Just for the sake of being friendly... and other reasons!
The Oscars were probably the best they've been in all of the years that I've actually been watching them. The first yearI watched was the year of Gladiator, Crouching Tiger, Traffic, Erin Brachovich, and Chocolat. Yeah, that WAS a good year, considering I can still remember all of the nominated movies.
This year, and recent years, for that matter, have been a little different. More subdued films, IMO with a more somber mood throughout the nation, and as a result a much more boring presentation. But I liked of things about the awards this year. For one, Jon Stewart. For two, Crash winning. And for three, realizing that the Academy actually has a fairly significant role in society (a revelation that popped up with Clooney's "Proud to be an Academy Member" speech).
Surprises? Ratings. Lower than last year. What the heck?
So here's my idea. It's not a big deal that they're long -- I don't care about length at all. Don't change the criteria for films, either. But make the audience interested by dropping the award show sometime in December. Or even better, have all of your stars come into the show naked.
Okay, in all seriousness though, I think the reason that the ratings are down is because the films they're nominating are films that are definitely worthy of recognition, but that are a bit more artsy and a bit less Hollywood. Not that I disagree with it, but let's come up with a best picture nominee set based on money alone. What do you get?
Star Wars Episode III -- Ben orgasms one last time
Chronicles of Riddick II -- Aslan Rises Again
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
War of the Worlds
King Kong
Which of THOSE would you pick? Hmm, nothing. But think about this, based on movies people saw that made a considerable amount of money.
Batman Begins
Walk the Line
The 40-Year-Old Virgin
Brokeback Mountain
Sin City
Now THAT is a show I would watch. I don't think I'm alone, either.
Old years not even that far back had their top movies for the year winning the nominations. Consider 2003 (Return of the King), 1998 (Saving Private Ryan), 1997 (Titanic), and 1994 (Forrest Gump). And those were the top-rated Oscar shows of all time. (And don't go blaming it on the host, either -- Steve Martin was hosting the year ROTK won).
Anyway, lemme close by saying, if you want people to watch the Oscars, mix it up a bit. Throw in a "Babe" (which WAS nominated and got kids like myself watching the entire evening) or a "SIn City" and get people interested. Two years ago, consider this:
Passion of the Christ
Fahrenheit 9/11
Million Dollar Baby
The Aviator
Ray
...And you've got more viewers than you've ever had before.
This year, and recent years, for that matter, have been a little different. More subdued films, IMO with a more somber mood throughout the nation, and as a result a much more boring presentation. But I liked of things about the awards this year. For one, Jon Stewart. For two, Crash winning. And for three, realizing that the Academy actually has a fairly significant role in society (a revelation that popped up with Clooney's "Proud to be an Academy Member" speech).
Surprises? Ratings. Lower than last year. What the heck?
So here's my idea. It's not a big deal that they're long -- I don't care about length at all. Don't change the criteria for films, either. But make the audience interested by dropping the award show sometime in December. Or even better, have all of your stars come into the show naked.
Okay, in all seriousness though, I think the reason that the ratings are down is because the films they're nominating are films that are definitely worthy of recognition, but that are a bit more artsy and a bit less Hollywood. Not that I disagree with it, but let's come up with a best picture nominee set based on money alone. What do you get?
Star Wars Episode III -- Ben orgasms one last time
Chronicles of Riddick II -- Aslan Rises Again
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
War of the Worlds
King Kong
Which of THOSE would you pick? Hmm, nothing. But think about this, based on movies people saw that made a considerable amount of money.
Batman Begins
Walk the Line
The 40-Year-Old Virgin
Brokeback Mountain
Sin City
Now THAT is a show I would watch. I don't think I'm alone, either.
Old years not even that far back had their top movies for the year winning the nominations. Consider 2003 (Return of the King), 1998 (Saving Private Ryan), 1997 (Titanic), and 1994 (Forrest Gump). And those were the top-rated Oscar shows of all time. (And don't go blaming it on the host, either -- Steve Martin was hosting the year ROTK won).
Anyway, lemme close by saying, if you want people to watch the Oscars, mix it up a bit. Throw in a "Babe" (which WAS nominated and got kids like myself watching the entire evening) or a "SIn City" and get people interested. Two years ago, consider this:
Passion of the Christ
Fahrenheit 9/11
Million Dollar Baby
The Aviator
Ray
...And you've got more viewers than you've ever had before.