C'mon Hollywood #152
... Oscar Schmoscar Ď08
Iíve been watching the Oscars for about 15 years now and I can easily say that this year, more than any other year, I just couldnít get into the nominated movies. The main reason is probably the fact I hadnít seen the big winner of the year (NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN), so I didnít know whether to root for it or against it. For most categories, I didnít really care who won or lost, just as long as I placed in the office pool (tied for second baby!). Someone needs to create a Hollywood version of fantasy sports!
Hottest hottie of the night?
So with that in mind, Iíll use this yearís column to rant about the telecast. First and foremost, the Academy Award producers have got to shorten the broadcast even further. Yes, this is the third year in a row Iíve complained about this, but itís still too long. Every host Iíve seen has always joked about it, but itís a serious problem. Us poor saps on the East Coast have to stay up until midnight on a work/school day just to watch the big awards. This wasnít so bad when I was 16, but itís getting a little rough in my old age. Like Iíve said before, axe the musical numbers and the time slot for the Academy chairman and you got almost 30 minutes right there. This is a common and old complaint, but a three and a half hour award show is ridiculous and it leads to several other problems throughout the night.
For time related problems, I cringe every time a winner gets cut off with the music. If more than one person wins the award, then the first guy can babble on, and the second/third guy gets cut off. I absolutely loved it when Marketa Irglova was brought back onstage to give her acceptance speech. It was classless of them to cut her off in the first place, but it was cool of them to bring her back. For most winners, this is the single biggest achievement of their life, so cut them some slack. To completely contradict myself, winners need to stop babbling. Say your thanks, give your jokes (Tilda) and then move on. When you start to ramble on, it makes you look stupid. Oh, and if you try to name people in your office, or family members, you will inevitably fail to name everyone and someone will be pissed at you.
I donít care, I thought the bat joke was funny.
The ending of the broadcast also needs some work. We suffer through long montages, musical performances and a worthless producer segment only to have the two biggest awards crammed into a 30 second period. A word of advice to the Academy; if you crammed in the lesser awards, youíd keep your audience at the end. Itís not that we donít care about the lesser awards, itís just that we donít care as much. Most audience members are watching to see a) what everyone is wearing (accomplished before the broadcast even starts) and b) who wins the big 5 awards (accomplished at the very end). Boring us to tears in the middle is not a good way to keep your audience.
What do you think? The next Jack at the Oscars?
Despite the usual complaints, I thought the 2008 Academy Awards were pretty decent. I really like Jon Stewart and it was nice to see him relaxed this time as opposed to the nervous wreck he was his first year. I still like Jack Nicholson and itís cool that he shows up every year just to sit in the front row and interact with the host. I think some day weíre going to be saying the same thing about George Clooney.
|Source:||Joblo.com's Cool Columns|