As Dave Lettermen observed, “I think it takes a lot of nerve for a show that is 4 1/2 hours long to give out an award for editing.” The most popular annual complaint about the Oscars is that the show lasts too long. The speedy pace of the SAG awards fit tightly in a two-hour time-slot, and they had time for just as many awards with nobody rudely rushed offstage before they had time say, “Thanks.” Personally, the length never bothers me. I’d be happy if the Oscars started right around noon and lasted till a couple of hours past midnight — like the Super Bowl seems to. And maybe there’s the key to the length question. Back in high school, weren’t football games played in a couple of hours? (Stop calling those time-outs and they could wrap it up an hour and 15 minutes, technically, right? Time-outs are for sissies. Get on with it! Run your asses off like the real men in soccer do. 90 minutes, tops.) So why does the Super Bowl need to last all damn day? Possibly something to do with the ad revenue of $2.5mil per 30-second spot, ya think? The Oscars bring in a little less, locked in at $1.8 mil, but that’s still plenty of incentive to pad the show in order to squeeze in as many plugs as possible for Big Macs and Cokes, L’Oreal and Amex, GM & M&M’s.
It makes no economic sense to trim the broadcast of excess fluff. The fluffier the better for ABC — even if it means a tribute montage to binoculars. 30 million viewers is what they’re telling us, and yet you’ll still hear people perpetuating the myth of a billion viewers worldwide. (Extrapolating 15% of the US population to a global formula would get you pretty close to a billion, sure — but that’s assuming one out of 6 people in Burundi and Boliva are as jazzed about the Oscars as we are.)
But you can bet ABC will be looking for somebody to blame — anyone but themselves — and my guess is that Jon Stewart is the fall guy. For the record, I thought he was superb, and he earned enough cred with his handling of the Marketa Irglova incident for me to nominate him as Oscar Host for Life. But that kind of spontaneous graciousness might’ve only irked the execs with their finger on the orchestra trigger, so who knows?
The question is, who could possibly do a better than Stewart? Film.com has 5 suggestions (all of which suck) so who else might help deliver a ratings boost along with the requisite touch of class? (as Pete said earlier today, maybe “the selection of a more appropriate host from the film community itself.”) Jon Stewart has set the bar pretty high. Any thoughts on a serious alternative?
This post is awesome. I’m impressed by your style – experienced blogger, huh? Added your blog to my favs.
Billy Crystal is a god. That aside, you KNOW they’re asking Conan when takes over the Tonight Show gig. (And he’ll be great.)
I think Jon Stewart was great this year (even better than he was the first time). I liked Ellen Degeneres last year and I hope she’ll be back again.
But please – no Jerry Seinfeld…
For someone new: What about Jack Nicholson? He’s in the frame most of the time anyway…
Tina Fey seems like someone who might get asked next year, and I’d be cool with that. I don’t see Baldwin hosting, though.
I thought John Stewart was great. The ratings weren’t his fault. People decided in advance not to watch, probably because they weren’t interested in most of the nominated films, and many of the nominees, and that is our tragedy.
I thought Stewart was superb as well, but sooner or later, they’ll go with someone new.
I remember reading that Jason Alexander did a bang-up job emceeing at the Scripters or one of those things this year. He’s someone I could see becoming sort of a Bob Hope/Billy Crystal down the line.
I could also see them going with someone like Tina Fey. Alec Baldwin would be great, but he’s too big a star, most likely.
I also predict they ask Steve Carrell pretty soon, if they haven’t already.
queen latifah
Was I the only person who thought Jon Stewart was EXCELLENT 2 years ago? He was great then AND now.
Barring that however, if it had to be somebody else, how about film celebrities who love film – say…
Quinton Tarantino (…He was great at Cannes a few years back.)
beyond that, the only person I can think of is…
ME!!! I wanna host the oscars! With a team of hired writers I could be at least as funny as… well, Bruce Villanche, but those arguments aside, I really wanna do it!
free…i predict obama will win both tx and ohio!
go obama….
Stewart really upped his game this time. He wasn’t good last time, but he was great this year. His decision to bring back the Once actor is reason enough to bring him back.
And I absolutely hate the idea of having Seinfeld or Jack Black host. Two people I’ve always found overrated and terribly unfunny.
I’d go for Stewart, Colbert, Lewis Black, Will Ferrell. Dave Chapelle would probably be funny, but it’d be nice if they had a black host who DIDN’T polarize the audience racially like Hughley did at the BFCA. It’s always uncomfortable and unfunny. And as an African-American myself, it’s kind of embarassing.
Pierre, just saw your post…Clooney would be great…think of Damion and pitt, and julia roberts joining him a bit. there is a Bob Hope quality to Clooney’s joke-e-ness.
