What did you think of the 2013 Oscars? (1 Viewer)

[Citizen87645]

I think Crystal was a great host for the 90s, but after that decade his hosting style started to seem long in the tooth. 2012 in particular seemed forced, but that may have been the circumstances of him replacing Eddie Murphy last minute. That said, the show has not really found an adequate replacement for Crystal, "Next Generation Crystal" if you will. I think it would be worth having Tina Fey and Amy Poehler take a crack at it. I know some don't find them funny, but that's inevitable with any comedian selected. I think the idea of using actors as hosts has not paid off, as the gig is too far outside their wheelhouses. At least with a comedian you have someone with experience standing up in front of a bunch of people, with in-the-trenches training on how to move on from awkward moments or jokes that bomb. The exception may be those with live theater training (e.g. Hugh Jackman or Neil Patrick Harris).

 

[Charles_Y]

I seem to be the only one bothered by this but I can't remember this particular awards show going by "The Oscars." I once heard this informal moniker was coined by Bette Davis about either one of her husbands or someone she knew. These are the 85th Academy Awards! I found this renaming a real indication of how low this show is going. Having MacFarlane, an animator with questionable taste, as host simply seals it. He was mediocre in my view. Heaven knows why the orchestra was located elsewhere. Did they know something we didn't? Ridiculous. The only humorous addition might have been the use of the Jaws theme to signal approaching overtime on speeches. Maybe, not. I don't know. As this is the only awards show I watch anymore I despair. Perhaps, my age at 57 has something to do with it.

 

[WillG]

POLITICAL COMMENTS REMOVED BY THE OWNERSHIP

disliked the boobs song. Can you imagine doing this with 'we saw your penis?'.

I don't see what the big deal about that would be. Actually, it would probably be more funny because male frontal nudity is much more rare than actresses doing topless scenes. I thought the Boobs song was funny. I've seen some stuff in the news talking about some of the unamused looking reactions of some of the actresses mentioned. Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't those cutaways pre-taped in keeping with the joke that Seth was going to be reviewed as the worst Oscar host ever? And even if some of them really weren't amused, F 'em if they can't take a joke. Pretty much every major actress out there has done a nude scene in at least one of their films and seem fine with it (and the associated publicity, box office dollars etc). Only one I can think of off the top of my head who hasn't is Julia Roberts (and since she's actually somewhat famous for never doing a nude scene, it seems like not doing nudity is more the exception than the rule) Oh yeah, as per the song, Jennifer Lawrence hasn't, but give it time. I'm sure there are others who haven't, but it's hard to think of many (of course, I'm talking about actresses where there would be somewhat of a general interest for people to see nude, so don't come back at me with names like Queen Latifah or Melissa McCarthy etc.)

I agree that Billy Crystal is the perfect host. Funny, and non-offensive

Eh, I like a little bit of "offensive" and while Crystal had a great reign as the go to host, I thought he was kind of stale last year.

Ya think...... They acted like he was Scorsese and all the years he was screwed by the Academy.

I think the some of the "Outrage" over Affleck not getting a director nomination may have been over the perception some had that He and Bigelow were snubbed for political reasons. There was some vocal criticism in the industry over the suggestions in "Zero Dark Thirty" that torture may have been a contributing factor in finding Bin Laden. I found "Argo" to be mostly apolitical (and I give credit to Affleck for resisting to include any overt political stance) but maybe that's what some didn't like, that it didn't take a very political incident and put a "Hollywood Politics" slant on it. That's all just speculation of course, but it wouldn't shock me if that were the case.

Wow. Seemed obvious to me why that pairing was so horrific. Worst Oscar show I ever watched.

Not to mention that Franco seemed completely stoned throughout the whole thing.

I think the idea of using actors as hosts has not paid off, as the gig is too far outside their wheelhouses

I think it's actually the worst you can go. Just by definition alone, movie actors don't work "Live" and not all of them have comedic chops. You need someone who is trained to work "Live" like a stand up comedian or a stage actor who would be trained at improv. When they announced McFarlane as host, it seemed a very strange choice as he's a cartoonist by trade. However, he does have comedy and vocal talent so he was able to do a halfway decent job, but He's not going to usurp Crystal, Hope or Carson as the king of the Oscar hosts in anyone's eyes.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

On a forum that kindly asks people not to interject their political opinions into
the discussion, I am rather surprised that it has been done here. You guys should
know better.
I have already had to censor such comments.
Please keep political opinions out of this discussion.

 

[Mark Collins]

I just felt something more was going on with Ben Affleck . I noticed it when he spoke directly to Seth about the show before he gave his award. He seemed to want to tell all about himself. I noticed Stevens reaction when he mentioned his name. Steven looked shocked at what Ben was saying. To long of a show and I wanted Lincoln to win.

