Sign in to follow this  
CinemaInternational

Changes Coming for the Academy Awards

161 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, scsu1975 said:

Maybe merge two ideas ... I'd consider watching the Oscars if all the presenters were females clad only in bikinis. 

How about Tor Johnson in a bikini?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bethluvsfilms said:

I don't mind the emcee bits for the most parts (though there are some I like more than others), but yes, the musical numbers drag the show on longer than need be.

I wish they would have kept showing the honorary Oscars on the show though, at least for those from the studio era. Lauren Bacall would have gotten a really big standing ovation if she had been on the telecast, and I think it's a disgrace that the Academy didn't allow her to receive her honor on the show rather than on the non-telecast ceremony. I would have loved to have heard what she had to say.

Not just her, buth Angela Lansbury and Debbie Reynolds too!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CinemaInternational said:

How about Tor Johnson in a bikini?

A Speedo would be more interesting

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sagebrush said:

It is disrespectful. It's bad enough they get "played off" nearly 30 sec after they begin their acceptance speeches. Let them have their day in the sun; a win is a win.

They could speed things up by having all nominees onstage for the award presentations. That way, there's no time-consuming long walk for each winner. And there would be no Jennifer Lawrence-like accidents, either.

Image result for jennifer lawrence trips gif

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CinemaInternational said:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/academy-plans-three-hour-oscars-telecast-adds-popular-film-category-1133138

It all reeks of desperation. The popular film category is a tacky idea meant to lure in viewers and also to stop the glut of "The Oscars never nominate box office hits!" rants that appear every year. 

And then...they take it out on the TV awards.  They think "The audience would love it if we got an 'edgy' host who jokes about how much we HATE the awards!"

Which is always fun?  Until they forget that the host's job is to entertain the stars and directors sitting in the live audience who don't hate the Oscars--or this year's movies--and they're the ones we hear boo'ing the host's jokes first.  Listen to Ellen, Jimmy, Johnny, Bob and Billy, future hosts:  Shmooze or Die.

Still, we're in our second year of liberation from King Harvey the Terrible...It'll take us a few years to figure out how we'd ever do an awards year without him, but believe us, we'll figure it out.  If we couldn't have Hugo, Toy Story 3, Dunkirk, Mad Max or Inside Out as one decent commercial populist Best Picture winner to "bring us back" to sanity again, I say, at this point, whatever does the job:  Wakanda **** FOREVER!!

Quote

And the idea of moving some if the tech categories to commercial breaktimes seems unfeeling, unceremonious, and disrespectful.

Now that Chris Rock has a successful hosting gig, I'm sure we've all forgotten that one terrible year of "Best Sound Editing can stay in their seats, and we'll bring it out to you."
(Oh, why bother, let's just get a big T-shirt cannon!)  

Edited by TCMModerator1
Edited for Language
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enjoying all the above commentary. I say yes definitely more clips. One of the things that cemented my love of the movies as a child and early adolescent was seeing those clips of all the many nominees I hadn't seen in the theater. You know, at that age, I was pretty much only going to Star Wars and Superman: the Movie and not The Deer Hunter and Kramer vs. Kramer, but I could see those clips and get a real sense of what the movie was about and its style. It's distressing now that a show about movies shows so little from actual movies. The time allotted to production numbers vs. movie clips has got to be four to one? Five to one?

I also miss the lifetime award recipients getting a chance to speak at the ceremony, which was also a highlight of my younger years. That was really my introduction to a lot of classic movie stars who were by the time I became aware of them were barely working any more or in some instances long retired. It seems criminal some of the stars listed above didn't get to speak. Pretty sure Sidney Poitier was also on that list. I don't mean to hate on some of the categories and the winners, but I often thought we could cut out Best Animated Short (which are never seen by anyone unless they're the one nominee every year that runs before a Pixar movie) or the two Best Sound awards (what the distinction between them any more is, I have no idea) so that we can give a legendary films star two minutes to speak.

TCM runs pieces where they let the Academy president speak between features during 31 Days, which I don't mind so much, as their appearance might mean a few less Backlot or Wine Club spots that month. The new guy, whose name escapes me, actually seemed happy that the Governor's Ball awards weren't televised, saying this gave the proceedings a more relaxed, intimate feeling. I think it's a disservice to the fans. I would absolutely watch that ceremony if I could, at least part of it, depending on who was being honored in a given year. No, it probably wouldn't be a ratings bonanza, but I wish they would just stream it from their official website or something as a courtesy. Or it seems like something one of the Turner networks would show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bethluvsfilms said:

Does that mean any film made by Adam Sandler, Will Farrell, or Jack Black may end up taking home an Oscar?

