It's the age-old question that comes up just about every year, but after last night's marathon Oscar ceremony, I need to ask it again: Is it about time for the Academy to award most of the technical prizes (for editing, art, costumes, makeup, visual effects, etc.) either another day or before the televised ceremony starts?The reason why I ask is because of the way the producers formatted the show this year. They did a nice job of grouping those technical awards together, threading them through the life cycle of a film's production. Believe me, it helped; instead of dragging out new presenters for each and every category, one set usually presented a few at a times (poor Will Smith was out there presenting the post-production awards almost as long as host Hugh Jackman was on stage). But somewhere around 10:30, I was still looking at the clock and trying to count how many categories were left.
It doesn't seem to matter how the Academy presents these awards. They're just boring as hell and there's nothing they can do about it to make it better. Yes, it's nice to see the people behind the scenes get their day in the spotlight on national television. But the problem is that it goes on for the vast majority of the program's middle portion, making a ceremony that could be knocked off in a brisk two-and-a-half hours into a three-and-a-half hour snoozefest.
To be honest, I can't think of a good way to fix this aside from cutting out these presentations altogether, which isn't fair to the people who win them. There's already a Sci-Tech Oscars ceremony, so it wouldn't be hard to put these awards there.
Can this be done? Or is a long, boring Oscar ceremony just something we have to accept? Let me know in the comments.
Mike Henry and Daryl Hall on a Cleveland Show Thanksgiving
The TV Squad Podcast: The Prisoner, '80s TV, soap news and more
Let's talk about spoilers ...
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-23-2009 @ 11:10AM
Steve Flack said...
NO!
You want to shorten the Oscars? Lose every thing thats not an award! Lose the opening musical number (it's never funny anyway), lose any other musical number that's not a nominated song. Lose the pointless montages. let the winners speak, and present every nominated song in it's entirety, by the actual artists (Peter Gabriel refused to perform because they asked him to trim his song by 40 seconds. I'd rather have heard those 40 seconds than see a montage of scenes from romantic movies of the year). Also, did every nominee need their ego stroked while the former winners talked about how great they are?
In the end, the Oscars could be trimmed down to two hours by focusing on the actual awards (instead of a musical number about how "the musical is back!" -which it's been for about six years now).
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 11:12AM
Courtney said...
I'd be a little perturbed if they just dropped the technical awards. True, it got a little boring, but it allows us to see more than just the five nominees that are usually the same five movies nominated for every other category--best pictures, best directing, best writing, best acting... Plus, those people really work hard in these films, and they deserve a big hurrah as much as the actors do! I was mightily annoyed to see Cinematography get overshadowed by Ben Stiller's stupid performance--while Natalie Portman was saying how great the Cinematographers were! No one listened! Anyway, as much as it's the drier side of things, I think it's important to keep in.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 11:18AM
Scott said...
There's a lot of other fat to be cut before getting rid of the technical awards, as others have pointed out. Musical numbers of all kinds (except for the song over the "In Memoriam" piece) and at least 60% of the montages should go. Then kill the 30 seconds of horribly unfunny chitchat between presenters before their category. Then kill the schmaltzy award in the middle that went to Jerry Lewis.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 11:21AM
gottacook said...
Go see Visions of Light: The Art of Cinematography, and then try to argue that what a skilled cinematographer brings to a movie is such a minor contribution that his or her award (and the other tech awards) should be moved to a different night. What slows the Oscars down is all the gratuitous stuff nobody asked for except the show's producers and the AMPAS officers.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 8:48PM
Jaradel said...
Keep the technical awards in! The Oscars are about awarding all aspects of the film, not just the "pretty" stuff. The people who work on the screenplays, production, and postproduction deserve to be recognized publicly. As a former audio engineer myself, I would be highly peeved if the Oscar ceremony ignored the writers, the production teams and the postproduction teams.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 11:29AM
Joe Coughlin said...
And AMPAS would say that they are not technical categories at all and are artistic. When you're editing, just like directing, you have choices to make and those choices are what make it art.
The Oscars aren't just acting awards. That's what the SAG Awards are for. The non Sci-Tech awards are for artistic achievement in film.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 11:35AM
Brett said...