I’d definitely say Crystal. nobody even comes close in this generation.
then i would say try out some new people like seinfeld, jim carrey or robin williams. robin might be a little too “out there” for this watered-down era, but if they want ratings, then they should want robin williams and his craziness and unpredictability.
if not, then whoopi seems to be pretty good also.
Jerry S. Nope. I am probably the only guy on earth who disliked the tv show.
John Stewart was fine. Ellen would be fine again.
Early on I liked HOPE…thats Bobby Hope….but later on he was too republican.
We need significant movies, crowd pleasers, to get the oscars UP again. However, the suits are only interested in money…if the they LOVED MOVIES, the money would come…but they actually HATE WHAT THEY ARE DOING. not all, but most.
Crystal is, indeed, king. but i’ve always thought Bette Midler would be a hoot as host. you need a performer, someone who can think on their feet. most of today’s “movie stars” can’t function off the set or w/o a script. many lack a theatrical background and are uncomfortable in front of an audience.
I’m really disappointed in the ratings, because I agree that Jon Stewart was wonderful this year. Quick and smart but didn’t hog the spotlight and kept the show moving along well. It was perhaps too political in parts (most people outside the US that were watching are far more interested in the films than they are in the democratic candidacy, and some might argue the same for the US audience) but overall I thought he was a great host. Much improved on last time. The Norbit quip was a classic- he pushes the boundaries just enough. I hope he comes back when there’s a big hit like Titanic or Lord of the Rings and people realise it’s not about him, it’s all about the mass appeal of the films.
How abut Tim Gunn–it would have elegance and class and someone everybody loves. I know he’s not in the movie business–but he should be a star.
Apparently the Stewart bringing Irglova back on stage was Gil Cates’ idea according to the Associated Press: http://oscars.movies.yahoo.com/news/reuters/20080224/1714.html
I’m actually inclined to believe him since the orchestra actually stopped playing to let her speak, but she had already left the stage.
Mark–Good try, but we’ll have the same old show with new faces.
Tero, you took the words right out of my mouth. Conan O’Brien has shown us, by hosting the Emmys awhile back, just how well he’d do at the Oscars. He’s funny, musically talented, as well, and respectable enough for the prestige-conscious Academy. What’s more, he’s hip enough that iconoclasts and sophists wouldn’t be totally appalled. I’d even bet that he ends up doing it someday.
Pete really has an interesting notion with Oprah. I wonder whether she’d accept if asked. I bet it would get people to watch.
For that matter, Queen Latifah could work the Kodak Theater blindfolded, and George Clooney — if he’d ever accept — I think would be great, as well.
No matter who hosts, the show needs to get rid of Gil Cates once and for all. Billy Crystal’s day is past — he gets more borscht belt with each passing year.
Whether you like Jon Stewart or not — and I like him a lot — I don’t think he and the Oscarcast have the right chemistry. His fame — if you can call it that — is almost entirely due to political humor. He’s simply not enough part of Hollywood to give the show the tone it needs.
Perhaphs the Oscars should try going back to the multiple host format, then we wouldn’t be able to blame any one person. Personally, I loved Jon Stewart and I would love to see him host next year. But continuing with the multiple host idea, perhaps they should have Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Steve Carell, Conan O’Brien and a few other very funny people who could tag team the whole show.
Did I miss something here? This was, by my estimate, one of the shortest Oscar ceremonies, at just over 3 hours & fifteen minutes (or am I dumb?). I enjoyed it thoroughly. No complaints from me. Stewart was in fine form. I laughed, I was amused even when not laughing and the presenters were well selected. The nominated films were some of the best in a very long time. It had a consistent pace and ended before you knew it. So where did it go wrong? Perhaps in the fact that millions of Amercians decided to ignore it. That’s all that really happened. People no longer appreciate quality films. They want their popcorn & soda combo entertainment. They will not sit through ATONEMENT or THERE WILL BE BLOOD and would hardly consider watching these film rewarded at som awards ceremony. Now as for the next host. I am prepared for any decision made –
Steve Martin or Billy Crystal both would be great repeat hosts but I’d love to see Lily Tomlin give it a shot!
Stewart was great both times he hosted. I consider him the best host after Bob Hope and Billy Crystal. I wouldn’t mind if he hosted again in the future, or every ceremony from now on in that case. It’s rare to have a host that doesn’t kiss the celebrities’ asses all the time. Stewart was neutral, and very very funny. The first time he hosted I sort of got the feeling that he didn’t know much about the movies, but he was still funny. This time around I could tell he definitely saw the movies, and was caring a little more than the last time he hosted. The rating of the ceremonies have been going downhill, and it’s hardly Stewart’s fault; it’s just the general trend of it. People don’t care much for the Oscars anymore, and Stewart shouldn’t take the blame for it.