 

Interesting that you mention comedy actors. One major complaint many have had for years is that there was never a specific comedy oscar. Unfortunately, comedy isn't what it once was today. But, think of all the comedy geniuses that never got the honor simply because it wasn't available.

I believe Oscar, like any other long time institution needs to make adjustments to the times to stay relevant. But, I ask a very interesting question of you posters:

Those of you who are complaining about this change. How many of you have actually watched each Oscars program the past few years ?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, GGGGerald said:

Interesting that you mention comedy actors. One major complaint many have had for years is that there was never a specific comedy oscar. Unfortunately, comedy isn't what it once was today. But, think of all the comedy geniuses that never got the honor simply because it wasn't available.

I believe Oscar, like any other long time institution needs to make adjustments to the times to stay relevant. But, I ask a very interesting question of you posters:

Those of you who are complaining about this change. How many of you have actually watched each Oscars program the past few years ?

 

 

I've been watching the Oscars since I was a teenager. 

You'll get no argument from me that comedy in the past has gotten the short end of the stick from the Academy, but the kind of toilet humor that comes from today's comics, especially Adam Sandler, are more worthy of the Razzies than Academy Awards.

I mean, does anyone think movies like LITTLE NICKY or DUDE, WHERE'S MY CAR? should have winded up with golden statues?

Maybe the Academy does need a serious overhaul, but if it starts giving awards out just to please the hipsters out there, it's going to do more harm than good for its image.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GGGGerald said:

Those of you who are complaining about this change. How many of you have actually watched each Oscars program the past few years ?

Every year.  Even when I don't care about movies I haven't seen (or, like Moonlight or Room, wouldn't see), I at least know I'll get some excerpt in their defense to persuade me why I should consider it--One year ago today I couldn't tell you from the title or poster what The Shape of Water even was; a few clips and acting awards later, I at least knew.  And even if they're not using Chuck "100 Years of Movies" Workman anymore for the In Memoriam or classic-clips salutes, at least he's set the bar for the style.

My earliest memory when I was a kid was seeing TV Guide list the nominations in their "Close Up" sidebar:  Even if I didn't know Cabaret or Clockwork Orange or Godfather II or Towering Inferno (or even, at ten, what the words meant) I at least knew the movies by reputation from Mad Magazine satire.  The 70's Golden Age Oscars--back in the prehistoric Bob Hope/Johnny Carson days before Rob Lowe & Snow White, when the show was still a Vegas-y whitebread entertainment spectacle, and Billy Crystal hadn't started CGI'ing himself into movies or making Jack Palance jokes--was a referendum on what movies would be chosen for this year's Pantheon..It's not like we'd have a year that no movies would ever be remembered for, so which five, and which one, were going to have a reserved seat on the cultural Noah's Ark for the next twenty to fifty years? 

Of course, I was only allowed to stay up for twenty or thirty minutes of it, so I would only get to see a bit or piece of it--hopefully the Best Visual Effects winner, the only one that mattered to a kid in the 70's--so I might only see an opening number or some Best Song presentation, or Art Direction and Costume from one of the Irwin Allen disaster movies.  Movies took their time to get to theaters in those days, so I got to see Frankie Laine singing the "Blazing Saddles" Best Song theme, and Richard Kiley going full-LaMancha on "The Little Prince" before ever getting a chance to see the movies they came from on our own screen, but that at least fit in with my idea that movies were great things that came from some famous place somewhere.  In those days, our theater was a comfy little downtown hole-in-the-wall in walking distance from our house (everything was), so movies existed mostly as Coming-Attraction posters to me, and the Oscars were the first glimpse to hype at what was Coming.  And if, like "All the President's Men", I had seen it, all the better to root for.

And oh, if you're going to make a joke about James Franco and Anne Hathaway, don't worry:  After thirty years writing the ceremonies I remembered, that was the one that finally officially got Bruce "Star Wars Holiday Special" Villanch fired as resident permanent writer.  Our long national nightmare has been over for at least seven years now, in case you hadn't noticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, GGGGerald said:

Interesting that you mention comedy actors. One major complaint many have had for years is that there was never a specific comedy oscar. Unfortunately, comedy isn't what it once was today. But, think of all the comedy geniuses that never got the honor simply because it wasn't available.

I believe Oscar, like any other long time institution needs to make adjustments to the times to stay relevant. But, I ask a very interesting question of you posters:

Those of you who are complaining about this change. How many of you have actually watched each Oscars program the past few years ?

 

I'm complaining, and I've watched it every year for the past 35 years at least, and sporadically before that. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GGGGerald said:

Interesting that you mention comedy actors. One major complaint many have had for years is that there was never a specific comedy oscar. Unfortunately, comedy isn't what it once was today. But, think of all the comedy geniuses that never got the honor simply because it wasn't available.

