As someone who has been lucky enough to attend the Oscar telecast, I’ve seen firsthand that the host’s job is a thankless one. I have not attended a single Oscars show where the host was not under high pressure scrutiny across the board. And, by the way, the same thing happened with Andy Samberg and Sandra Oh at the Golden Globes this year. They seemed to be only there for us to hate on them. I don’t know exactly when the internet became such a hive of bullies — yet that seems to be, for the most part, what the combination of clickbait-driven news plus the algorithms of Twitter and Facebook have done to us. It’s true of everything, from ads on TV to awards shows. No one really seems to care unless there is something to get mad about. And MAD MAD MAD MAD everyone is on a daily basis, flinging hashtags angrily, making furious pronouncements that get thousands of retweets and likes.
Now is when you ask me whether or not I think the controversies that raise the collective ire are justified . My answer is when this is going on at the same time, no. What’s missing is actual conversations or thoughtful, effective problem solving. I’m not now, nor will I ever be, a fan of angry mobs over relatively trivial ripples. I would prefer much more optimism, love, and support across the board, instead of whatever is going on now, which is becoming increasingly unbearable from one day to the next.
I can’t imagine a single high profile person who would willingly step into the job as Oscar host at this rate, unless it’s someone who is open and welcoming of the kind of hate that will be slung his or her way. No one is protected, by the way, from the wrath of the hivemind — at least not anyone who would generate the kind ratings they seek. Maybe it’s better this way. For true movie lovers, for loyal Oscar watchers, the lack of a host is the least troubling shakeup. ABC and the show’s producers have taken a machete to so many Oscar traditions we hold dear. All the same, along with the ongoing revolution in film distribution itself, we are living through an era in American cinema when the Oscar telecast needs to evolve. But we hope the Academy doesn’t do itself damage with too many hasty face-lifts all at once as it adapts to the new landscape.
Either way, there will be performers on the show and probably a voiceover saying “please welcome Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper” and the show will proceed mostly as usual without the need for anyone to come out and tells jokes in between. There will also be highly-respected presenters who can help move things along. There is the promise that the show will be kept under three hours, and now we have “popular’ movies nominated (as if that never happened before, hundreds of times), which should test whether it’s the presence or absence of popular films that drive viewership to begin with.
The question will have to be whether the ratings can climb from the all-time low of last year or not.
2018: 26.5 million, The Shape of Water (Jimmy Kimmel)
2017: 32.9 million, Moonlight (Jimmy Kimmel)
2016: 34.4 million, Spotlight (Chris Rock)
2015: 37.3 million, Birdman (Neil Patrick Harris)
2014: 43.7 million, 12 Years a Slave (Ellen DeGeneres)
2013: 40.3 million, Argo (Seth MacFarlane)
2012: 39.3 million, The Artist (Billy Crystal)
2011: 37.9 million, The King’s Speech (Anne Hathaway/James Franco)
2010: 41.3 million, The Hurt Locker (Steve Martin/Alec Baldwin)
2009: 36.3 million, Slumdog Millionaire (Hugh Jackman)
2008: 32.0 million, No Country For Old Men (Jon Stewart)
2007: 40.2 million, The Departed (Ellen DeGeneres)
2006: 38.9 million, Crash (Jon Stewart)
2005: 42.1 million, Million Dollar Baby (Chris Rock)
2004: 43.5 million, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (Billy Crystal)
[source: Deadline]
It will be interesting to see whether or not the telecast’s big changes will impact these ratings or not. One thing we can be sure of: Twitter will be pissed because Twitter is always pissed. About everything. All of the time.
Wow the ratings downturn has been dramatic as Sasha’s breakdown outlines. I also point out without question. Most popular award winner of our generation in return of king got omgst highest ratings of all that time. Unsurprisingly last years was lowest …politics and agendas and all round ugliness of how academy manage the content and their choice of contenders being soo at odfs mostly with target audience …is what turns people off increasingly . frankly only black panther gaining momentum on awards night during broadcast will increase it’s ratings .
It an alarming drop …under 40 million for population of over few hundred million for biggest arts awards show on earth is a worry…but wait are these estimated global ratings or just domestic audience ? Regardless academy in crisis …of their own making
An article written on IndieWire said that the cinematography, sound editing, sound mixing, and documentary branches are to be edited into a montage-like in order to get into the telecast and cut the runtime to less than 3 hours.
“The goal is to maximize the emotion of the event, and to include clips, the names of nominees, their reactions, and a condensed version of their speeches to honor the triumph of the victory.”
Full article: https://www.indiewire.com/2019/02/inside-the-academy-drama-builds-on-which-craft-winners-to-edit-into-the-live-oscar-broadcast-1202042112/
Brutal…
Cinematography only happens to be the art of lensing and lighting. Definitely not very important in making movies.
But who cares, right? Lady Gaga is singing Shallow!
Well now it looks like Janney, Oldman, McDormand and Rockwell will be presenting an award. Great news!
OT: But Woody Allen just sued Amazon for $68 million for breach of contract. I bet Chalamet and others are going to be nervous about anything that comes out in discovery. I’d expect Amazon to quietly settle by giving Woody his film back.
Unless Amazon had good cause to shelve Allen’s film then it seems they owe him damages. I would not expect “good cause” to include renewed interest in old accusations that everyone already knew about and never resulted in prosecution.
Why would Chalamet be nervous? He took a job, he did his job, he got paid for the job, and he gave that money to #metoo charities.
What do you think there is to discover in discovery that any of the actors or crew need to worry about?
It was a dick move by Chalamet to shit on a film that had yet to be released because he wanted some #MeToo cred. It’s not like Woody Allen would be the only person on that project hurt if it never saw the light of day.