 

[Stan]

Haven't watched the show in several years, but McFarlane was pretty decent. Plus he's got a much better singing voice than I ever expected. Typical hosting, good and bad jokes, but I thought most people were just upset that he made very truthful jokes, maybe not very "pc", but spot on. But he seemed to recover well and didn't choke when things bombed. Loved the Shirley Bassey and Striesand appearances, still some excellent voices that really surprised me. Stupidly missed the last half hour or so with the big awards, knew the show is famous for running over but forgot to program extra time into the DVR. Hopefully can catch some clips on YouTube, etc.

 

[Todd Erwin]

I thought the show was just *okay*. It definitely was not the train wreck that was Franco & Hathaway, but Seth just seemed so out of place. And what was the deal with Kristen Stewart? She had to be the most unenthusiastic presenter in the history of the show.

 

[Walter Kittel]

And what was the deal with Kristen Stewart? She had to be the most unenthusiastic presenter in the history of the show

You may not have noticed, but she limped to the microphone. I noticed that she looked kind of 'toasted' and googled afterwards and apparently she has some type of injury. She was on crutches. I am speculating that she may have been on some type of pain medication, given her appearance. Thought the show was okay at best. The Shatner bit was fun, but went on for too long. Liked the Meryl Streep introduction. I didn't have a dog in the fight this year, so I was fine with the Academy "spreading the wealth". - Walter.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I was wondering about Kristen Stewart as well. She looked totally high and totally uninterested at certain points of the show. I would accept the pain medication as the reason for it.

 

[Citizen87645]

My "what was up with" question is for Renee Zellweger. Is she illiterate or did she not have her contacts in?

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Boy, Cameron, am I glad you brought her up.

I had an instant crush on Renee Zellweger when I saw
her in Jerry Maguire. She was so cute.

What in God's name happened to her (and that is one
of the better pictures I found of her from last night)

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Every year I hope for a more streamlined, entertaining Oscars Event. I had high hopes for Seth, but in the end, despite dragging William Shatner in as Captain Kirk, the show just felt bloated. Those of us who were part of the HTF live chat were wondering when the opening segment would end and that they would simply start handing out awards.

The opening did feel bloated, but I thought the rest of the show flowed more smoothly than it usually does. Seth MacFarlane did a good job keeping things moving and keeping out of the way. The awkward canned bits with the presenters also illicted less groans than usual.

Overall, I was unimpressed with the show. There was something off about the whole night. The two things that stand out in my mind are how many commercials there were and how much time was spent on the lesser categories.

The time spent on the lesser categories was actually one of the things I liked about this show. Most years, they're treated with more or less open contempt. It was nice to see them get a little appreciation.

Felt horrible when the VFX workers for Pi won and they all stood outside protesting over lost pay and jobs. While inside they can't even get a mention before the jaws music started.

That's been one of my ongoing complaints for years, that the actors can gab a lot longer than the technical folks before they get played off the stage.

And how many times could they mention Chicago? Is it because the show producers also produced it?

Yes. It was painfully evident that they felt the movie was far more beloved that it actually was. I think the musical tribute was just an excuse for the producers to reassemble some of the Chicago players. Which is a shame, because Jennifer Hudson wiped them off the stage, and then the Les Mis cast really showed how you much a large cast of singers shine.

Overall my feeling is that it was just another semi-lame awards show. I tend to watch mainly to participate in the chat which is *always* fun. Were it not for the chat I'd not bother and just read about the winners in the paper the next day. Yeah, I'm the guy the programmers hate... Frankly, they'd do better with *fewer* production numbers and self-serving promos for past projects *cough**Chicago**cough* and might actually have time to allow winners a bit of screen/thank you time plus get the show off the air on time.

I still get frustrated with the inability to cut the excess from this show every year. Each year the producer seems to indicate they're going to "fix" the show, and each year it's still bloated, pretentious, and too long.

The problem is that everything that sinks the broadcast is the stuff that the Academy members who make the decisions love. And then whoever the producer is this year feels the need to leave his stamp, so you get stuff like the self-serving musicals tribute.

Wow. Seemed obvious to me why that pairing was so horrific. Worst Oscar show I ever watched.

Me too. Whatever you think of MacFarlane, the Franco/Hathaway paring was an unmitigated disaster.

I think Crystal was a great host for the 90s, but after that decade his hosting style started to seem long in the tooth. 2012 in particular seemed forced

I agree. Crystal had a good run, but his run is done. If the next host does as well as last night, I'll be a happy camper. I think Stephen Colbert could do a great job. Your Neil Patrick Harris suggestion would also be terrific. There's a reason he's becoming a perennial at the Tonys.