We've had actors who've been nominated for comedic roles:  Dustin Hoffman, Paul Newman, Peter O'Toole, Steve Martin, Madeline Kahn, Cher, Jean Hagen, Charles Durning any unholy number of times--And when, like John Gielgud, they win over their dramatic competition, it only shows the talent and discipline of just how much harder Comedy really is than Dying.  (And I still say Tim Curry was robbed of a BSA nom for "Clue", even though everyone was pushing for one from Sylvester Stallone's "Oscar".)

That's as important as a comedy Best Picture competing on the same playing field as a dramatic Best Picture, since the issue is which movie did a better job of producing itself to please the audience.  Unfortunately, today, that's something we also lost when universal mainstream farce-humor niche'd and fractured itself into non-existence sometime during the GWBush era.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GGGGerald said:

Interesting that you mention comedy actors. One major complaint many have had for years is that there was never a specific comedy oscar. Unfortunately, comedy isn't what it once was today. But, think of all the comedy geniuses that never got the honor simply because it wasn't available.

I believe Oscar, like any other long time institution needs to make adjustments to the times to stay relevant. But, I ask a very interesting question of you posters:

Those of you who are complaining about this change. How many of you have actually watched each Oscars program the past few years ?

 

 

Oh my gosh, I've watched every ceremony from start to finish since 1977.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/8/17664682/oscars-popular-film-category-2019

The Oscars’ new “popular film” category is a bad idea from a panicked organization

There are many reasons the new category is concerning, but three in particular stand out.

The Oscars have announced some radical changes to the annual awards ceremony.  Photo by Andrew H. Walker/Getty Images

The new Oscar awarding achievements in popular film is a bad idea.

Yes, I’m aware I’m saying that knowing essentially nothing about how the award will be defined and adjudicated; the press release from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announcing the new category states that those details “will be forthcoming.”

But the announcement of a new category for “outstanding achievement in popular film” nonetheless feels like a panicked move by an Academy that’s worried Black Panther won’t be nominated for Best Picture, an echo of when they expanded the Best Picture category to 10 nominees in 2009 in response to The Dark Knight and Wall-E being snubbed in that category. (The number of Best Picture nominees changed again two years later to “five to 10 nominees.”)

To be sure, the announcement of this category is vague enough that it could mean just about anything. Hollywood stunt people have long wanted the awards to add a category for the best stunt coordination, and this could, theoretically, be that — popular films do often feature a lot of stunts, after all. Or “achievement in popular film” could just be a de facto special Oscar given to the year’s box office champ, along the lines of the existing Honorary Awards.

But c’mon. It’s not going to be that. It’s going to be the Oscars nominating a handful of the year’s biggest blockbusters, to make sure that the Black Panthers and the Mission: Impossibles of the world are nominated somewhere other than the sound and visual effects categories.

It’s going to feel like shameless pandering, and it’s just going to make the awards less meaningful. When blockbusters are good, like Black Panther, they should be nominated for Best Picture, not some category created in a panic.

But my concerns about this category extend beyond, “This seems like it wasn’t really thought through.” Here are three of the most significant red flags raised by this vague announcement.

  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they start handing out statuettes for "box office receipts" it'll only be a short jump into splintering categories into "Best teeth", "Nicest hair" and "cutest Booty"  awards.  And the future hosts won't "tell" jokes or stuff anymore.  They'll "text" it all for people in the audience or at home too, to read on their PHONES after they download the "Oscars APP."  And nobody WILL be able to watch the broadcast unless they "stream" it to their "devices".

Sepiatone

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HONESTLY, the AMPAS can do whatever they want. I been rill damn OVER the Oscars for a while...

I JUST TRULY WISH, FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY SHRIVELED, TAR-BLACK HEART THAT TCM WOULD KILL 31 DAYS OF OSCAR.

END IT.

CEASE IT.

STOP IT.

NOW AND FOREVER.

FOR EVER AND EVER, AMEN.

WE HATE IT, YOU HATE IT, I KNOW I DON'T SPEAK FOR EVERYONE HERE, BUT- SERIOUSLY- EVERYONE HATES IT, EVEN IF THEY SAY THEY DON'T.

In fact, if TCM is genuinely interested in relevance, I daresay FEBRUARY become 28 (or possibly 29 depending on the year) DAYS OF NO OSCARS AT ALL, and EVERYTHING they show had to have been something that got NOT ONE SINGLE NOMINATION.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, LawrenceA said:

Their original idea was to help trim the running time of the main awards show, and that I can understand. I like that since they've created the separate event (called the Governor's Ball) they have added more honorary winners each year, so that instead of the one or two that used to win per year during the televised years, now they give 4 or 5 each year.