I will always believe that Chalamet and Gerwig’s Oscar pushes got completely derailed when they said what they said. They looked liked opportunists and suckups . Allen is a 24 time nominee meaning a LOT of Academy voters were fans of his. Gerwig was going to win director after all the Globes love, and that vanished almost immediately after she joined in the mob.
My point about their names showing up in discovery is if Amazon spiked the film primarily because of what actors publicly said about Allen, those actors could have a bit of a backlash.
Interesting argument. $850 billion company panics because a 22-yr-old donates his own money to charity.
Amazon: “The whole thing is all Timmy and Greta’s fault, Your Honor.”
A more interesting argument would be did said $850 billion dollar company panic because they happened to have a project in the works with Timmy at the time he said it?
I’ll back up the bus about the lawsuit, but it DOES remind people that Timothy in a fit of opportunistic cowardice tried to woke his way to an Oscar by shitting on one of the most iconic directors in film history (24 nominations, 4 wins. Not nothing) in a fit of MeToo hysteria.
There are a lot of people who worked on that film who lost money because it hasn’t been allowed to be seen. Timmy, Greta, and Rebecca are probably on a few shit lists because of that.
I’m not gonna bicker about this, Pete.
Timothee did nothing wrong, and millions of people admire what did whether you do or not.
You think what he did was was a “dick move.”
I’m sure some people agree with you.
Me? I think it’s a dick move to pretend that you know what’s in another man’s heart and mock him for saying that he’s acting on his evolving conscience. I think it’s a dick move to play long-distance psychiatrist on a young man you know nothing about, and then to characterize his decision to hand over a million dollars to charity as “a fit of opportunistic cowardice.”
Maybe some people agree with me. I don’t care whether they do or not.
I’m content with how I feel about this. I’ll bet Chalamet is too.
Timothee doesn’t say what he says, the film probably gets quietly released. Buried, but released. Literally suppressing a movie from being seen is quite the escalation of all of this. Shit Bryan Singer kept his credit and still gets to work.
I’m sure he can sleep at night, but I’m fairly certain there were a lot of people who worked on that film that would have liked to have had their work SEEN by an audience, but obviously Timothee’s “evolving conscience” took priority.
I get it, we’ll agree to disagree. This is just an interesting discussion to have during all the back and forth about just how unfairly Green Book was treated.
I agree with you that Chalamet (and Gerwig) made the wrong call but I forgive him because he was young, new on the scene and probably easily led by some misguided PR folks.
Amazon : “Timmy ruined us so naturally now we hate him so much that we had no other choice but to spend a fortune on his Oscar campaign for that other Amazon film of his, Beautiful Boy”
Wow, Amazon. Harsh. And Confusing.
Is that Amazon talking? Or is it that sarcastic bish Alexa?
It’s Amazon, Alexa is on vacation (= away doing court-ordered anger management courses).
Gerwig was never going to win Director, don’t rewrite history
Not rewriting. She was the “it” girl after the Globes and had aggressive press working the MeToo angle about her film (Natalie Portman’s snotty comment about the “male nominees” for Globe Director helped too). I think some backlash to her opportunism (made more glaring by the Jennifer Jason Leigh stuff) derailed a Directing bid that was lining up nicely before she said that.
I also think people realized that Lady Bird was not a very good movie and it was pure hype (almost like what Vice is going through now). A lot of people were afraid to admit that it didn’t deserve all the accolades. Gerwig brought her hipster A-game but the only people who found it “cool” were probably the older members of the academy who wanted to feel “cool”. Her direction makes Bradley Cooper look like a master. Very unexceptional compositions, almost TV-like. I felt no sympathy for Ronan’s character. I just found it a poorly-conceived film, especially compared to modern classics such as Get Out, Phantom Thread, Call Me By Your Name…
LB is an excellent film.
woof. I think Gerwig is the opposite of everything you just wrote!
“a Directing bid that was lining up nicely before she said that.”
Gerwig didn’t speak out against Woody Allen until Jan 8th. The Globes were Jan 6th.
If she had been a lock for Best Director, how come she didn’t win anything throughout December? (Aside from the fact that Del Toro was beating her all month long because his movie was better.)
Gerwig did beat Del Toro once. With the Alliance of Women Film Journalists, Gerwig won Best Female Director and Del Toro didn’t.
Because the Alliance of Women Film Journalists gave Del Toro their award for Best Director Regardless of Gender.
Yes, yes, Gerwig was the “It” girl. She’s still the “It” girl. She’s the “It ” girl with no awards for Best Director.
Because she’s not there yet. Not because she refuses to work with Woody anymore.
Yeesh, is this the same site where people say voters don’t care about what celebrities say on social media?
She’s probably more likely to work with Jennifer Jason Leigh before she works with Allen, yes.
Thanks Ryan. Gerwig was never close to winning Director. Never.
That is one wild conspiracy theory that deserves to be flushed.
I just hope that once the dust has settled and people finally get to see the movie, it’s more “Midnight in Paris” Woody than “To Rome With Love” Woody
Was rootong for both Chalamet and Gerwig in writing last year. But decision to distance themselves to Allen is totally fad of #MeToo movement. It seems to me that they were both pressures by the current call against Allen. I really hope Amazon gives back Allen’s film so we could see it and be the judge of its artistic qualities.
I’m there’s gonna be a backlash upon its release but hell, give Woody fucking Allen a break.
Who is watching the Oscars? Seriously, tens of millions of people watch it, and I do not believe that all of them are (like people on this site) invested in the whole thing and all the categories. BUT if you are not interested in the tech categories, are you even watching? Seriously, it’s hard to imagine that people actually watch a 3 hour programme of acceptance speeches where I am only interested in 5 categories total, 3 of which are the very last of the evening. Do they? I wouldn’t, if I was not interested in all categories. But if they do, does it matter if the show is 3.5 or 3 hours long? If people are committed enough to watch 3.5 hours of boredom, does it matter if it is reduced to 3 hours? I have no idea whatsoever how this works. I don’t understand what difference this commercial break stuff makes. I don’t understand why they’re fucking over the people who are committed to watch their 4 hour show. Maybe because we are going to watch anyway, no matter what they do?
