Sunday night's Academy Awards were entertaining enough, without being particularly surprising. Pretty much in keeping with the relatively safe list of nominees, the closest I came to being surprised was watching Scorcese lose again… and by the time that happened, it really wasn't a surprise anymore and seemed kind of inevitable.
I was pleased to see both Sideways & Eternal Sunshine nab their screenplay nominations (and it's about time Charlie Kaufman won for one of his stories!). And I was equally glad to see The Incredibles take best animated feature. Much as I enjoyed Shrek 2, Incredibles was just the better film. And the less said about Shark Tale, the better (imho, of course).
Like I said, by the end of the night, I wasn't that surprised to see Million Dollar Baby take it over The Aviator, nor Clint win over Marty. Let's face it, he won the DGA award this year. That just didn't bode well for Scorcese's chances.
Just before the show, I'd thumbed through Entertainment Weekly's Oscar Preview article and found it really interesting that, in the magazine's selections, their critics choices, and the picks they had from their anonymous screenwriter, actor and producer, Aviator lost out almost across the board to Baby. (The producer is the one that inferred that the Academy doesn't like Scorcese.) What I found even more interesting was that, after it was all over, they had picked the winner for every one of the major races (and, I think, most of the minor ones as well.) So much for mocking EW for it's lack of any real industry insight.
Chris Rock was more entertaining that I expected him to be (not that I don't find Rock funny… this just doesn't seem his venue), Sean Penn is a humorless SOB (what's new, right?) and the efforts they made to streamline things seemed to help bring the show in under 4 hours. Didn't, apparently, help with the ratings, however.
It's interesting the hierarchy they established, with nominees for documentaries, short subjects and other, apparently "minor" categories getting to accept their awards from the aisles (and one guy, apparently, either asleep in his seat when they announced him, or faking it for laughs), then the more techie/design oriented awards getting to actually be on stage for a group shot, and the major awards the only one getting the full walk-from-your-seat-to-centerstage treatment.
Of course, if they really wanted to trim some time from the show, how about getting rid of those horrible production number versions of nominated songs? Maybe a clip of the song from the movie, rather than subject us to stuff like Antonio Banderas mauling a Spanish folk song (so much so that the guy that won the award for it felt compelled to sing a little of the song as his acceptance speech) or repeated viewings of Beyonce working hard to impress us that she's not just another pop-star. (Yes, she's good. Doesn't make those numbers any more interesting, however.) They managed to get rid of the pointless dance numbers a few years back… maybe the songs are on the chopping block!
So, like I said, nothing terribly new or exciting this year. And none of the usually dependable "I never saw that coming" winners. So maybe next year, right? But isn't it a little early for this already…
Handicapping the 2006 Oscars
I was pleased to see both Sideways & Eternal Sunshine nab their screenplay nominations (and it's about time Charlie Kaufman won for one of his stories!). And I was equally glad to see The Incredibles take best animated feature. Much as I enjoyed Shrek 2, Incredibles was just the better film. And the less said about Shark Tale, the better (imho, of course).
Like I said, by the end of the night, I wasn't that surprised to see Million Dollar Baby take it over The Aviator, nor Clint win over Marty. Let's face it, he won the DGA award this year. That just didn't bode well for Scorcese's chances.
Just before the show, I'd thumbed through Entertainment Weekly's Oscar Preview article and found it really interesting that, in the magazine's selections, their critics choices, and the picks they had from their anonymous screenwriter, actor and producer, Aviator lost out almost across the board to Baby. (The producer is the one that inferred that the Academy doesn't like Scorcese.) What I found even more interesting was that, after it was all over, they had picked the winner for every one of the major races (and, I think, most of the minor ones as well.) So much for mocking EW for it's lack of any real industry insight.
Chris Rock was more entertaining that I expected him to be (not that I don't find Rock funny… this just doesn't seem his venue), Sean Penn is a humorless SOB (what's new, right?) and the efforts they made to streamline things seemed to help bring the show in under 4 hours. Didn't, apparently, help with the ratings, however.
It's interesting the hierarchy they established, with nominees for documentaries, short subjects and other, apparently "minor" categories getting to accept their awards from the aisles (and one guy, apparently, either asleep in his seat when they announced him, or faking it for laughs), then the more techie/design oriented awards getting to actually be on stage for a group shot, and the major awards the only one getting the full walk-from-your-seat-to-centerstage treatment.
Of course, if they really wanted to trim some time from the show, how about getting rid of those horrible production number versions of nominated songs? Maybe a clip of the song from the movie, rather than subject us to stuff like Antonio Banderas mauling a Spanish folk song (so much so that the guy that won the award for it felt compelled to sing a little of the song as his acceptance speech) or repeated viewings of Beyonce working hard to impress us that she's not just another pop-star. (Yes, she's good. Doesn't make those numbers any more interesting, however.) They managed to get rid of the pointless dance numbers a few years back… maybe the songs are on the chopping block!
So, like I said, nothing terribly new or exciting this year. And none of the usually dependable "I never saw that coming" winners. So maybe next year, right? But isn't it a little early for this already…
Handicapping the 2006 Oscars
Comments
As for the show...
I thought Rock was mediocre at best. Just not nearly funny or engaging enough. Best moment was the "drive thru Oscars" crack. They need someone more Hollywood...more "movie insider".
I am also apalled by the "award from your seat" crap. Standing on the stage? That's ok...but in your seat? How ridiculous and embarrasing.
Here is my list on how to make the show work:
1) Get a host who is "inside". Has a real knowledge, appreciation, and love for all things Hollywood and all things filmic.
2) Eliminate "best song" as a whole freaking category! It has nothing to do with filmmaking, movies add films to the rolling credits to get nominated, and the numbers are terrible.
3) Replacing the horrible song numbers - have different actors do readings of nominated scripts. Big names doing a scene from a script - show us what writing is to film.
4) Don't be afraid to go long! Revel in what it is...if it's 4 hours long, that's ok.
5) Have a theme for each show, and have the appropriate clip montages to celebrate that aspect of film.
6) Only one honorary award in any year (whether it is an honorary Oscar, Herscholdt award, or Thalberg award).
7) More clips! All Best Pic noms, all acting noms.
8) Dump Best Short live action, short animated, and short doc. There are film festivals for that stuff now. Just stick to feature length.