2008 Woodie Awards
Nobody cares about Oscar
By: Brad Canze
Issue date: 2/27/08 Section: Lifeline
Sunday's 80th annual Academy Awards were the first major television event to herald the return to work for the Writers' Guild of America.
Although it was certainly rough around the edges, it was probably one of the better Oscar broadcasts in recent memory.
And a record low audience watched it.
According to Nielsen Media Research, the 32 million viewers of Sunday's telecast make it the lowest-rated Oscar broadcast since the organization started tracking the awards in 1972.
After the strike was finally resolved on Feb. 12, the fact that there was a full script for the awards show a week-and-a-half later is pretty incredible. Jon Stewart's opening monologue was pretty strong. However, it was obvious most of the effort was put into writing that monologue because the majority of the in-between banter and celebrity presentations were wonky in the first degree.
But again, it's impressive there were even speeches to begin with since there was so little time to prepare. I'm happy there was even a show at all.
I watched the entire telecast of the awards, and updated my blog with commentary throughout (and I only say that to prove that I know what I am talking about as far as the awards went, and not at all to promote this fine publication's blog at cmlife.wordpress.com).
For the most part, it went just as I expected.
The Coen brothers were the men of the night, as their film "No Country For Old Men" won the night with awards for best supporting actor, adapted screenplay, directing and best film, all of which were completely deserved.
In a perfect world, these accolades would turn around the movie's box-office underperformance, and the DVD release will make $1 billion, Cormac McCarthy's original book will sell 200 million more copies and Javier Bardem will become an international superstar to rivals Brad Pitt and Johnny Depp.
What I couldn't get behind was the awarding of Best Actress to Marion Cotillard for her performance in "La Vie En Rose." I have not seen the movie (some genius should open up an art-house theater in Mount Pleasant), and I'm sure her performance was wonderful, but I, like every high schooler, college hipster and middle-aged pervert, was rooting for Ellen Page to win for "Juno."
To steal a catchphrase, "oh my blog" (which you can read at cmlife.wordpress.com), she was brilliant in that movie.
I just don't understand why the Academy Awards viewership has been so lacking for the past 10 or so years. I mean, who wouldn't want to watch a three-and-a-half-hour presentation loaded to the teeth with dull montages, awful dialogue, and awards like "Outstanding Achievement in Sound Mixing?"
In all of my hopeless geekiness, I did enjoy the awards, but I feel they need to cut the fat and re-package it as a slick, fast, two-hour show.
The Academy had better do something, because if the ratings continue to plummet like they have, the only way I'll be able to watch the Oscars in the future is to get invited to the live show.
lifeline@cm-life.com
Although it was certainly rough around the edges, it was probably one of the better Oscar broadcasts in recent memory.
And a record low audience watched it.
According to Nielsen Media Research, the 32 million viewers of Sunday's telecast make it the lowest-rated Oscar broadcast since the organization started tracking the awards in 1972.
After the strike was finally resolved on Feb. 12, the fact that there was a full script for the awards show a week-and-a-half later is pretty incredible. Jon Stewart's opening monologue was pretty strong. However, it was obvious most of the effort was put into writing that monologue because the majority of the in-between banter and celebrity presentations were wonky in the first degree.
But again, it's impressive there were even speeches to begin with since there was so little time to prepare. I'm happy there was even a show at all.
I watched the entire telecast of the awards, and updated my blog with commentary throughout (and I only say that to prove that I know what I am talking about as far as the awards went, and not at all to promote this fine publication's blog at cmlife.wordpress.com).
For the most part, it went just as I expected.
The Coen brothers were the men of the night, as their film "No Country For Old Men" won the night with awards for best supporting actor, adapted screenplay, directing and best film, all of which were completely deserved.
In a perfect world, these accolades would turn around the movie's box-office underperformance, and the DVD release will make $1 billion, Cormac McCarthy's original book will sell 200 million more copies and Javier Bardem will become an international superstar to rivals Brad Pitt and Johnny Depp.
What I couldn't get behind was the awarding of Best Actress to Marion Cotillard for her performance in "La Vie En Rose." I have not seen the movie (some genius should open up an art-house theater in Mount Pleasant), and I'm sure her performance was wonderful, but I, like every high schooler, college hipster and middle-aged pervert, was rooting for Ellen Page to win for "Juno."
To steal a catchphrase, "oh my blog" (which you can read at cmlife.wordpress.com), she was brilliant in that movie.
I just don't understand why the Academy Awards viewership has been so lacking for the past 10 or so years. I mean, who wouldn't want to watch a three-and-a-half-hour presentation loaded to the teeth with dull montages, awful dialogue, and awards like "Outstanding Achievement in Sound Mixing?"
In all of my hopeless geekiness, I did enjoy the awards, but I feel they need to cut the fat and re-package it as a slick, fast, two-hour show.
The Academy had better do something, because if the ratings continue to plummet like they have, the only way I'll be able to watch the Oscars in the future is to get invited to the live show.
lifeline@cm-life.com
Be the first to comment on this story