If someone has an answer to any or all of these questions, I’d love to hear it.
I go to an annual Oscar party and while we do mostly watch its also just a fun party. I haven’t watched the Oscars alone in a while.
I host an Oscars party that it is it’s 22nd year. Lots of fun but we take it seriously, prizes, quizzes & dressing up.
Last year we dressed up as our favourite acting performance. I was Kidman in The Hours lol
You and your friends have more fun on Oscar Night than most of the people who get invited to the Oscars.
Did you do a Virginia Woolf nose?
Of course. The outfit is all about the nose.
But I was beaten on the night by my partner who chose Shape for BP when everyone else including me chose 3B
Been a part of a big Oscar Party every year since 2003. 15-20 people. Prizes, outfits, prediction game. Very interactive, very exciting. Tons of fun, foo, beverages, and overall good cheer, always. It’s so great.
And even though not everyone is as psycho about it as some of the others, we’re all SO invested in all the 24 categories for our games and we all love to hear the speeches from all.
Time was, people watched the Oscars for the “glamour’. Seeing movie stars “live” and hearing their seemingly unscripted banter was a kick. And lots of women watched in order to check out the evening gowns. Also, the little bits of “scandal” one might have gleaned couldn’t easily be fact checked, so the idea that some of these rich, attractive people were sometimes shamelessly “bad” added to the thrill.
In the age of the internet, where secrecy and privacy have been vanquished, and fashion news is everywhere, most of this “excitement” is laughably passe. Unless potential viewers have seen at least one or two of the nominated movies, I suppose a lot of them don’t feel any urge to tune in to the broadcast. What’s going to be new?
But then who are the 26 million people USA wide? what are their motivations for watching?
Great question, and I didn’t mean to sound flippant. Some of the appeal I outlined may still be at work, and maybe more people have seen, or at least heard about, the nominated movies than one might imagine. But I don’t have the answer to your question and I wish an exhaustive poll could be devised to get at it.
If I’m being honest some of that probably is sheer momentum, it’s something that has seemed “important” in the past and gets a lot of press so people find themselves watching it.
This weekend I’m going to see the Best Animated Shorts and Best Live Action Shorts, once again gratefully compiled and put in movie theaters by ShortsTV.
Since they’ve started doing this, my interest in seeing those categories on the broadcast has greatly increased, and its exciting to see new talent get honors alongside major studios. (Yes, I know Kobe Bryant won last year for a mediocre short. Moving on….)
If they banish these categories — and Best Doc Short — off the show, then the Academy Awards are public celebrating only a tiny fraction of their industry. Most people watching the Oscars are actually interested in those categories, and for those that aren’t great! Bathroom break for you.
Me too – I’m watching them on Saturday and I’m super excited. 🙂
I would have to disagree that most people watch the Oscars for the short awards. Most people have never watched them and never will. Believe me when I say that once these awards come up, most people go to the bathroom or get something to eat.
I would if they are on YouTube and the animation is interesting looking.
Genuinely the only awards I would get rid of – or present at the ceremony where they give the Honouary Statuettes.
or when the presdient of AMPAS speaks
There’s something they could cut that no one cares about haha
I would never do away with the short categories entirely because they are important to have but if there’s anything they could cut or turn into a quicker summary sort of thing when just present the winners on stage together that would be the thing to shorten.
Swiped off of reddit, but you can contact ABC directly to air your grievances about the Oscars:
Go to this URL: https://abc.go.com/feedback
Under the Select Your Issue options, choose: ABC Programming Feedback
Under the Show Or Category options, choose: The Oscars
Under the Subject options, choose: I have an issue with this show because
And then pen your message in the Message section.
I’ve already (in kinder verbiage) written them about relegating the below-the-line categories to commercial breaks, which is bullshit of the very first rank. I doubt it will do any good, but maybe if there’s enough of an uproar, we can get a traditional ceremony, for the most part.
Did it. They only allow you so many words. I wrote:
“Hello,
It would be MUCH appreciated if The Oscars were to include all 24 categories this year, and every year. All the people who contribute to film deserve their time in the spotlight. Not only have winners from the below-the-line categories provided some of the best memories over the years, but it’s just the RIGHT thing to do. Most of the people who tune-in to watch the Oscars are die-hard film and Oscar fans, so please, please do US the honor of watching them win in real-time. Thank you.”
This is great… Thanks for posting this.
Great. Thanks, cabspaintedyellow. Featured.
The Academy has made no announcement regarding whether they are actually going ahead with relegating any categories to the commercial breaks so why assume it will be below the line categories.
Perhaps it will be Best Actress, yes.
Is it already official that tech and craft categories won’t be shown live? If that’s the case I hope the nominated artists of each categories boycott the ceremony. That shows solidarity against this lack of importance by the Academy and ABC of their works.
Imagine if this happened last year and Roger Deakins is the heavy favorite to win Cinematography. Hell hath no fury like an Oscar pundits scorned!
They’ve done so many backflips- popular film, host, previous acting winners not presenting awards, they might also backflip on this.
Surely heads need to roll over the clusterfuck that is Oscars 2019?
If this is implemented last year, we lose Deakins’s moment AND Academy Award winner Kobe Bryant, which was one of the few mainstream, headline-grabbing bits from last year’s ceremony.
Bailey has been “proud” if for his category to give way and even volunteered it. What if the Animated Short made it and Cinematography didn’t? My god! I cannot…!
I apologize for a completely off-topic and extremely specific question but: does anyone have experience with ticket sales at Berlinale? Are the online tickets only small quotas, how quickly do the tickets run out at the box offices and are the same-day tickets of the kind that there is automatically going to be a certain amount left or are they just leftover tickets, and if so, are there likely to be any left on the same day? And what is the expected waiting time so that one can be quite certain to get a ticket to something?