And what was the deal with Kristen Stewart? She had to be the most unenthusiastic presenter in the history of the show.

She's more or less always like that. My two big disappointments last night: - Argo over Lincoln for Adapted Screenplay. Kushner was flat-out robbed. - Life of Pi over The Avengers for Visual Effects.

 

[WillG]

Boy, Cameron, am I glad you brought her up. What in God's name happened to her (and that is one of the better pictures I found of her from last night)

Yeah, I saw her in one of the pre-interviews and thought it was her and couldn't believe it, then I felt convinced it wasn't her, but sure enough her name came up on the screen. Yikes

 

[Dee Zee]

How about Jimmy Kimmel next year if Tina and Amy aren't available.

 

[Patrick_S]

Seth wasn’t the worst or the best host we have had in the past decade. Sure the opening went on far too long but after that things did get better. I thought they could have done a better job with the Bond tribute. I have read on the web but not sure it is true that the original montage of clips was eight minutes long but was cut down when it became apparent that they were not going to be able to get all the Bond actors on stage. I do not know if that is true or not but it sound plausible. One big improvement this year was the “In Memorial” segment. That was a vast improvement and I certainly hope other award shows follow the Academy’s lead. Having a live performer sing takes focus away from what the segment intent of remembering those that have passed. As for the winners, didn’t have any real “what were they thinking” reactions. That is not to say I wasn’t surprised by some of the winners just that after I thought about the winners I could see them winning.

 

[Patrick_S]

Boy, Cameron, am I glad you brought her up. What in God's name happened to her (and that is one of the better pictures I found of her from last night)

She was so cute back in Jerry Maguire, now sadly she seems to have caught a bad case of what I like to call Helen Hunt syndrome. Both actresses seem to have a permanent squint.

 

[Edwin-S]

I seem to be the only one bothered by this but I can't remember this particular awards show going by "The Oscars." I once heard this informal moniker was coined by Bette Davis about either one of her husbands or someone she knew. These are the 85th Academy Awards! I found this renaming a real indication of how low this show is going. Having MacFarlane, an animator with questionable taste, as host simply seals it. He was mediocre in my view. Heaven knows why the orchestra was located elsewhere. Did they know something we didn't? Ridiculous. The only humorous addition might have been the use of the Jaws theme to signal approaching overtime on speeches. Maybe, not. I don't know. As this is the only awards show I watch anymore I despair. Perhaps, my age at 57 has something to do with it.

Yeah, because having an animator host the Academy Awards is really dragging the show down to its lowest depth. After all, animation isn't real film making, right? The only thing is that McFarlane is a comedy writer/director/producer, so I would say that qualifies him for hosting duties as much as Billy Crystal and probably more than some of the dud actors that they have used as hosts. I doubt the man has done any animating in years.

 

[Edwin-S]

Seth McFarlane, himself, admitted that being the host for the Academy Awards was going to be difficult. He even admitted that it was more than likely that it would be his one and only appearance, since he doubted he would be offered the gig again. The comments about him being an animator and a cartoonist only prove his point. Frankly, I think the guy had more guts than brains when he took the job. An irreverent cartoonist and animator, well known for his crude, random comedy style. What was the Academy Award management thinking? I know, that maybe bringing someone like that in would inject a little life into a stodgy, boring, drawn out affair. Little did they know how wrong they were, because even McFarlane had to pull his horns in, due to the "prestige" of the event. There is no way to overcome the 85 years of pretentious inertia that the AA's have become, no matter who helms it. People actually want the whole thing to be boring, no matter how much they complain about it.

 

[Jose Martinez]

I love Seth McFarlane's crude politically incorrect humor. Which is why I did not watch last night's Oscar show. Knowing how out of touch most of the Academy members are, I had a feeling his kind of humor wouldn't go well with a lot of them, i.e. Tommy Lee Jones. Plus he'd probably be held back by the powers that be. Anyway, I'm glad the ratings were up but I think it had more to do with the popularity of this year's nominees.

 

[Van594]

She was so cute back in Jerry Maguire, now sadly she seems to have caught a bad case of what I like to call Helen Hunt syndrome. Both actresses seem to have a permanent squint.

To be fair it was back in 1996 that Jerry Maguire was made...thats a long time in cute actress years(ask Meg Ryan and her lips). Renee has had obvious botox done which takes away the softer features that made her cute. Being a woman in Hollywood can't be easy with the next young cutie just around the corner wanting your job. As far as Ben Affleck goes, good for him. Argo didn't direct itself and to get best picture and not be nominated he deserved something if not a say. I feel for Ben because here is a guy who's career was going down the pretty boy crapper and he has totally reinvented himself as a top of the line director.