- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: .
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:40 am to DelU249
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:40 am to DelU249
Well, they still had 36.6 million viewers, making it one of the most watched programs of the year. The annual chest beating and gnashing of teeth over the telecast notwithstanding. The Oscars do better ratings than anything except the Super Bowl. Last year's ratings were the highest since 2000, so they were destined to dip. Nothing drives the ratings like the Oscar frontrunner (Titanic, LOTR, Avatar, and 12 Years a Slave were the biggest numbers). This year's box office leader among nominees, American Sniper, apparently failed to drive viewership (or no one thought it was going to win). A battle between Birdman and Boyhood depressed numbers, obviously.
Your advice is a mixture of good and bad:
1. The speeches were by far the best part of the show, and the only thing people will remember of this broadcast, other than the failed briefcase joke. The people upset by the speeches? We call them viewers. Besides, the solution of less spontaniety is a bad one. The speeches are the last reason to tune in. Besides, they won an Oscar, let em say what they want, particularly if its tied into the film.
2. Agreed. No reason this show should ever top 3 hours. There's 24 awards, you should be able to hand out 8 an hour, even with filler.
3. Wow. Make it less boring. No one ever thought of that. They have reduced the patter and NPH's monologue barely existed. He at least kept things moving. That was the best part of his gig, though I think we should go back to Ellen.
4. We should stop honoring good movies because the majority of the audience has shitty taste? That's like arguing if we had food awards to not honor the top restaurants because most people like McDonald's. I do think they should do a better job of honoring big tent movies, which is why they expanded the Best Picture category in the first place. Guardians of the Galaxy should've been nominated (and let's not even get into the Lego Movie's snub in animation). But the Oscars honor mainstream Hollywood movies. Cinephiles get pissed that they aren't honoring more erudite fare, and the masses get pissed that more superhero films aren't nominated. That's raging at the Oscars to honor something different than they do. If you want an award show that honors mainstream mediocrities, regardless of its quality, the Grammys still exist.
In the end, I will defend middlebrow. Most of us ARE middlebrow, and it gets sneered at by the high brow and the low brow. Making quality films that people would actually want to see is hard. I wouldn't be against expanding the categories to include something for stunts or special effects, and put it in the main show. I've heard of the idea of a choreography award for fight sequences, which would be outstanding. That involves more award bloat, but it would be adding very popular films.
But the idea that Linklater made Boyhood or Inarritu made Birdman to win an Oscar is patently absurd. They were both ambitious films that honestly started life with almost no chance of winning an Academy Award. The Oscar bait-y stuff like Imitation Game or the Theory of Everything or American Sniper (nothing like a biopic) didn't take away from the show. And looking at recent Best Picture winning, classic "Oscar Bait" doesn't work anymore.
5. Of course not. But just because they like it, it doesn't make it good, either. I think Guardians should've been nominated. Honestly, Captain America was a tense spy thriller that would've been nominated had it not been a comic book movie (the Academy loves spy thrillers). Every one of the 8 films nominated for Best Picture took home at least one Oscar, so they did spread the wealth. Which was the major problem with the show. Tight races don't get the ratings, historically, coronations do. People want to see Titanic get double digit awards.
Honestly, they could have had more $100 million films nominated. You could honor Boyhood, Birdman, and ugh, Grand Budapest Hotel while still having slots for American Sniper, Interstellar, and Gone Girl. All traditional Oscar-type films, all of which grossed $150 million. That's without getting into genre pics that grossed over $100 million and were actually good movies like Guardians, Captain America, Edge of Tomorrow, and 22 Jump Street.
There is room for both.
Your advice is a mixture of good and bad:
1. The speeches were by far the best part of the show, and the only thing people will remember of this broadcast, other than the failed briefcase joke. The people upset by the speeches? We call them viewers. Besides, the solution of less spontaniety is a bad one. The speeches are the last reason to tune in. Besides, they won an Oscar, let em say what they want, particularly if its tied into the film.
2. Agreed. No reason this show should ever top 3 hours. There's 24 awards, you should be able to hand out 8 an hour, even with filler.
3. Wow. Make it less boring. No one ever thought of that. They have reduced the patter and NPH's monologue barely existed. He at least kept things moving. That was the best part of his gig, though I think we should go back to Ellen.
4. We should stop honoring good movies because the majority of the audience has shitty taste? That's like arguing if we had food awards to not honor the top restaurants because most people like McDonald's. I do think they should do a better job of honoring big tent movies, which is why they expanded the Best Picture category in the first place. Guardians of the Galaxy should've been nominated (and let's not even get into the Lego Movie's snub in animation). But the Oscars honor mainstream Hollywood movies. Cinephiles get pissed that they aren't honoring more erudite fare, and the masses get pissed that more superhero films aren't nominated. That's raging at the Oscars to honor something different than they do. If you want an award show that honors mainstream mediocrities, regardless of its quality, the Grammys still exist.