I’m asking this because the online ticket sales have in the previous three days caused several traumatic experiences since everything’s sold out in a minute or two (30 seconds if it’s a film in comp) and the payment structure causes a lot of problems so I have so far mostly been left with nothing when everything’s sold out. So is there any hope left for actually seeing any of these films?
Sadly I have no experience with the Berlinale, but was at the London Film Festival last year and they also sold out basically everything in 10 seconds. But there was a returns queue for each film that did provide a surprisingly large amount of tickets for each screening. I managed to get in to every film I wanted, even though I had almost no tickets in advance. (I did have to queue 2 hours for The Favourite though.) Maybe the Berlinale has a similar system?
Best of luck!
Sadly the festival site says that one apparently can’t return tickets at Berlinale so that’s probably not possible. But thank you for a thoughtful reply
Normal people couldn’t return London Film Festival tickets either. It was some member tickets or idk what were available at the returns queue. But there was plenty. You might want to call the box office, they will probably know how many tickets might be available on the day.
That’s great to know, hopefully it applies here as well. Thanks!
Hi Ferdinand, you’re absolutely correct in calling the experience of buying Berlinale tickets traumatic. Before I managed to get accredited, I had to put myself through hell for many years. So here’s is what I’ve learned the hard way:
The good news: it’s a very fair system. The bad news: it’s a very fair system.
Unlike Cannes, where hierarchy is a natural way of life, or Venice, where one ticket to a competition premiere could set you back 50 Euros, Berlin is all about the complete democratization of festival going. You put in the sacrifice, you get rewarded with tickets.
So forget about doing it online. Unless it’s an extraordinarily unpopular movie that screens early morning on a week day or you have military-level data speed, the chance of booking Berlinale tickets online from a very limited contingent is minimal. And the worst part is, when you realize the online contingent is sold out and head to the ticket counter, the line there is usually so huge there’s no guarantee you can get one there either.
So. The ONLY reliable way of securing tickets is to get up EARLY and queue. Obviously it’s freezing cold this time of year and it literally feels like you’re tearing your soul from your body just trying to wake up and leave the house, but what we wouldn’t do for movies, right?
I remember getting to Potsdamer Platz at 4am to buy the premiere ticket to Stephen Frear’s CHERI in 2009. A six-hour wait. And how can I forget that one time where I camped out for Linklater’s BEFORE MIDNIGHT. Like literally spent the night on the floor of a shopping mall in front of the ticket counter.
These sound like horror stories but they are battle stories too and you actually make friends through these crazy experiences. Also, the sense of pure joy when you finally hold those tickets in your hand? Indescribable.
Of course I didn’t spend countless hours of my life standing in line without learning a trick or two. First of all, it’s relatively easy to buy tickets to screenings at Friedrichstadtpalast. It’s the biggest Berlinale venue and they only rarely TRULY sell out. It’s also probably the only venue where I would encourage you to try and ask for reduced last-minute tickets. My second tip is book tickets for the last day of the festival. For reasons I never understood, it’s much rarer for screenings on the last day (always a Sunday where they even offer cheaper ticket price) to sell out.
Remember too that the general three-day-in-advance rule doesn’t apply in either of these two cases, meaning you can buy tickets to all screenings at the Friedrichstadtpalast and on the last day right now. Back then my record was seeing six films on the last day, from 9am all the way to midnight. A dream.
What else can I tell you…oh a rule of thumb: if you’re trying to buy tickets to screenings at any other venue, not on the last day, competition or any buzzed titles from other sections, you’re usually only safe when your spot in the line is still on that little red carpet they roll out in front of the ticket counter at the Potsdamer Platz Arkaden. The further away from that stretch of red carpet, the riskier it gets.
If it’s any consolation, you should know that even the press have to fight (= queue for hours) for Berlinale tickets to non-press screenings. How I got to see CALL ME BY YOUR NAME at the unforgettable Zoo Palast premiere with Guadagnino and the entire cast? You could probably imagine.
Hi Ferdinand, you’re absolutely correct in calling the experience of buying Berlinale tickets traumatic. Before I managed to get accredited, I had to put myself through hell for many years. So here’s is what I’ve learned the hard way:
The good news: it’s a very fair system. The bad news: it’s a very fair system.
Unlike Cannes, where hierarchy is a natural way of life, or Venice, where one ticket to a competition premiere could set you back 50 Euros, Berlin is all about the complete democratization of festival going. You put in the sacrifice, you get rewarded with tickets.
So forget about doing it online. Unless it’s an extraordinarily unpopular movie that screens early morning on a week day or you have military-level data speed, the chance of booking Berlinale tickets online from a very limited contingent is minimal. And the worst part is, when you realize the online contingent is sold out and head to the ticket counter, the line there is usually so huge there’s no guarantee you can get one there either.
So. The ONLY reliable way of securing tickets is to get up EARLY and queue. Obviously it’s freezing cold this time of year and it literally feels like you’re tearing your soul from your body just trying to wake up and leave the house, but what we wouldn’t do for movies, right?
I remember getting to Potsdamer Platz at 4am to buy the premiere ticket to Stephen Frear’s CHERI in 2009. A six-hour wait. And how can I forget that one time where I camped out for Linklater’s BEFORE MIDNIGHT. Like literally spent the night on the floor of a shopping mall in front of the ticket counter.
These sound like horror stories but they are battle stories too and you actually make friends through these crazy experiences. Also, the sense of pure joy when you finally hold those tickets in your hand? Indescribable.