I also think that they should televise the Governor's Ball. If a regular network (ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX) doesn't want to air it, show it on TCM or some other cable channel, unedited (live preferably), so that we can see/hear all of the testimonials, honorariums, and thank you speeches.

 

Well, they dont.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jakeem said:

Seriously, this “best pop movie” category is the worst idea the Academy has had since they asked me to sing with Snow White.

LMREO!!! Good one! He has a sense of humor at least! (and still looks good)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

WE HATE IT, YOU HATE IT, I KNOW I DON'T SPEAK FOR EVERYONE HERE, BUT- SERIOUSLY- EVERYONE HATES IT, EVEN IF THEY SAY THEY DON'T.

Didn't someone post some statistic last year that showed that the 31 Days of Oscar was routinely the most watched month of TCM out of the year? I'm not supporting it, as I've usually seen 98% of the movies shown during that month, but if it gets the ratings, then that's why TCM does it. TCM isn't ad-driven, but higher ratings means more demand on providers to offer the channel, and the larger amount TCM can charge carriers for their channel.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Didn't someone post some statistic last year that showed that the 31 Days of Oscar was routinely the most watched month of TCM out of the year? I'm not supporting it, as I've usually seen 98% of the movies shown during that month, but if it gets the ratings, then that's why TCM does it. TCM isn't ad-driven, but higher ratings means more demand on providers to offer the channel, and the larger amount TCM can charge carriers for their channel.

i don't recall that, but i do recall A LOOOOONG TIME AGO someone posting an interview that someone did with some dude named something like Taradish who was something like a VP at TCM and it quoted him as saying something along the lines of "at TCM, we pride ourselves on not even looking at the ratings."

so, shrug emoji?

WHAT THE HELL 2% OF MOVIES ON DURING OSCAR MONTH HAVE YOU NOT SEEN! I. WANT. TO. SEE. RECEIPTS.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, I've seen 101% of movies shown during OSCAR MONTH and I'm like a level 6 to your level 9.5 when it comes to the breadth and depth of having seen stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i was thinking tho, it is most likely a long term contract they have with the AMPAS to use the name and the image and etc. etc.

so even if they wanted to get out of having to show OSCAR MONTH, they can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also also admit that my hatred for 31 DAYS has become so pronounced and instilled that you could show me actual graphs, charts and verbatim testimony from The Nielson people that it delivers a 5.1 share for the month and I'd go FULL MAGA on you and be all "FAKE NEWS! BENGAHZI! WERE Q GOES WE GO! et cetera..."

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

Seriously, I've seen 101% of movies shown during OSCAR MONTH and I'm like a level 6 to your level 9.5 when it comes to the breadth and depth of having seen stuff.

Yeah, but you've apparently seen more quality stuff, whereas I've seen 75 Hercules movies, and dozens of "Attack of the..." movies and "Night of the..." movies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ABC Was The Oscar Changes Instigator

Further details have come to light in the wake of yesterday’s shock announcement regarding the addition of a ‘Popular Movie’ category at the annual Academy Awards event.

Variety has posted a report suggesting the changes that have just been announced were the result of pressure from Disney-ABC Television Group executives in the wake of the poor ratings for this year’s ceremony.

ABC has a pact with AMPAS to broadcast the Oscars through 2028 and so is keen to make it work, but the viewership fell to 26.6 million viewers earlier this year – a steeper decline than the also dwindling figures of other awards ceremonies like the Grammys.

So ABC execs met with AMPAS and after studying ratings carefully, they made the recommendations of reigning in the show’s length, the moving up of the ceremony to an early calendar period and a proposed ‘best blockbuster’ category.

The first two changes have so far been met far more positively, though the shorter length has been revealed to be partly achieved by moving several awards categories into commercial breaks with those smaller awards being announced later in the broadcast with a quick montage.

It’s the popular film awards where both criticism and questions still linger, but ABC is reportedly quite happy with the changes and likely won’t budge on them despite the backlash because they perceive changes to an old institution like the Oscars often yields complaints. AMPAS also issued the following statement:

“While the details for a popular film category are still being finalized, a single film is eligible for an Oscar in both categories – Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film and the Academy Award for Best Picture. The new category will be introduced this coming year, at the 91st Oscars. In creating this award, the Board of Governors supports broad-based consideration of excellence in all films.”

Amusingly ABC has shot itself in the bit somewhat here. Consultants were hired to push “Black Panther” as a serious contender for a potential Best Picture nomination – now it will be exiled to the ‘Popular Movie’ category which is being labelled as a deeply condescending honor.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/abc-was-the-oscar-changes-instigator/

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us