Skip navigation

Oscar's hits & misses

LIAM LACEY

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 11:16 AM EDT 25/02/09

The 'Super Bowl for women' was all about taking risks this year. ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Joe the violist from Canada writes: This isn't the first critic going on about how much the Oscar telecast viewership needs to improve. Should the ratings be that much of a concern? I'd rather keep the voting in the hands of the Academy -- people in the industry who actually know the merits of filmmaking and watch the nominated films -- instead of opening up voting to the masses a la American Idol in an effort to draw additional viewers to the telecast. Television ratings are ephemeral, a concern for 4 hours of television on one day of the year, whereas an Oscar is forever. If ratings start to dictate how the Oscars should operate, then I'd rather they just not telecast the Academy Awards. This is, after all, supposed to be an honour bestowed upon the very best in film, and not about improving the ratings of a television show. Some quick fixes would be cutting those silly montages, and excessive musical numbers. Also, try starting the show earlier -- you viewers in the East get pretty cranky about having to stay up so late. But don't start messing with how the awards are given out. If its so important that the people vote, theres the "People's Choice Awards," the "MTV Awards" and thousands of Internet sites. Keep the voting in the hands of the 6,000 members of the Academy. Five years from now no one will care about television ratings or remember how good or bad the Oscar show was. Instead they'll remember how they were moved to tears later that week when they went and saw an Oscar winning film about an underdog in India, a film they probably would not have seen otherwise.
  2. Paulino Nunes from Toronto, Canada writes: You've hit the nail on the head. I was embarrassed for everyone involved in the "Musicals Are Back" number - I was flashing back to the Brady Bunch Variety Hour...

    I, too, was jonesing for some CLIPS. The fact that Slumdog Millionaire won 8 awards (1/3 of ALL awards presented) and yet amounted to a minute or so of clips in a 3 1/2 hour show is absolutely absurd. It's as if they went out of their way to keep the content of the films a secret.

    And I absolutely agree that while some of the 'Quintet of Praise' moments were genuinely interesting (DeNiro had the best line of the night), many seemed awkward or forced and some example of what these nominees were being praised for would have been nice.

    btw - there was nothing cryptic about Kunio Kato's acceptance speech. He was simply thanking his production company, Robot Communications. It was a great speech nevertheless.
  3. Bruuks Brew from Canada writes: The Oscars should not be awarded based on an American Idol style of voting by the general public. Great acting performances will get overlooked, and the popularity contest mentality will take over.

    I'm not saying the current methods are perfect either. However, to turn this into another "text .... to vote for ....." show will degrade the rich tradition of the Oscars. While I'm sure a million teenage girls can select an American idol, I don't trust them to choose between Sean Penn and Micky Rourke.
  4. Rain Couver from Canada writes: First, super bowl for women? WTF is that all about? It is the super bowl for the film industry and anyone who is passionate about films. You hear that Liam Lacey?

    Joe the violist hit the nail on the head. This award started out as a way for colleagues in the film industry to honour outstanding artistry based on a knowledge of filmmaking. I can't imagine the masses knowing how to truly appreciate cinematography, editing, sound design, etc.

    Paulino, you may not have enjoyed the musical numbers, but the Oscars are a show. Just because you don't like musicals doesn't mean that the rest of us don't, and the number is quite correct, musicals are coming back if you look at upcoming films. Most of us have seen the films in question so we don't need to see clips. If you want to see clips of Slumdog Millionaire, go see it? Anyway, that previous winners honouring the nominees was a brilliant idea.
  5. strider 643 from Canada writes: Borrinnngggggg!!
  6. Anton Berger from Kelowna, Canada writes: they held the Oscars already?
  7. R. Canuck from Canada writes: If they want to appeal to a broader audience they need a shorter show, ditch the techie awards and show some trailers! They should also have people talk about their art not thank 300 people that nobody knows. The host was fine, the singing was fine the number of awards was not. Cut the show keep it funny and keep it tight and some men might even watch.
  8. Chad Noor from Montreal, Canada writes: The Oscars are voted on by those in the know - the peers of the nominees and that's why they are different from other awards (which are voted by critics, journalists, public etc). In order to distinguish the Oscars for other awards shows, they should focus on this aspect during the broadcast - let the viewer know what went into the decision to nominate someone. When Tina Fey and Steve Martin introduced the writing awards, they gave us some insight into what went into the considerations. By showing us on screen the words that were written and how they were transformed into visuals was interesting. The same should be done for the other categories, especially the less glamourous. Examples: sound editting - show us scenes before and after Costume design - don't just show a sketch and then show the actual dress, show some of the behind the scenes It may come across too much like film school, but then again, that's what these nominations are about. That the choices someone made, when faced with hundreds of possibilities, turned out help make that aspect of the film stand out from the crowd. Help the viewer appreciate the work being honoured. Maybe people don't watch (or just focus on the big acting awards) because they don't understand what is being awarded.
  9. Hugo Hall from Calgary, Canada writes: I think awards shows are boring tripe but for those of you who insist on compromising the quality of our Sunday night television selection by watching them, I have some suggestions on making this painful exercise a bit more interesting: (1) It should not take 4 hours or so to find out what the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences thinks were the best movies and performances of the year...there are about two dozen awards, it does not need to take so long; (2) Not to disrespect the winners but sometimes the winners seem more about politics and less about merit...who in the World was actually surprised that Heath Ledger got his posthumous Oscar?; (3) More, not less, emphasis on important aspects of film such as cinematography, special effects, costumes, sound editing, etc. - backed up by some clips to better educate the public on why these aspects of filmmaking are so important to the moviegoing experience; (4) less of everything else - cut down on long speeches, political rants, cheesy musical numbers, bad jokes, cheesy tributes, montages.
  10. deepcover1 speaks from Toronto, Canada writes: I hadn't realized Hugh Jackman was so multi-talented. The show was fresh and mostly very classy.

    I loved seeing the 5 past winners speak directly to the 5 newly nominated. Did anyone notice that Anthony Hopkins looked a bit annoyed when he wasn't introduced as Sir Anthony, but Ben Kingsley was introduced as Sir Ben?
  11. truth betold from Canada writes: As a huge fan of movies of all genres from all eras, I find the Academy Awards unwatchably crass and low-brow: i.e., a TV show.

    1. The "jokes" are weakly written, under-rehearsed, and pathetically delivered. That Ben Stiller thing was more painful than a bad SNL skit.
    2. Song & Dance numbers. What decade is this? Have I tuned into the Carol Burnett Show by mistake?
    3. Politics. Marlon Brando's grandstanding. George Clooney's "smug", Tim Robbins/Susan Sarandon's speechifying, Michael Moore's fatuousness, Sean Penn's self-satisfaction.
    4. The Quintets of Praise. That was brutal. I've seen more sincere pitches at trade shows.

    If you want to celebrate movies, offer a well-rehearsed and sharply delivered script - with clips - showing viewers what great cinematography, editing, acting, etc., has meant over 100 years of movies. Not some B-rate Aussie tap-dancing, B-rate comedians butchering jokes, and super-annuated past winners offering up fake praise for this year's nominees.

    Un. Watchable.
  12. chanel turner from Canada writes: Change the day to Saturday night--- then we can stay up late... shorten it- bring back the red-carpet- that is all many of us want to see--- sorry!

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top