In the end, I will defend middlebrow. Most of us ARE middlebrow, and it gets sneered at by the high brow and the low brow. Making quality films that people would actually want to see is hard. I wouldn't be against expanding the categories to include something for stunts or special effects, and put it in the main show. I've heard of the idea of a choreography award for fight sequences, which would be outstanding. That involves more award bloat, but it would be adding very popular films.
But the idea that Linklater made Boyhood or Inarritu made Birdman to win an Oscar is patently absurd. They were both ambitious films that honestly started life with almost no chance of winning an Academy Award. The Oscar bait-y stuff like Imitation Game or the Theory of Everything or American Sniper (nothing like a biopic) didn't take away from the show. And looking at recent Best Picture winning, classic "Oscar Bait" doesn't work anymore.
5. Of course not. But just because they like it, it doesn't make it good, either. I think Guardians should've been nominated. Honestly, Captain America was a tense spy thriller that would've been nominated had it not been a comic book movie (the Academy loves spy thrillers). Every one of the 8 films nominated for Best Picture took home at least one Oscar, so they did spread the wealth. Which was the major problem with the show. Tight races don't get the ratings, historically, coronations do. People want to see Titanic get double digit awards.
Honestly, they could have had more $100 million films nominated. You could honor Boyhood, Birdman, and ugh, Grand Budapest Hotel while still having slots for American Sniper, Interstellar, and Gone Girl. All traditional Oscar-type films, all of which grossed $150 million. That's without getting into genre pics that grossed over $100 million and were actually good movies like Guardians, Captain America, Edge of Tomorrow, and 22 Jump Street.
There is room for both.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:40 am to DelU249
quote:
2. Cut the run time. It's so looooooooong.
This is my biggest complaint. Most people watch to see who gets best film, best actor/actress, and best supporting actor/actress. I don't want to sit through hours and hours of best song from an animated foreign short film.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:43 am to Baloo
quote:
I've heard of the idea of a choreography award for fight sequences, which would be outstanding.
That would be awesome.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:45 am to LoveThatMoney
run time is too long.
NPH is an ok host but his writers were average.
i could take or leave the political stuff but i do like messages like the one JK Simmons had.
i'm just not the kind of person who watches someone try to convince gay kids not to commit suicide and think "WTF is this shite??!!!"
NPH is an ok host but his writers were average.
i could take or leave the political stuff but i do like messages like the one JK Simmons had.
i'm just not the kind of person who watches someone try to convince gay kids not to commit suicide and think "WTF is this shite??!!!"
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:47 am to Baloo
I like most of what you say, but for #5 I feel like you run into the problem of too many movies to nominate for not enough awards.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:49 am to DelU249
quote:
Kind of like having Heath ledger nominated for the Joker. No way he would have even been nominated had he not died.
That's pretty well regarded as one of the better villain performances since Fiennes in Schindler's List - I think he would have been nominated without dying - but, I concede that his death overshadowed the film and the Oscars that year - such a shock because he was going to be the next $20 million man in Hollywood.
quote:
He gave the best performance
quote:
One of the few times they get it right, and they did it for the wrong reasons.
Maybe so. I guess we'll never know because there is no way to separate them.
And I don't care to even try to watch the Oscar ceremony anymore - haven't in years.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:51 am to Baloo
quote:
If you want an award show that honors mainstream mediocrities, regardless of its quality, the Grammys still exist.
Good post. Agree with most of it.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:53 am to DollaChoppa
I was talking straight Best Picture there. There are 10 slots: use them. Those extra 2 slots could've gone to some combination of Guardians, Captain America, Gone Girl, and Interstellar (or Selma, but I'm just using $100mm films right now).
I do think more categories would help genre films, though that might extend the run time. Still, best choereography (put fight and dance up against each other!), best special effects, and best stunts would open up some awards for the summer blockbusters.
But, above all, STOP BEING ASHAMED OF WHAT THE OSCARS ARE. Go all out on glitz and glamour. Stop being so dour and depressing. Have fun, wear outrageous dresses, and get drunk. And I hate to say it, a few more montages of prior winners wouldn't kill you, particularly in the in memorium section. Stop telling us movies are great. Instead, show us.
I do think more categories would help genre films, though that might extend the run time. Still, best choereography (put fight and dance up against each other!), best special effects, and best stunts would open up some awards for the summer blockbusters.
But, above all, STOP BEING ASHAMED OF WHAT THE OSCARS ARE. Go all out on glitz and glamour. Stop being so dour and depressing. Have fun, wear outrageous dresses, and get drunk. And I hate to say it, a few more montages of prior winners wouldn't kill you, particularly in the in memorium section. Stop telling us movies are great. Instead, show us.
This post was edited on 2/24/15 at 9:56 am
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:56 am to TDTGodfather
quote:
i could take or leave the political stuff but i do like messages like the one JK Simmons had.