Robin Williams and Jim Carrey would try to overdo it.
How about a Stewart/Colbert tag-team?
Billy Crystal, of course, will always be untouchable.
None of you is thinking outside the box–one conventional comedian after another.
How about a former Oscar nominee and public icon who will feed the publicity machine for weeks prior to the ceremony. Who? None other than Oprah Winfrey.
We could not count on her for comedy but she would officiate with good humor, dignity, respect for the nominees and the industry and we would hang on her every word.
Imagine the millions of people who would want to know how Oprah would handle the assignment.
The template for the show needs to be rethunk.
I thought we were just discussing alternate hosts for the sake of it. I thought Jon Stewart was great both years he hosted, it’s very rare that a host will make fun of the quality of an actual nominee like he did with Norbit and Cinderella Man’s makeup nominations in their respective years.
To be fair to him, he was lumped with arguably the two least audience-friendly years in recent memory as far as nominees go (“Juno” this year notwithstanding).
Danny Trejo?! WTF!
For me, I’d go after Robin Williams for a first time solo host.
My repeat offender might have to be Ellen Degeneres.
Billy Crystal is unbeatable, I think…
Conan O’Brien would be really good, too…
My God, they had celebrities galore at the ceremony. Even Nicole Kidman took a secondary role to amp up the glamour.
The show will always have a share of awfulness no matter who hosts the show. And after the two and half hour mark, you’re ready to go to sleep.
Stewart can hardly be blamed for the low ratings. First of all, the writers’ strike made many wonder if the show would happen at all–and brought into question the importance of the Oscars in the first place. And you can’t deny that four out of the five movies nominated for best picture were far from beloved by the general public so why should they bother watching? I do think if they want to regain an audience they need to bring back real movie celebrities on the show and past Oscar winners.
Turn the show over to someone who now has his hand on the pulse of the audience–Judd Apatow. Make him the chief writer and take people from his stable of performers to act as hosts. That would bring in the younger audience though it might outrage the older Academy members.
Failing that, I say Billy Crystal is King.
If it was Jerry Seinfeld then I just couldn’t watch the show! ANYONE ELSE!!!
I like th idea of Jack Black – or even Billy Crystal.
PS. Why are we having this discussion anyway? John Stewart was excellent. And no-one is ever going to be 100% perfect (except maybe Bob Hope – and asking him to come back is a little OTT).
I thought Jerry Seinfeld was pretty much auditioning for the part when he did his Best Documentary presentation last year (and he should have got it), but according to an interview he did with Empire magazine a couple of months ago, they ask him all the time and he always says no. He said it was a thankless job and there’s no reason for him to do it really.
I think they should bring back actual film stars. Jim Carrey or Robin Williams or something would be pushing it probably (although Williams is always great when he has to present an award) but I think Jack Black or Will Ferrell especially could do a good job (although I doubt anyone else will agree).
Arlen,
Way to kill the discussion, dude.
Sort of ruins it for everybody when you give the most perfect answer in comment #6.
😉
JERRY SEINFELD
He would kill.
Bruce in Ithaca,
Genius, you. Let me tell ya, I was hooked up by electrodes in a chat window Sunday night, so for me Sasha was co-host. And so brilliant, words cannot express — I’m sorry you guys had to miss most of it. (It was on tape-delay, for fear of expletives, and the delay was set for about 5 months, just to be extra safe.)
Fun night for all of us — too bad I had more fun than any of you.
(Except, maybe, for the Miramax party later… and that would be more fun only if I could’ve managed to switch places with Penelope Cruz).
But this gives me something to look forward to next year.
Nope, not the Miramax party (shooting for 2010 on that.) I mean next year we’ll have a crash-proof system for Live Blogging set up. And then you’ll all see what a sensational blast it is to have Sasha Stone as your Oscar date.
I thought that John Stewart did a better job the second time around than he did 2 years ago. However, I did not enjoy some the remarks he made. They were sarcastic and not funny. I heard and read that Colin Farrell asked that Marketa Iglova be allowed to go back out on stage to give her acceptance speech. If Stewart made this happen, then thanks a lot. For next year, it would be great to see a film star host like Billy Crystal, who was great in the past. W – hat would you all think of Chris Rock – and could the audience at the Oscars appreciate his no holds bar ( and great humor) – – – P. S. I thought the winners were well picked and oh so deserving . May 2008 give us great filmmaking as ’07 did.
I liked Ellen last year.
How about Sasha as host? 🙂