Of course I didn’t spend countless hours of my life standing in line without learning a trick or two. First of all, it’s relatively easy to buy tickets to screenings at Friedrichstadtpalast. It’s the biggest Berlinale venue and they only rarely TRULY sell out. It’s also probably the only venue where I would encourage you to try and ask for reduced last-minute tickets. My second tip is book tickets for the last day of the festival. For reasons I never understood, it’s much rarer for screenings on the last day (always a Sunday where they even offer cheaper ticket price) to sell out.
Remember too that the general three-day-in-advance rule doesn’t apply in either of these two cases, meaning you can buy tickets to all screenings at the Friedrichstadtpalast and on the last day right now. Back then my record was seeing six films on the last day, from 9am all the way to midnight. A dream.
What else can I tell you…oh a rule of thumb: if you’re trying to buy tickets to screenings at any other venue, not on the last day, competition or any buzzed titles from other sections, you’re usually only safe when your spot in the line is still on that little red carpet they roll out in front of the ticket counter at the Potsdamer Platz Arkaden. The further away from that stretch of red carpet, the riskier it gets.
If it’s any consolation, you should know that even the press have to fight (= queue for hours) for Berlinale tickets to non-press screenings. How I got to see CALL ME BY YOUR NAME at the unforgettable Zoo Palast premiere with Guadagnino and the entire cast? You could probably imagine.
Thank you, Tony!
Your narrative is the first great neo-noir thriller of 2019.
“How I got to see CALL ME BY YOUR NAME at the unforgettable Zoo Palast premiere with Guadagnino and the entire cast? You could probably imagine.”
I’m afraid to even think about it.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/874ffd81cb889cf423df949c66039f00c4de7df5d30991be78071701ba02b0d4.gif
Thank you so much for your incredibly thorough answer. I shall use it as a guide on my way
Ferdinand, my friend
Sorry you’re facing what sounds like a confusing and frustrating situation
I’m going to email our man in Berlin Zhuo-Ning Su, and fwd him your questions here
He lives in Berlin and will be reporting for AD from Berlinale again this year.
Thank you, Ryan.
And if it’s possible to get a contact him, it would be really helpful. I’m travelling tomorrow and I’ve sent a querie to the festival as well so it’s not an emergency (I posted the comment here just in case there was a quick answer to it from someone) but at least forwarding the questions would be a tremendous help.
I’ve already heard back from our brilliant correspondent Zhuo-Ning (Tony) Su.
He says he’ll drop by here in the comments in a couple of hours and share some advice, based on his own Berlinale battle experience.
Not sure if this matters, but HBO Asia isn’t broadcasting the Oscars this year leaving the 2019 ceremony with no Asian region broadcaster. It just lost its broadcaster in the world’s largest region unless another Asian pay-cable channel gets its rights. Business-wise I think that gotta hurts them because no one bought the rights not to mention the social influence. I’m guessing its primarily because of having no host. But the show has been in limbo ever since and seems like the Academy and the producers are having trial and error. All major awards show this year was and will be shown in the region by other pay cable channels (Globes, CCA, SAG, BAFTAs) except the Oscars.
In my country, the Oscar telecast airs on Monday morning around 8 A.M. when everyone is probably going to work or school. Might be the reason why people here don’t tune it in even though cable-TV and particularly, HBO-Asia, is largely accessible.
Same as in my country. But Oscar telecasts has been shown here ever since I was in grade school and there’s always a local or pay cable official broadcaster for the eventm regardless of schedule and time. The Oscars has a niche audience here, an assured audience aside from the lurkers who happen to just passed by while browsing channels and most of the time, broadcatsers run replays within the week. It’s just weird that of all the awards show it was the Oscars who has not been picked up by any network and it happened in a year as messy as this.
I absolutely adored Jimmy Kimmel and was hoping he would be the Johnny Carson for the Oscars, but that’s not to be.
I thought he did a surprisingly great job too.
I kinda liked Jimmy Kimmel except for his dumb stunts with ‘normal folks’ which lasted too long and was a tad condescending.
One of the best recent hosts.
The thing is, when the Oscars became more and more like the Indie Spirits with their winners, not only did that year’s numbers suffer, *but the following year’s* took a major hit. If the Oscars award BP to a movie that has made so little $ this year to the point where their boxoffice total is now “n/a”, you may as well write off the next 5 years.
Maybe, but if they just cravenly give the awards to something that made money in a desperate ploy for ratings they will lose a lot of credibility and prestige and that could be just as damaging long term.
It’s the choices they make, not the hosts that preside over the choices they make. 🙂
La La Land won 6 Oscars, which was definitely a popular hit, and the ratings plummeted the year after.
And you think people will tune in if Black Panther, Bohemian Rhapsody or ASIB wins BP, a shorter ceremony without presenting the tech categories live? They might as well just have a press conference at Samuel Goldwyn Theater and get over with it. Or annouce that one of those films wins BP. That way maybe the movie-going public will tune in.
When you mean tech’s does that include stuff like art direction. If they get rid off all of those there will be hardly any awards to give out.
Of course. Crafts categories are my faves. If they won’t show it then why still call it “awards”?
Part of the fun though surely is the 4 hour suspense? The tech categories serve as bellwethers for the bigger categories.
Cool. So what should be the minimum box office required for a film to be eligible for an Oscar?
Find the lowest grossing movie that has Kristen Bell has ever been in, and that will be Paul’s box-office measuring stick for Movies Paul Would Allow to Win Best Picture
So I think the bar that must be crossed is $3 million
That was the total gross for two Kristen Bell masterpieces: Veronica Mars and Pootie Tang.
The Veronica Mars movie was ok-ish. The money might have been better spent rebooting the series entirely (which has happened I believe)
I had a conversation with my two sisters in law, both very liberal. One lives in Minnesota and works at a theater. The other lives Michigan and works at a college. Neither are interested in watching a black and white foreign language movie set in Mexico about a housekeeper.
