Oscars were horrible

[Andykev]

I used to "never" miss the yearly Oscar presentations. Way back when quality films, perhaps classics, were the nominees. Like Lawrence of Arabia (1962). The Sound of Music (1966). Oliver! (1969). Patton (1971). The Godfather (1973). Gandhi (1983). Amadeus (1985). Out of Africa (1986). The Last Emporer (1988). Dances with Wolves (1991). Schindler's List (1994). Titanic (1998). A Beautiful Mind (2002). Chicago (2003). This list is not "all inclusive" but pretty much sums up (for me) that since about the past dozen years..the "BEST PICTURE" winners have been pretty poor.

Now, interspersed in my list are "many" fantastic films that did not win "Best Picture" but were absolutely wonderful (Life is Beautiful, The Pianist, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and even earlier...). These are all exciting and beautiful films. And so much, much better than recent "modern era" productions. Maybe it's just that I'm getting old.

And the "Stars". I can honestly say many of them are so new compared to the "Golden Age" actors. And the Academy host. It used to be Bob Hope. Of course he's gone. But Jimmy Kimmel, Ellen, Chris Rock, ..heck I miss Billy Crystal. At least he was funny. And why on earth did they parade people off a tour bus thru the ceremony? What a dumb distraction. Much worse than the year Ellen was taking "selfies" and ordering pizza.

And the screw-up. Big "oops" of declaring the wrong winner. Steve Harvey is off the hook now, I guess. A Grand Finale which pretty much summed up the lameness of the entire evening.

So, what did you think of the Oscars?

 

[scotrace]

I was mainly relieved Meryl Streep did't win.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Too long. The 1943 Academy Awards radio broadcast ran twenty-nine minutes, and in 1944 they expanded it to a little over an hour. And it was too long then.

 

[Doctor Strange]

I've been an every-year viewer since I was a kid in the mid-60s, but I skipped watching the Oscars broadcast this year. Mostly because I hadn't seen most of the nominated films and didn't have any strong feelings about them.

Seems like it was the right decision.

 

[MisterCairo]

I was mainly relieved Meryl Streep did't win.

I hear she's kind of over rated...

 

[Bushman]

I personally don't care for Meryl Streep myself, and likewise find her an over-rated actress. However, I don't watch the Oscars and never have. The snobbery of stars patting each other on the back is among the reason people hate Hollywood. It's no secret the Academy always snubs blockbusters, no matter the quality, unless it's truly something groundbreaking. And even then, you have to question their judgement sometimes. For example, did Suicide Squad REALLY deserve an Oscar? I don't think so.

 

[LizzieMaine]

"Titanic" got best picture, and that wasn't exactly Battleship Potemkin. I think it's more a matter of an extremely insular, closed-off industry thinking the rest of us really give a fat pail of damn about what they think of each other.

The Oscars in the Era were not the "thing" that they are today. The ceremonies weren't even broadcast until 1943, and not on a nationwide network until 1944. Television, more than anything else, "made" the Oscars, which is supremely ironic given the elitist Movie Actors Are Better Than TV Actors mentality that's come to prevail over the past sixty years or so.

 

[emigran]

The world we live in today... is all I can say... no sense disparaging anyone for what just is... tsk tsk...

 

[Edward]

The Oscars get.... and probably deserve.... the attention we give them. I've always considered them something of a farce, wholly irrelevant to the media I choose to consume. Somebody must care, though: I gather it adds an average of 14 million to a film's take if it wins one of the big Oscars. For me, it's mind over matter. I pay the Oscars no mind, and they don't matter.

I think the only time I ever bothered with the ceremony - and then only the edited highlights in the end - was the Schindler year. (Schindler won best picture, but Tom Hanks still too kbest actor for Philedelhpa, as Aids awareness was more fashionable than the Holocaust in Hollywood that year.) Oh.... I do remember one year at university a bunch of us sat up late to watch it live, but I think we got bored and turned off after the first half hour. The only bit of it that was of any real interest was watching out for the Seat Fillers - people whose job it is to, when Jack Nicholson or whoever gets bored and wanders off to the bar, run and sit in their seat so that no empty chairs at the Oscars are ever seen on television. I find that hilarious for some reason.

 

[LizzieMaine]

What I think would be more interesting is to open the Oscars to public voting, the way the All Star Teams are chosen in baseball. Have punch-card ballots available in all theatres -- no online voting, you actually have to walk into a theatre and ask at the box office to get a ballot -- and have business-reply postage printed on the back. Punch your card and drop it in the mailbox on the way out. Sure, you'd get some ballot stuffing, but it would average out and you'd get a more interesting spread of winners, I think. Let the Academy continue to make the nominations, but let the butts-in-seats actually decide who they want to win.

 

[AmateisGal]

I used to love watching them, too, but haven't for years. I intentionally skipped this year because I had a suspicion many speeches would be political in nature, which is fine, but I had no desire to sit through it. I've had it with politics lately.