His speech was genuine and he had no desire to discuss any kind of agenda. It was what most normal people would do in that situation.
quote:
i'm just not the kind of person who watches someone try to convince gay kids not to commit suicide and think "WTF is this shite??!!!"
I couldn't relate to that guy and I'm not a fan of his movie, but I think he was at least being genuine and expressing the depths from where he came. I 100% agree with your point but its hard to hate the guy for saying that and he could've been a lot worse.
This post was edited on 2/24/15 at 9:59 am
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:58 am to DelU249
If you want to talk snubs, let's talk Calvary and Brendan Gleeson not some average summer CGI fest.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 9:58 am to Baloo
quote:
Stop telling us movies are great. Instead, show us.
100% Agree
Posted on 2/24/15 at 10:10 am to DelU249
I think the Oscars should stop pursuing a host to appeal to the "younger" crowd. They should go for a host that appeals to a female crowd, and possibly an affluent female crowd. That's their core audience. Less Harris, Franco, Hathaway and MacFarlane. More Ellen Degeneres or Tina Fey or someone who scales older. For my money, Steve Martin is the best Oscar host. Dig him up again. If you need a big musical number to kick things off... use the youngsters there.
Get rid of the stiff presentation scripts and odd presenter pairings. Don't put people out there who aren't familiar with each other or haven't worked together. Let them play off each other a little.
I like the idea of expanding the list of nominees for Best Picture. You can't overload the nomination field with little, important movies that no one has ever seen. People want to see their favorite movies in contention for awards. Give them what they want (a little more than they do now). No one watched this year because the most mainstream movie was American Sniper, and that movie's audience hates the Oscars. Of the remaining 7, 6 would be considered "smaller" movies with limited mainstream appeal (Selma is the other one - goodbye, white audience!).
Always remember... the highest rated Oscars ever was when Titanic won Best Picture and Billy Crystal hosted.
Titanic - female audience. Big hollywood glamour. Huge blockbuster in the mix for pretty much every award.
Billy Crystal - Triple threat performer, older, established, female-friendly.
Hit the shite out of the female audience and go mainstream if you want to win ratings-wise on Oscar night.
Otherwise, don't complain. You're digging your own grave.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 10:18 am to FairhopeTider
quote:
If the Oscars is truly a celebration of movies
It's not. The Oscars, like all other awards shows, are just avenues for celebrities to pat themselves on the back in front of millions of people. I got fed up with that shite. I never watch any of the awards shows anymore.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 10:34 am to DelU249
quote:Without reading OP, I'm going to guess because. . . the Oscars sucks.
So the Oscar Ratings Sucked Big Balls, Here's Why
This was my first year - and certainly not my last - to not watch the Oscars. I care about the awards and who wins them, but I have no interest in the show itself. After reading the responses to this year's show and hearing some of the plights the rich celebs tried to bring to light (whilst patting themselves on the back), I'm glad I didn't watch.
This post was edited on 2/24/15 at 10:42 am
Posted on 2/24/15 at 10:34 am to DelU249
oscars were doomed when interstellar wasnt nominated for best picture and best director
Posted on 2/24/15 at 10:37 am to FairhopeTider
quote:
If the Oscars is truly a celebration of movies, then make it one instead a celebration of celebrity or political agendas.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 10:39 am to Baloo
quote:
I do think more categories would help genre films, though that might extend the run time. Still, best choereography (put fight and dance up against each other!), best special effects, and best stunts would open up some awards for the summer blockbusters
no just move the effects and editing awards to the technical oscars.
i do think cinematography should stay with the big show. and i'm torn on things like costume and set design but to bring in other categories you could drop those as well (not drop, add to tech oscars).
keep both screenplay categories iwth the big show though and animated and docs too.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 10:40 am to DelU249
quote:
There's nothing brave or memorable about you delivering an opinion to a room full of people who agree with you.
Yes
quote:
2. Cut the run time. It's so looooooooong.
3. Make it less boring. maybe ditch the cards and have your presenters give natural presentations for the category.
Yes
quote:
Kind of like having Heath ledger nominated for the Joker. No way he would have even been nominated had he not died.
Yes
quote:
grand Budapest hotel (and my wife loves WA), that movie just sucked
No
This post was edited on 2/24/15 at 10:42 am
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:04 am to DelU249
Announce all the good awards first to keep your audience. There are too many categories no one cares about. They are so worried about social issues but in reality they make so much money it doesn't really matter to them. They are so against war but in reality they have no clue what the military goes through. They love Obama but they are so clueless and blame Bush for everything even though Obama has been in office for a long time and has just as many issues with his presidency as Bush did, stop using the blame the Bush card, it's tired and over. The only movies saving Hollywood right now have nothing to do with the Oscar caliber films. I'm sure it burns all of them to see what numbers American Sniper was able to bring in at a down time at the box office.
Popular
Back to top



4