When asked if it won Best Picture would they watch it. The Minnesota sister in law would consider watching Roma if it won Best Picture. The other could not care less about the Oscars.
Just giving everyone an outsider perspective of how Roma is being viewed outside the film community.
Bear in mind that viewers have changed their viewing habits over the past 15 years or so. Almost all TV shows have experienced plummeting numbers mainly because now you can watch on-demand, download stuff, connect from any device, anywhere and watch a show hours or days after they were initially broadcast. The oscars are still strong. Also, I don’t believe this hype with the oscar presenters. Bring back Billy Crystal and I’ll tell you no one will have any bone to pick with him or dig up some old tweet because you take him at face value. Both him or Robin Williams, let’s say, have behaved inappropriately in the past based on metoo or the standards you’re now being judged on twitter. You kind of know that’s who he is. An old dog, but funny. I’d rather have him or steve martin than awkwafina or haddish.
Billy can never host as he has a blackface problem.
@Seb, It occurred to me that network TV is becoming more and more saturated with Awards shows (how many c&w awards shows have there been) and reality shows and less and fewer comedies and drama. I think there’s a segmenting going on. Streaming on the one side presenting movies and mini-series; Network TV on the other with the reality, game shows, and award shows; and then cable with just about everything.
I kind of don’t want Billy to put through the horseshit torrent of Twitter abuse from people born c. 2002.
Rumor I heard is that they will be a heavy presence of the MCU cast as presenters. Not in vain, Avengers: Endgame looks on paper, as one of the films of the year… and the Oscars will happen with Captain Marvel setting the red carpet for Endgame.
The Hugh Jackman year was in my opinion one of the best Oscar shows in recent memory. The opening monologue / number was funny, classy and glossy; having 5 previous winners as presenters per acting category was a lovely, nostalgic touch and I’m fairly certain all songs and categories made it to air. They should just follow this concept, it sure af WORKED the last time.
Jackman’s was great because he knows how to be a MoC and entertain. Ellen knows how to do that too – given she’s essentially a MoC daily on her show. They need a ‘showman’, someone who can entertain and engage and know how to move things along quickly. That’s not a skill that most stand up comedians may have.
My favourite too. Penelope, Winslet, Ledger, Penn, Slumdog sweep and Jackman was just amazing. Also amazing is that my fave hosts (him, Whoopi, Ellen and Steve Martin) are the classiest ones and not the ones that go for easy jokes or that try to depreciate films in contention. I wish they just had waited one more year to make the 5 past winners. Javier would have presented the Oscar to Penelope. I say ratings are only outside the curve if you have a 200 M + contending to win or two 100 M contending. They are a little better if you have a great source material to work (was the case that year despite the BP snubs) in the sense that you have a diverse slate of films nominated, including popular hits. And a little bit better if the host is classy and doesn’t try to diminish the films involved or make the invitees feel uncomfortable. 2009 was terrific in this sense… in the end it was magical. Even the way they arranged the seats and the round stage that year somehow reminded me of the scenario of Who Wants to be a Millionaire.
Whoopi, Ellen, Hugh Jackman are by far my favourite Oscar hosts of the last two decades.
Agree with Jackman. But my favorite by far is 2007 with Ellen. Remember it started WITH THE NOMINEES? They had a special vtr. Then inside the Kodak with all of them standing and congratulating each other. Wow. I got goosebumps everytime I watched it. Also first time that Writing presentation thatvthey showed the actual script with the corresponding scene. And the Costume Design nominees works recreated on stage. Love it! That’s a show! That’s how you pay tribute and honor the craftsmen of movie-making!
I wonder whether John Bailey will be re-elected for a third term after how this years ceremony has been handled. It’s been a chaotic mess, with nothing but less than great press about the Academy.
One can only hope that the Academy’s museum manages to bring in a fair few dollars.
The problem is everyone is politically correct….and I’m glad Kevin Hart (a BIG movie star) didn’t back down and apologize.
Huh? How does that relate to what I said? I’m not talking about Kevin Hart – who, if he did apologise, would have been a ratings boost for them – but the way the Academy quietly put something out, then everyone says, that’s not a good idea, and then the Academy backsteps on it. There is little suggestion that the people behind the show know what they’re doing, other than that they have to meet the goal of making it under 3 hours long. Nothing to do with being PC.
Even if he apologized, and still hosted, ratings would’ve dropped because most of us think it would’ve been too little too late.
It’s hard to tell, but I do think that he would have brought in Kevin Hart faithfuls, but that would mean nothing when he wouldn’t have hosted the following year.
I don’t think all of these shits would have happened if it was Laura Dern who has been elected president.
One would think he would be shitcanned.
But at the rate they’re trending, he’ll remain the President for another ten years.
They can only stay on for four years, so just like another President, there’s a possible two more years with this guy.
But the other president could potentially stay for 6.
I will say it for the last time. Why not air the Oscars live streaming on every platform? With ads. No one sits in front of a television anymore. Why is this not easy?
ABC owns the exclusive streaming rights to the ceremony for a ridiculously long time. Through 2028 or something like that.
Except, without knowing for sure this is the case, my sense is that it’s not “ridiculous” for the two parties. With this contract, I imagine that they both know that neither of them is going anywhere for the next 9 years. ABC can rely on some definite revenue, however much the amount may fluctuate from year to year. At the same time, AMPAS doesn’t become an “orphan” having to hammer out a new deal with a different network each year. I’d guess that such a long-term arrangement gives both parties an incentive to iron out whatever “difficulties” may arise (plenty of those this year). Of course this is supposition on my part. I don’t know.
But, given the Oscars are the weaker party here, ABC will likely continue to exert pressure on them to ‘boost ratings’ – meaning, they’ll force things that go against what the Oscars are. It’s a lose/lose situation.