 

[scotrace]

I don't care how bad or good the Oscar awards show is, I try never to miss it. I love the moments like Jennifer Lawrence tripping up the steps, Roberto Begnini leaping over chair backs, and this year's spectacular envelope fumble. Poor Warrene Beatty-- younger folk around me dismissed him as a doddering old dope, and it was hardly his fault. I'll always remember Faye Dunaway barking "La La Land!" Then getting the hell out of Dodge and back to her cashews and vodka in a slurpy cup. Ad libbed stuff that's better than many of the scripted movies that get nominated.
The glam, the excitement, the missteps, the shade throwing, the idiocy at times. All too good to miss, for me, no matter how bad it is. This year was worth seeing Viola Davis get a MUCH deserved Oscar. They should hand her one of those things every time she signs to do anything, because her performance is going to deserve it.

Meryl Streep and Johnny Depp have done so much, we know all their foibles and tricks and mannerisms, and it's enough. You gave away all your secrets a long time ago. Daniel Day Lewis is probably smart in hibernating for years between pictures. By the time he does one, he's been immersing himself in the role for so long-- he darn well oughtta be good.

 

[Worf]

Problem is... they nominated films the public did not see. No one cared what or who won because the drivel they did watch wasn't nominated. I don't bemoan the fact that the films of the Golden or Silver age of cinema are gone.... I bemoan the fact that people don't watch.

Worf

 

[Bushman]

What I think would be more interesting is to open the Oscars to public voting, the way the All Star Teams are chosen in baseball. Have punch-card ballots available in all theatres -- no online voting, you actually have to walk into a theatre and ask at the box office to get a ballot -- and have business-reply postage printed on the back. Punch your card and drop it in the mailbox on the way out. Sure, you'd get some ballot stuffing, but it would average out and you'd get a more interesting spread of winners, I think. Let the Academy continue to make the nominations, but let the butts-in-seats actually decide who they want to win.

Maybe, but I'd be worried about it becoming a popularity contest instead of a quality judging contest. I mean, we're not guaranteed that with the Academy, but as disillusioned with them as I am, I still trust the Academy to know more about film history and critique than average joe schmoe with a YouTube account.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Problem is... they nominated films the public did not see. No one cared what or who won because the drivel they did watch wasn't nominated. I don't bemoan the fact that the films of the Golden or Silver age of cinema are gone.... I bemoan the fact that people don't watch.

Worf

There's a lot of truth to that. We're an indie theatre, and yet we only had two of the "Best Picture" nominees. The distribution system for a lot of these films is so broken that people don't get to see a lot of films because the theatres that want to show them can't get them. Increasingly, it's video rights that matter, and they just write off the theatrical run as unimportant.

 

[MikeKardec]

Too long. The 1943 Academy Awards radio broadcast ran twenty-nine minutes, and in 1944 they expanded it to a little over an hour. And it was too long then.

I have never been to the Awards but have family and friends who have gone semi regularly. From what I've heard, in the form of exhaustive complaints, is that it's a much better show on TV and is EXCRUCIATINGLY boring if you are in the actual audience ... the joke is that they will give a standing ovation to nearly anything just to excuse getting up for a moment.

Television, more than anything else, "made" the Oscars, which is supremely ironic given the elitist Movie Actors Are Better Than TV Actors mentality that's come to prevail over the past sixty years or so.

I get the feeling that the difference between Film and TV actors snobbery is pretty much over. It's likely still promoted by a very few old actors from the era when it was a coherent difference between Hollywood castes who either can't or simply won't do TV. The blockbuster stars are gone (they don't power blockbusters any longer) and nobody turns down HBO, so the border is probably no longer in effect.

Let the Academy continue to make the nominations, but let the butts-in-seats actually decide who they want to win.

I love this idea to no end. The pretentious little XXXX (insert uncomplimentary word) would just HATE it if the rubes could vote! Start a Change dot Org campaign, I'll join!

they nominated films the public did not see. No one cared what or who won because the drivel they did watch wasn't nominated.

This is actually okay, except under Lizzie's new rule mentioned above, it doesn't make the Oscars a better TV show but, as it is, it should be the industry awarding excellence among its own. They now hide the technical awards from the public, there's no glam but there's some amazing stuff going on. If the same sort of innovation was cut loose on a number of other businesses the world would be a different place. Unfortunately, there are few other areas of technology where you can pay off your R&D with one home run.

The thing that always gets me is the "In Memoriam" section. I like modern performances better but there is something about the star power of those from an earlier time and there is something to be said for some of them as interesting and dynamic people. Not necessarily good people, the entertainment industry does not bring that out except in a very special few, but I find myself always saying: "There goes so-and-so, we won't see his like again." Very sad, though maybe more for me than some others.

 

[Inkstainedwretch]

Back in 2004 or 05, I was both surprised and pleased when the in memoriam featured Russ Meyer and Leni Riefenstahl. I thought it was cool that the Academy was willing to recognize its black sheep (though the montage behind Leni was of "Olympia," not "Triumph of the Will."

 

[basbol13]

 

[MikeKardec]

Back in 2004 or 05, I was both surprised and pleased when the in memoriam featured Russ Meyer and Leni Riefenstahl. I thought it was cool that the Academy was willing to recognize its black sheep (though the montage behind Leni was of "Olympia," not "Triumph of the Will."

Yeah. I was surprised too. Their hypocrisy does not touch those who have gotten inside the circle, though how that ever happened with Riefenstahl I'll never know. Serious film maker but the appreciation by Hollywood, I'd have loved to have heard those discussions!

 

[scotrace]

Let the people choose? Gee, how could that go wrong?