I don't know what was up with the five-presenter thing this year for the Best Sup Actor/Actress and Actor/Acretess awards...what a waste of time. Many of the presenters really didn't even know anything about the person they were chatting up.
I think the other awards are where they belong...the sep ceremony always has a Hottie for The Notties, so I'm sure they are happy. :)
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 11:50AM
jag said...
I am so tired today because it was on so late. They did not need to bring out the previous winners to talk about each actor. Long and Boring. That took at minimum 30 minutes.
The only thing I liked about it was that when they were talking about the supporting actresses, I was able to change the channel and watch the finish of Amazing Race.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 2:53PM
Bobby said...
Agreed. The previous winners bit needs to never return. Had they eliminated that and the pointless montages, they could have easily cut 30 minutes.
2-23-2009 @ 11:51AM
jag said...
Stop all winners from giving speeches. Yes we all know you want to acknowledge the losers in your category, your family, your agent, the producer, director and other actors in your movie.
You win the award. You go to the podium, get your Oscar and say Thank you Academy. The End.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 12:01PM
dkny said...
please people i think you should be able to stay up till 11:45 without falling asleep at the wheel. Would you like a half hour show where they just read the names of the winners? What fun would that be? Not only that, but the pure excitement of these lesser known winners is the best part of the show. Unless of course you would prefer someone reading a press-release because a red carpet for that would make a whole lot of sense.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 12:11PM
Alex said...
Fastest way to shorten the Oscars: Lose the commercials.
You're celebrating the movie industry, people, not TV.
And if the network has a problem getting rid of the commercials, put it on PBS.
I'm just sayin'. . . .
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 1:21PM
Andrew said...
The Oscars are a celebration of artistic achievement in film, not a celebration of famous people in film. An editor is as much an artist as a director. If you're someone who watches the awards out of a passion for the art of film, then the "technical" categories are as essential as best actor/actress. If you're someone who watches out of a desire to be entertained, then you either have to suck it up or not watch.
Reply
2-25-2009 @ 11:53AM
Will said...
"The Oscars are a celebration of artistic achievement in film, not a celebration of famous people in film." Andrew, you are nothing short of a genius. That is THE perfect description of the reason the technical awards should never be cut from the live broadcast. The Oscars, contrary to popular belief, are NOT just about the movie stars; they are also about the people behind the scenes without whose enormous talent there would be no movie in the first place. And they don't deserve to be pushed aside.
2-23-2009 @ 1:50PM
Dave said...
You should read up on what the Sci-Tech Oscars actually are (actually called the Academy Scientific and Technical Awards). It's a recognition of...scientists.
Announcing Best Editor or Best Sound Design there just wouldn't make any sense; there's a huge difference between honoring the scientists who invented to machine the movie is edited on and honoring the artist who uses that machine to make a watchable movie.
Let's keep the artistry awards where they are. The Oscars are a celebration of the art of movie making. Does it really hurt us to learn about more about that process during the ceremony?
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 8:03PM
metz said...
Whack em. Nobody cares about the winner in these categories except the winner.
Limit the Oscars to best picture, best director, Actor, Actress, supporting actor, actress and original screen play. Give out a few special achievement awards, pay homage to the deceased and wrap the whole thing up in 90 minutes with commercials. It took me less than an hour to get through the whole thing on TiVo.
Ditch the songs, editing, makeup, costumes, effects, adapted screen play and everything else.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 8:27PM
MarcDom7 said...
To even pose the question is incredibly offensive to the art and entertainment of the industry you declare that you love.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 10:48PM
Becky said...
I don't think cinematography is that boring to watch b/c a lot of those talents are what make the movie as much as the actors. What I don't care for are the shorts and foreign language. I agree with the others and killing the musical numbers and most of the montages, except maybe when Jon Stewart does them.
Reply
2-23-2009 @ 11:45PM
RobynM said...
I definitely think they should stay in. Not only because, as many others have capably pointed out, they are art categories and deserve to be treated as such, but because those categories are often the only place where popular genre films are nominated.
This year's example: Iron Man, despite a great performance by Robert Downey Jr., was only nominated for the sound and visual editing categories.
Reply