Excellent point. The power isn’t equal. And ABC may be leveraging their advantage and ruthlessly trimming content in order to boost ratings. Or that’s what they imagine the result will be. Do they know or care what Oscar traditions can mean both to new and to longtime viewers? And how hard does AMPAS dare to push back? OTOH, wouldn’t it be very bad PR for ABC if AMPAS walked?
I was talking through my hat. Good reality check from you.
ABC has a YouTube channel. A Facebook page. Etc…
This is always my comment too. It’s pretty ridiculous. Even with basic cable, it’s a hassle every year to watch the Oscars for one reason or another
I think the show has a different set of ads in different markets and ABC wants to retain control of this.
ABC owns it?
Does ABC not have a YouTube channel, a Facebook page, etc…?
It is for the best. It will speed things up.
As for the ratings? Not to touch a third rail here, but at this point trying to change things to placate people who wouldn’t watch the Oscars even if you did everything they asked you to is a pointless exercise. Nominate more HITS they say, but give an award to Black Panther they’ll turn around and say “affirmative action award” or some such. It’s a lose lose, so stop playing Breitbart’s game and just make the award a prestigious artistic award, TV be damned.
I have always defended that ratings only go up when a 200M + film can win or when two 100 M + are the contenders for the big one.
The problem with many changes is that you could erode the audience of regular viewers… without compensating it by attracting casual ones.
Yeah, but my point about Black Panther stands. Billion dollar box office and you and I damn well know how the culture war crowd would react if it won.
I remember when Drudge used to have a radio show, and the night LOTR ran the table, Drudge could barely contain his revulsion that it won. Again, billion dollar box office.
Maybe it’s time to stop trying to placate culture warriors who aren’t interested in laying down their rhetorical arms.
I’m not against the no host idea. No one comic or other performer is going to make everyone happy and it might just spare us a cringe worthy opening number and will definitely spare us the political jokes which are no longer funny. I do hope, and perhaps Sasha or Ryan you can chime in here, that all of the winner will have their chance to thank their colleagues and loved ones on live television. I hate the idea of a person’s reward for their hard work relegated to being handed out during a commercial break. It’s almost as bad as when they lined all the nominees up on stage to save time. What the academy needs to do is consult fans of the show to inform them what works and what doesn’t.
If only ALL the winners got a chance to actually give a speech on TV. Bad luck tech categories.
It’s really a shame. These people work just as hard if not harder to get to that podium – sometimes th best, most memorable speeches come from someone on the tech side.
If the ratings aren’t down on last year they won’t be up much… The popular movies might bring in a few more people but the trend of Oscars ratings going down will continue because tv viewership is going down. Just look at the Superbowl… It’s numbers went down again – and if you break it’s numbers into streaming+ live TV, love TV took a massive hit (it was held up by a big increase in streaming numbers). Basically the big reason the Oscars are losing viewers is broadcast tv is losing viewers really strongly. It’s a format that is slowly dying due to the internet…
If the Oscars want to stay alive what they need to do is be streamed internationally over the internet – still with ads so they will make money. Popular films might help them a bit but they won’t in the long runbto stay alive on a dying medium, neither will throwing some categories onto ad breaks – what will help them is modernising the way they are seen! Plus they should accept that there is so much counter programming these days that they will always have more competition than they used to regardless so numbers may not be what they used to but 30 million is still a lot!
Yes. Thank you for being a voice of reason.
I’ve recently thought a lot about the Oscars being on Netflix. It seems like a smart move. But, Netflix produce films, and these films are getting nominated, so if a Netflix film wins, and the show is streamed on Netflix, then they surely would be called out for being partisan. The same goes with Amazon, or Hulu, or Disney+. It seems like it’s the inevitable future, it just raises the question of where and how.
No, the Oscars on Netflix is not a good idea. It’s better suited for Youtube.
They’re already in that situation with ABC and Disney. I don’t see how that’s a problem.
I’d be willing to see an experiment in a hostless Oscars, but, so far we’ve heard a lot about what isn’t going to be at the Oscars and basically nothing about what actually will be there.
They’ll be getting rid of the actual cameras next.
Sasha you haven’t mentioned the appalling decision to not have last years acting winners presenting.
AMPAS seems to care more about ceremony ratings than anything else.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/all-four-last-years-oscar-winning-actors-serve-as-presenters-1182431
Fixed.
Aaaaaaand now – suddenly – The Academy announce that they are THRILLED that last year’s winner will NOW present awards.
WTF, Academy. Get it right the first time.
This is a terrible dream.
Agreed. They are just idiotic af this season. Their most recent arguments (dramatised version) :
– Let’s announce plans for a (potentially condescending) Popular Film category ! But wait who would wanna win our “We don’t think you are good enough for Best Picture but we still want to look hip so eh, there you go!” category ? Nah, won’t work, abort, abort!
– Let’s take away career-high moments from winners of “lesser” categories by not putting them on air at all ! Sure their only sin is that they aren’t movie stars but isn’t that enough ? Doesn’t that clearly give us the right to consider their Oscar winning moments less important than that of the “famous” peeps ?
– Let’s ask a guy with a troubling homophobic past to host! And when he refuses to apologise let’s keep him still ! And when he finally apologises and starts playing the victim, let’s beg for his return! And when he doesn’t return, let’s just go host-less because who could possibly replace such a genius, huh ? Rather go host-less than God forbid, ask a woman. AGAIN.
– Let’s play favourites and only let the megastars sing their Songs! Oh wait does that reveal our true nature of being fakeass pricks who don’t really care for nominees who have the nerve to be only “artists” and not megastars, too ? Yeah, scratch that, let them all sing, whatevah, we can deal.
– Let’s try to get megastars to present the acting categories and just ghost last year’s winners! Oh wait, all megastars we approached kinda told us we are dicks for attempting to do this to last year’s winners so now we just realised that we would indeed love to have them back ! Come back last year’s winners, we’ve just decided that we do love y’all after all!
