Oscar turned 80 last night. For eight decades, Hollywood has been handing out gold statuettes for the best in motion picture arts and sciences. Sadly, last night's show will not have to worry about winning an Emmy. Not only was the show pedestrian, long and uninspired, it was also a bomb in the Nielsen overnight ratings. In fact, it was historically disappointing: averaging just 32 million viewers to become the least watched Oscar telecast ever! EVER, people!Of course, if you're worried that with ratings so bad, some day the Academy Awards won't be broadcast -- don't. The Oscars, like the Super Bowl, make a fortune for the network broadcasting it. ABC made an average of $1.8 million for each 30-second spot.
Dismal ratings weren't the only thing people were buzzing about in reviewing Sunday's Oscar telecast. On ABC's The View, Whoopi Goldberg, an Oscar-winner (best supporting actress, Ghost,1990) who hosted the show four times (1994, 1996, 1999 and 2002) was ticked off that she was not included in a montage about the previous broadcasts. Although she was shown in a clip when she won her Oscar, the comic actress felt slighted that her past hosting duties were overlooked entirely. "Undoubtedly, I (bleeped) somebody off yet again. You know what, I don't - I don't know," she told her co-hosts on The View.
That wasn't the only touchy subject being talked about today with regard to the Oscars. Many people -- online and off -- were questioning why Brad Renfro was not included in the "memorial" montage. The young actor, who'd starred in The Client among other credits, died of a heroin and morphine overdose on January 15. The montage did include Heath Ledger, who died from an accidental overdose of prescription drugs, a week after Renfro. When asked why Ledger was included, but Renfro was not, Leslie Unger, spokeswoman for the Academy, said, "Unfortunately we cannot include everyone. Our goal is to honor individuals who worked in the many professions and trades of the motion picture industry, not just actors."
The Upfronts: FOX
Carter Bays of How I Met Your Mother: The TV Squad Interview
The Upfronts: CBS
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
2-25-2008 @ 9:30PM
Riley Freeman said...
the oscars has always been boring. they constantly reward movies that nobody watches. its uptight and uncomfortable. its just a bland performance. they are stuck in the 1920s they really need to move into 2008 and update their formart start rewarding different brands of movies as opposed to the same crap year after year
Reply
2-25-2008 @ 9:37PM
lucyfan62 said...
First off, this year's show was not all that long. It only ran 17 minutes over and by Oscar standards, that's coming in on time! I thought the show ran smoothly, but the problem was that none of the top films were huge box office hits (only JUNO has crossed the $100 million mark and I still don't know that many people who have seen it!). There were hardly any surprises, so not many people tuned in. If the Best Picture race was TRANSFORMERS against HARRY POTTER and HAIRSPRAY, maybe more people would have been interested to see what won.
As for the Renfro snub, I think the Academy misjudged how many people were going to notice the omission. I don't buy their BS response that it had to do with time. They could have cut the not funny video bits of what "tributes" they would have had if the writers strike had continued. I think they purposely omitted Renfro because of the circumstances surrounding his death. But they also omitted a couple of other actors as well. Lois Nettleton died in the period between Renfro and Ledger (along with Suzanne Pleshette, who was included), and Charles Lane, who died at the age of 102! This guy was one of the most recognizable actors around and he was in movies and TV shows longer than probably any other actor! I appreciate the Academy showcasing people behind the camera as well, but when you have some big names (or faces) that have passed they should acknowledge them over a producer, studio head or agent! It just showed some poor judgment on their part.
Reply
2-26-2008 @ 12:37AM
Vito said...
Thing is, though, nobody will remember much about Hairspray or Transformers. When Transformers 2 hits, that will make more money than the first one did, and it will then take all the attention away from it.
There are some movies selected with a short shelf life. But There Will Be Blood and No Country For Old Men will be talked about and watched for a very long time. Even after Transformers 3 produces a spinoff franchise.
2-26-2008 @ 11:39AM
anna brady said...
my only regret about the awards was not getting to watch-seems like i was lucky! but it kept diners away from the restaurant i work in as a coat checker-no tips!its a great mexican restaurant,by the way-best in new york-el parador east 34th.bet.1st and 2nd.aves.come visit-and tip me well-sun.mon.tues.evenings,6-11pm anna
2-26-2008 @ 1:16PM
lucyfan62 said...
Vito, I'm not saying that the films selected aren't worthy of the Oscar attention - I'm a big fan of both NO COUNTRY and THERE WILL BE BLOOD - I'm just saying that the general movie-going public didn't see these films and therefore didn't care to tune in to see which one won the awards. I simply picked some popular, crowd-pleasing titles as my example (and also films that I enjoyed as well). When you have a big money-maker up for Best Picture and several other awards (think "Titanic") then more people tune in. Generally, the box office champ rarely wins the award (remember 1982 - "Gandhi" vs "E.T." - and which of those films remains more beloved by the populace today?), but having one in the running will help boost ratings. But the Academy should change things up a bit like the Golden Globes. Break down the categories so dramas don't compete against comedies and musicals. It just doesn't seem fair to pit a film like "Juno" against something like "No Country." Maybe that would also help the Academy's stodgy reputation!
