And The Oscar Goes To......

[Deleted]

I can see why the Twilight stars would present seeing as they seem to be movie stars poised for larger stardom afterwards. I'm not saying they will get that stardom but that's the way they're marketed.

But I think of Miley Cyrus and Zac Efron (even if they do appear in movies from time to time) as tv stars for tweens. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I just think of the huge cheese factor when I see them. Well, especially with Miley. I think Efron might be a lot less cheesy since he starred in that Orson Welles movie with Danes. Maybe he's transitioned into the mainstream grown-up market now.

Okay, I'm fine with all of them EXCEPT MILEY. No matter how much they try to convince me she's a grown-up star for the next generation I think of her as the cheesy teen for the tween set. Shirley Temple may have been a child star, but it seemed like she had the same credibility as her older counterparts whenever she'd get one of those kiddie Oscars. Even adults watched Shirley Temple. I don't think she was just for kids.

Back in the day Winona Ryder and Johnny Depp (who I can't recall actually presenting when they were teen or tween idols) seemed to have more street cred though. Well, even Rob Lowe seemed like he had more street cred.

[Deleted]

Eh, whatever. It's not like they're giving them awards. Jennifer Garner has never had a real reason for being there other than working for ABC, and I don't recall there ever being a huge fuss about that.

Meanwhile, The Hurt Locker's chances are getting better and better. At this point I feel comfortable calling Best Picture for it.

[normadesmond]

I think they're trying to figure out why their ratings continue to slip and why the Oscars no longer generate the same excitement for the general public. They figure it's the speeches: they're trying to force the winners to keep it short and thank their family and friends in some backstage Thank You cam. Then they wonder if they need more teen idols and bring in the Twilight crowd.

But I think this is completely wrong. The real reason it's hard to care anymore is there's no longer any suspense or surprise. This year, the only real suspense is will Hurt Locker win Best Pic, and will Sandra or Meryl get Best Actress? And it's been the same every year ever since the SAG awards were invented and all these other critics associations started springing up. And you can watch these foregone conclusions play out in about 15 minutes on youtube, instead of plodding through the whole ceremony to see what you already knew was going to happen, happen. I really don't think tens of millions of Twilight fans will plow through the whole ceremony just to catch two minutes of Taylor Lautner (since they can see a hundred different youtube clips of him anyway, anytime they want).

I'd go further and say the creation of more and more different awards has tended to distort the Oscar voting process. For instance, even if someone disliked Helen Mirren's performance in The Queen, they'd probably feel obliged to choose her anyway because it would be cruel to make her lose the Oscar after she won about a hundred other awards. But's that's a bad example because I think that particular performance was admired.

A better example would be Javier Bardem in No Country for Old Men. Considering he swept all the critics' awards, he was all but guaranteed the Oscar, and he did, in fact, get it. But with Best Supporting Actress, Tilda Swinton got it for Michael Clayton. That suggests a lot of admiration for that film, and I wouldn't be surprised if Tom Wilkinson got the second most votes for Best Supporting Actor. We'll never know, but my feeling is that without the gazillion critics' awards going to Javier, it's quite possible that Wilkinson could have beaten him. We knew it was never going to happen, but it could have happened, easily, if this had occurred back in the days before all these critics' awards sprang up like dandelions, back when there was only the New York and L.A. critics and maybe one or two others.

Supposing these plentiful different acting awards existed back in the early 90s. And suppose the critics formed a phalanx and gave Best Supporting Actress to Judy Davis in Husbands and Wives, and Judy Davis won every prize there was as Mo'Nique is doing this year, and Javier Bardem did and Helen Mirren did. Then the stunning upset where Marisa Tomei won the Oscar for My Cousin Vinny wouldn't have happened. Impossible - unless the voters actively despised Judy Davis as a person they wouldn't want to hurt her feelings if she'd already won 20 or 30 acting prizes and Tomei had won none. They only felt at liberty to give it to Tomei because there was no true "frontrunner," only presumed frontrunners, but nobody cleaning up 20 or 30 awards when only a handful of "precursor" awards even existed in the first place!

It's not going too far to say that Marisa Tomei owes her Oscar to the fact she won it in the days before there existed an avalanche of precursor awards.

[Deleted]

I think the Oscars tend to overestimate themselves in the adverts. I saw a commercial where they lauded themselves as "the most prestigious event in the world." That sets up too high a bar. People tune in and are probably mumbling to themselves "That's it?" when they see Beyonce and the High School Musical kids.

[dutchninja]

That's such a great piece of analysis, Norma Desmond. I wholly agree!

Off topic(ish): I always thought the reason they got Jennifer Garner to present was that she was a professional. She turns up looking nice and confident, reads all the names out clearly, doesn't make it all about HER (ahem, Julia Roberts), and does a decent job in general. And I know people here loathe Tom Cruise, but he's also incredibly professional at these awards. I can't stand the actresses (generally) who stand up there simpering, unable to read the teleprompter (Nicole Kidman), and generally looking as awkward as hell. You're actors! Act like you're a professional announcer, goddamit!

[lpatrice]

I hope this nonsense, does not lead to an IB or Up in the Air win.

I think the real problem with the Oscar's is an identity crisis. They try to honor mainstream films and critical darlings and it never works because the voting block is not made up of critics.

Whatever the case, I'm rapidly losing interest in this years Oscars; I might just skip them all together. I did last year, and apparently did not miss a thing.

I think they're trying to figure out why their ratings continue to slip and why the Oscars no longer generate the same excitement for the general public. They figure it's the speeches: they're trying to force the winners to keep it short and thank their family and friends in some backstage Thank You cam. Then they wonder if they need more teen idols and bring in the Twilight crowd.

But I think this is completely wrong. The real reason it's hard to care anymore is there's no longer any suspense or surprise. This year, the only real suspense is will Hurt Locker win Best Pic, and will Sandra or Meryl get Best Actress?

Lately it is looking more and more like THL and Sandra Bullock will triumph. No suspense there.

[angelaudie]

I hope this nonsense, does not lead to an IB or Up in the Air win.

Sadly, thanks to that producer's stupid actions, I think there's an excellent possibility THL will have to kiss Best Picture goodbye. Academy members will probably vote another film just to show they cannot be had (yeah right). I'm sure many of them have worked on big budget films as well so the obvious Avatar slam will not do him any favors. I doubt they appreciate the implication that indies are somehow more worthy of Best Picture wins which they are not (Crash I'm looking at you!).

I can actually handle THL losing Best Picture. It's a good movie but there are other good films nominated as well. Now, if Kathryn loses Best Director thanks to his dumb actions I will be pissed!

[huntergrayson]

Sweet Xenu, I think the ceremony is going to be a disaster - they are going to snip the Best Song Performances but may hand out Awards via a dance routine? The hell?

When does the voting period end? I'm wondering if it may be too late for any backlash regarding that campaigning to affect THL's chances.

[Deleted]

The final ballots are due March 2nd, so unfortunately it could affect THL's chances. When I first saw that story my immediate thought was that they can kiss Best Picture good-bye. I don't think it'll hurt Kathryn Bigelow's chances though, everyone, even the other directing nominees, wants her to win.

[Mugsy]

The Oscar's ratings are slipping because the show is boring and irrelevent to many typical TV viewers. There are too many unknown movies and unknown actors nominated in the major categories that the average viewer feels like they have nothing invested. This isn't to say "little" movies and unknowns shouldn't be nominated; but when they are, esp. taking a high percentage of nominations, viewers don't care and don't watch.

Most people don't go to little independent films at little independent theatres. Whether that's good or bad depends probably on whether YOU do, but it's still fact.