In one word : ugh. Epic clusterfuck all around.
So far, they’ve reverted every bad idea: popular film, 2 songs, megastar presenters, EXCEPT for categories in the commercial breaks. Let’s hope that happens soon as well.
Agreed. Fingers crossed.
Honestly that’s the worst one to me.
It depends. It could be not so bad if they only lightly edit the sequences, so in the telecas it actually feels like they are giving them out live. (Maybe cut the time when they walk to the stage, that already saves around a minute per category.) But if they do it Critics’ Choice style where an announcer just announces the winner and maybe there’s a short clip of one sentence of the acceptance speech, that would be disastrous.
This will knock up to 30 minutes off the running time, no?
Ratings will be higher because the films are smash hits. And the winners have 90 second to make a speech.
I will never understand how chopping out the acceptance speeches is supposed to jack up the ratings.
Are people who are already watching the show going to phone up all their non-Oscarwatcher friends and say:
“Dude! Switch over and watch the Oscars right now! All the speeches are getting cut! It’s so awesome! You’re gonna love it. Please tune in and share the fun with me!”
I can’t even find the word to describe The Academy this year, in particular. It goes beyond the word “absurd”.
Ratings are only outside the curve if you have a 200 M + film that can win or two 100 M + contending for the win. They are indeed a little better when you have diverse source material to prepare the telecast. That includes genre and popular films. Billy Crystal did a terrific job in 2012, a ceremony that did everything it could to make the better show possible. But the slate of films nomninated as a whole sucked. Also a little bit better when you have a classy host that values the films involved and that doesn’t enter the stage to make invitees feel uncomfortable. But outside the curve only when huge hits can win.
I expect the ratings to be higher than last year’s simply due to all the smash hits in the mix this year (Black Panther, Bohemian Rhapsody, A Star Is Born) but I don’t know if it will be able to sneak back into the 30M+ range.
For what it’s worth Ellen brought the ratings both times she hosted, maybe the Academy should just either go hostless from now on or opt to do an Ellen era where she hosts for a couple of consecutive years.
I think too many people worry about what group is being represented by the host. IMO Steve Martin would be the best but 70yo. white guys probably need not apply. But the truth is most people really don’t care and as long as the host doesn’t think it’s all about them, they fade into the background. Which is as it should be..
Every other award show had a host. It’s no fair that the granddaddy of all awards shows go without one.
Best ceremonies
2003-Martin
2004-crystal
2009-jackman
2011-crystal
2013-degenres
The 1989 Oscars were an embarrassment to the film industry and the 2019 Oscars is just plain dumb without a jokey host.
It’s no wonder that Richard Kahn only lasted one year.
I think having or not having a host is one of the smallest problems. I personally think my favorite ceremonies had strong hosts – 2002 (Whoopi), 2003 (Martin), 2009 (Jackman) and 2014 (Ellen). Ratings wise, I always defended… ratings go up when a film with more 200 M box office can win the whole thing or when two with more than 100 M are battling for the prize. Take the ceremonies list and their ratings. This applies to every single year.
I fear in all of those possible changes is the erosion of viewers among the ones that watch the Oscars basically every year. The casual viewers will only flock in in the situations I mentioned.
I wrote this in another post:
Funny that one of the co-producers spent 3 minutes proposing his girlfriend at the Emmys when he won but limited reaching stage + speech time to 90 seconds. He would actually kick his own butt. And that was the most commented moment of the Emmys.
It seems that this ceremony is in the hands of many people out of the touch with the reality.
Breaking the tradition of the past winners is acceptable in special circumstances like Casey Affleck last year or when they made the 5 past winners present (Just wish they waited one more year so Javier would have presented the Oscar to Penélope).
Do they really think bringing Oprah Winfrey or Tom Hanks to present instead of Francis McDormand or Gary Oldman is making ratings go up? As of the other two are not very well known people. Gary Oldman played one of the most popular characters in the second most popular film franchise ever. McDormand provided the most memorable moment from last year’s ceremony.
Alison Janney is less wide known than Awkwafina, Maya Rudolph and Amandla Stenberg? Or is it straight out ageism against last year’s winners?Curious that sb that spent the whole career trying to bring stories about strong women like Shakespeare in Love and Hidden Figures could be signing the butt kicking of such important actresses like Janney and McDormmand.
It’s so stupid that there is no host. Billy crystal? Whoopi Goldberg? Steve Martin? Tiffany haddish would’ve been perfect imho.
Billy Crystal is homophobic. Steve Martin is too old. Tiffany Haddish mispronounces names. Whoopi Goldberg dated Ted Danson and Ted Danson performed in blackface. Ellen DeGeneres forgave Kevin Hart for joking about beating the gay out of children. Chris Rock curses too much. Jon Stewart is retired. Neil Patrick Harris sings too much. Hugh Jackman is too Australian. Bob Hope is dead. Who does that leave? Only me, and unfortunately, I’ll be busy playing backgammon with my cat on Oscar night.
Newsflash: it is possible to be upset about more than one thing at a time. I am deeply concerned about the condition of our planet AND intolerant of homophobia AND disgusted by the way the film industry (and our society at large) still gives powerful men a pass for bad behavior. I do have room in my brain for all of those things at once.
Sasha is not the ultimate arbiter of what I am allowed be upset about. If I am upset about something Sasha is not, that does not make me a “hater” or a “troll.” That makes me a person with a different set of life experiences and opinions. I refuse to be shamed for that or be told that my feelings are somehow lesser or invalid because Sasha doesn’t agree with them.
The silliness about an Oscar host is after the initial monologue they mostly disappear for the rest of the broadcast (the silly “bits” that used to drag on seem to have been pared back as well).
If anything, me getting angry/upset/annoyed about the Oscars is a nice reprieve from being upset about global warming/racism/sexism.