren't "live" (they were wearing different dresses that evening).  I think back to recent Oscars shows and this is the most memorable thing I can remember about any of them.  I loved Whoopi Goldberg too.  Jimmy Kimmel was not funny so if anything I am glad we won't have a "surprise appearance by regular people" on the show this year.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I did love Jimmy Kimmel including his "feud" with Matt Damon.  "Ladies and gentleman, Ben Affleck and guest". lol! 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

An opening number and a few montages that have a relevant theme are fine.  It's the time wasted on "stunts" throughout the show that irritate, especially at the expense of speech time.  There is no reason this thing needs to run longer than 2.5 hours even if each winner gets a "whopping" two minutes to talk.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

So the BAFTA Awards, the last big precursor awards are done and here's how things seem to be shaping up for the key categories, IMHO. 

Best Picture

Looks like Roma will take it. If they could win at BAFTA, which clearly had so much love for The Favourite, the latter which is so quintessentially British, that bodes really well for their chances at the Oscars. Thing is, the BAFTA's have actually been off the last few years with their Best Picture pick. Last year they awarded Three Billboards and of course Shape of Water won the Oscar. And it's hard to ignore that PGA awarded Green Book Best Picture. And PGA is something like 90 percent accurate with their picks when it comes to what film wins the Oscar.

Best Actor 

Rami Malek is the clear favorite at this point. In fact this race has turned out very similar to the one between Michael Keaton (for Birdman) and Eddie Redmayne (for Theory of Everything) a few years ago. In that year, Keaton started the race a front runner. Then the Globes happened where both he and Redmayne won because they were competing in different categories, just like with Rami and Christian Bale at this year's Globes. Then Micheal Keaton won the Critics Choice, like Bale did this year. But then Eddie Redmayne won the SAG, like Rami and then won the BAFTA, like Rami and of course we know he won the Oscar. So hard to bet against Rami at this point but anything can happen on Oscar night so still not a complete done deal but looking close.

Best Actress

Still think Glenn Close will win even though the BAFTA awarded Olivia Colman tonight. I just think Olivia's win was one of those, "she's one of our own and was too amazing in this film for us to not award her, since we know the Oscars are going to give the trophy to Glenn".

Best Supporting Actor

This is probably the only truly sewn up acting category in my book. It's done. Mahershala's winning his second Oscar. 

Best Supporting Actress

Oh what a tangled mess. Like the Best Actor, I have to look at past award years on this one and if I do that, it is possible that Rachel Weisz might pull out a late run award season run and snatch the Oscar. I admit it was someone else who pointed this out on another board that made me realize that yes, this is shaping up exactly like a few years ago when many thought Sylvester Stallone was a sure thing to win Supporting Actor for Creed. Like Regina, Sylvester won the Golden Globe and Critics Choice but was snubbed by SAG and BAFTA. At SAG, they gave the award to Idris Elba who wasn't even nominated for an Oscar, much like Emily Blunt's win a few weeks ago. Then Mark Rylance won the BAFTA for a performance the critics had praised a lot and then of course he won the Oscar. Well Weisz just won the BAFTA. So yeah, does eerily feel like a bit of deja vu but I'm still keeping my fingers crossed for Regina. 

Best Director 

Like Mahersala for Supporting Actor, this is done. It's Cuaron. While I would love to Spike win as he's long overdue, I think he'll get his moment for Adapted Screenplay which I'm pretty sure will go to BlacKklansman. 

Edited by truthaboutluv

Share this post


Link to post

The Supporting Actress category might turn out a surprise winner this year. I wouldn't even be totally shocked if Marina de Tavira comes out of nowhere and takes it.

I thought Regina King still had a path to the Oscar if the other awards shows split, and it looks like they have, BUT...looking at how many nominations The Favourite has and how much BAFTA loved it, I have to imagine that movie is going to win something in a bigger category on Oscar night. And Rachel Weisz is basically a lead in the movie, which gives her an advantage. And despite Regina King being liked in the industry, now I'm wondering how many people are even watching Beale Street (it only got three nominations).

I'm really wavering on this one. I could see Weisz winning now, even though it'd be her second Oscar. I could also see King pulling it off. And I could see a shocker happening with de Tavira (Roma also has 10 nominations). This is the most wide open race.

Share this post


Link to post

I foresee:

Rami Malek

Glenn Close

Mahersala Ali

Regina King

Cuaron

Spike Lee for adapted screenplay

Best Picture.....hmmmmm, too close to call!

Edited by cpcathy

Share this post


Link to post

While I do think that Roma will most likely be named Best Picture, I'd just like to go on the record with my upset pick for the trophy. (If I say it "out loud," maybe it'll happen! 😁 )  Because of the preferential ballot, I honestly believe that Black Panther could slip in and grab the night's big award. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm stubborn. I'm going to keep hoping that Christian Bale wins the Oscar. If he loses and Rami wins it, I won't be that upset. But I really want Bale to win it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

So, the Academy announced today that they're taking four categories off the broadcast, to be presented during commercial breaks: Cinematography, Editing, Live-Action Short and Makeup & Hairstyling.

I think this is really absurd, to be honest. This mandate that the show HAS to be three hours doesn't apply to ANY other awards show (the Grammys were nearly four last night!). ABC is taking advantage of the Academy by demanding stupid shit like this. The Oscars are what they are, let them give out all the awards. And geez, film editing and cinematography are two of the most important below-the-line categories to filmmaking!

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

I was just coming here to post the THR article.  I'm stunned that Cinematography and Film Editing are among the "demoted" categories.  These artists deserve their due as much as the actors who are allowed to exceed the set limits for acceptance speeches just because they're recognizable to the TV audience.  Not cool, Academy. 😡

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/academy-unveils-4-oscars-categories-be-presented-commercial-breaks-1185505

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×