2-25-2008 @ 10:11PM
Ryan said...
Or people could actually watch the films nominated and stop bitching about how the Academy never ever honor box office champions (Titanic, Return of the King, The Departed, Forrest Gump, Gladiator...).
I mean if all the films were obscure foreign arthouse from Germany playing in 1.5 theatres then I understand, but every Best Picture nominee this year were still playing in many theatres all the way up the ceremony giving people PLENTY of time to watch what they've been missing.
Then again bitching is much easier and gotta admit cheaper, too.
Reply
2-25-2008 @ 10:42PM
bruce said...
Awards shows are always dull, boring, and irritating. But considering there were only 4 or 5 good movies made in the past year, there was no excitement in watching it, no competition, no great movie versus great movie. Truly a horrendous year in filmmaking. Even the two best films of the past year, No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood, were somewhat dull.
Reply
2-25-2008 @ 11:22PM
iuqiddis said...
I was only able to watch the ceremony intermittently, but I still found myself turning it off because of the long montages of past winners. I thought Jon Stewart was very good this year, but he barely got enough time to do anything. Even his initial monologue was small. I guess if there is one thing they should change for next year to make the show more entertaining they should cut down the montages, trust the host a bit more, and make the show shorter (though I guess removing most of the montages will make the show shorter anyways)
Reply
2-25-2008 @ 11:37PM
Argus said...
Ugh... John Stewart's hosting and Amy Adams' performance made the show watchable, but most of it was just grey.
There was no real excitement behind the awards. I think it was because when No Country For Old Men came out all the critics immediately said: This will win everything. And it did. Same with Day-Lewis in There will be blood. Don't get me wrong, Day-Lewis is an excellent actor, but the results seemed set in stone far ahead of time.
As for movies that everyone didn't watch. Who cares? The goal here is good film making and not commercial success. If transformers was nominated I would have woofed.
Reply
2-25-2008 @ 11:39PM
Jeff N. said...
How come the great Actor Roy Scheider was not included among those in the Academy who
had passed away? And like Lucyfan62 mentioned Charles Lane was not included, not Renfro or Lois Nettleton. Poorly poorly done.
Reply
2-26-2008 @ 8:53AM
David said...
Roy Scheider died after the date cutoff of Feb 1. The montage opened with a date range.
2-26-2008 @ 12:00AM
Gordon Werner said...
I have no need of watching insecure entertainment types pat each other on the back for doing their job well
Reply
2-26-2008 @ 12:11AM
Joey Geraci said...
Absolutely ridiculous that they didn't include the actors mentioned above. The pox on society's ass that is Valenti was mentioned, they could have mentioned people that actually contributed to society.
Amy Adam's made the performance worthwhile? Really!! Every song from that wretched pile of worthless excrement was barely passe. And the song that Adams performed was the worst. It was a travesty that only one song from Once got nominated while three from the crapfest Enchanted were nominated. At least Once won. But two of Once's songs should have been nominated, since multiple songs from one movie was an option. (If You Want Me, and Fallen from the Sky were both fantastic)
Reply
2-26-2008 @ 12:45AM
Franklin said...
ROFL joebob! When are you going to learn that your self-important opinions are neither fact nor important nor wanted? You just make a fool out of yourself with nearly every post you pinch out.
Speaking of wretched piles of worthless excrement...somebody hand that jackass a mirror, stat!
2-26-2008 @ 2:06AM
Jeff N. said...
I agree Joey more than one song should of been nominated from the movie 'Once'. But at least the one song that was,... won the Oscar.
And I did like it that Jon Stewart brought the girl back on stage to give her acceptance speech after they so rudely cut off her microphone.
2-26-2008 @ 2:13AM
Joey Geraci said...
I loved that Jon brought her back. And it was fitting that she had the best award speech of the night.
Franklin, who exactly are you defending? Jack Valenti? Enchanted? Neither are in need of your efforts. Enchanted made over $300 million (if only box office gross equated to quality), and Jack has got quite an estate he left behind too (again, if only the monetary wealth one accumulated in life equated to personal worth, than I'd... do well enough anyway. And Jack would have died a pauper)
2-26-2008 @ 12:26AM
Emily said...
Roy Scheider's death missed the cut-off date of 1/31, which is why he wasn't included in the montage. I'm sure he will be in there next year.
I definitely agree it was poor judgment not to include Renfro and the others mentioned, though.
Reply
2-26-2008 @ 12:47AM
JW said...
I doubt it affected the award show, but Nascar had a long race delay last night all the way up till 1 am central time, I am taking a wild guess that might have been a reason why there was a drop in viewers plus the reasons everyone else said.
Reply
2-26-2008 @ 3:50AM
sitruc said...
Didn't Fox return to programming during the delay? I thought I saw the ESPN ticker say the race would be picked up at 1AM EST on ESPN, but then of course it was delayed until 1PM EST on FOX.
2-26-2008 @ 7:18AM
Jimmy said...
Um, yeah ... I'm sure all the Tony Stewart fans were dying to see Marion Cotillard's acceptance speech for La Vie En Rose.