The Annual Academy Awards - General Discussion

[slowpoked]

. No way did JHud have to sing after the montage, haven't we had singers sing as the montage was going on, and much lovelier songs too? Wasn't Smile sung one year or am I thinking of the Emmys?

I remember James Taylor singing while the montage was happening. IMO it's more touching that way.

 

 

The point I got from Patricia Arquette's speech was that if you are a working mother, it's harder for you to get a job in Hollywood, or get equal pay. I really thought that was where she was trying to go with the "giving birth" message. Which may be why Meryl Streep was in her corner, how many kids does she have...4?

Probably. To be honest I was confused about her speech, but most probably because it started out weird, but I do get the gist of what she's saying. I don't begrudge her for using the movie's biggest stage to speak up about the issue. Equal pay for women is a major issue in a sexist industry like Hollywood. Everyone knows it's been going on, but it got more forefront with the leaked emails this past year (Amy Adams, JLaw, etc.). I think the public thinks this only affects the "smaller" women, but when big stars like Adams and JLaw are slighted, it's all the worse for the smaller women. Patricia was in front of her peers and TPTB that can tackle this issue head-on, so she went for it. I don't see any problem with it. I don't consider it politics, since it's an issue that affects most everyone in there directly. I don't see it any different as when Cate Blanchett implored in her speech last year to make more movies with women front and center because they do make money, contrary to reports. Or it's not any different when Tina Fey/Amy Poehler use humor to poke fun at Hollywood's sexism and ageism during the 3 years they hosted GGs.

[Chaos Theory]

I do understand people want to see movies nominated that they actually saw but then I go back to what I call my NCIS/2-1/2 men problem. NCIS is one of the most watched shows on television but I would hardly call it award worthy then you have shows that seem to be on the cancelation bubble that no one watches that are incredibly well written.

The same can be said for movies. There are blockbusters that everyone and their grandmother sees that aren't incredibly well written and there are smaller films like Still Alice that might eventually end up on your Netflix queue: that is actually better written that very few people saw in theaters.

Edited February 23, 2015 by Chaos Theory

[xander874]

 

I don't think the technical awards should be separated either. Those people worked just as hard--probably more so--as the actors.

And that's the crux of it. I personally would watch a technical awards show if they showed clips and had some fun hosts. But, most people wouldn't. Of course, they don't air most of the Grammys either and I think anyone could argue that the creators of the best Rock album (aired) worked just as hard as the creators of the best Latin Pop Album (not aired). It's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

 

Of course, if they split it, they could maybe add a couple of new technical categories, like best stunt coordinator.

[Inquisitionist]

I am pleased Eddie Redmayne won, but I would have been happy about anyone in the Best Actor category taking it. I thought they all had great performances and the category had a deep field to choose from. It is why I did not get upset that David Oyelowo was not nominated, because it was a deep field of fantastic male performances this year. I am totally blanking on who I thought could have squeezed in with a nomination with David Oyelowo.

 

And a strong case could have been made for nominating Ralph Fiennes in TGBH as well. 

 

Endless time was wasted on the bullshit category of "best song" though.

 

It really is a time-waster, isn't it?

[Neurochick]

I was a bit uncomfortable with the reverse racism throughout the night.

 

 

I don't get what is "reverse racism" when white people own most of the networks, movie studios and news outlets.  

 

And so what if Shonda Rhimes didn't like Gaga.  Goodness, it's not like the woman committed murder one or something.  And I like some of her shows, so they're not shitty to me.  

 

And why do a tribute to The Sound of Music anyway?  They could have left that shit out.  I love Gaga's performance, she was superb, but it belonged on another show.  And yes, I did see The Sound of Music, in Radio City Music Hall, (don't remember if it was 50 years ago, maybe 49).

Edited February 23, 2015 by Neurochick

[FormerMod-a1]

I think they need to change the pacing, but I don't think it's with removing some of these "lesser" categories or shuffling off to another night.  I like seeing the Documentary and Foreign Film categories as I learn form them.  Rightly or wrongly, many items in those categories are off my radar most the year and the Oscar noms give me a starting place to start looking and delving into them when I have the time.  I also like the more "mainstream" technical items that are included, some films are surprisingly technical (not just the big sci-fi and/or action films) whether with sound, music, editing, costumes, etc.  I also like the Original Song category.  All these songs are written for the film, as I understand it.  They are not existing songs that are used well in a film.  In every Oscars I've watched, they have all been sung in their entirety.  (Granted, I don't watch every year).  Lastly, I don't see what's wrong with a 4 hour show, as long as it's well paced and interesting.  Midnight is not that late to go to bed.  I work a "8-5"/M-F job at a bank and I normally don't go to bed until around 11-11:30.  You really don't have to stay up that much later to see it all.  I like that they show it live in all time zones and you have to make concessions.  I wouldn't expect the Pacific coasters to have to start watching at 3pm.

 

So really that means tighter pacing, e.g. sing *during* the In Memoriam, not after; when you see you''re going over time, don't drag on the host bits, etc.

[truthaboutluv]

YMMV but I disagree that time is wasted on the Best Song category. As someone else noted, the performances do well to break up the monotony of the show and I like that they were spaced throughout the night. Some years ago, producers did practically do away with the performances, narrowing all the nominees down to like a minute abbreviated performances of the songs, all done in one lump. But many complained and said they missed the performances. In my opinion, the problem wasn't the original song nominees performing their nominated song but as others noted, Jennifer Hudson showing up to sing a completely unnecessary song and even Gaga, who yes sounded amazing, the tribute to The Sound of Music was not really necessary. 

 

I do agree that the problem with the show is they need to find a way to celebrate the films more rather than wasting so much time on boring, lame bits by the hosts that aren't very funny or things that really adds nothing to the show. I remember some years ago, they had a tribute to the musical scores from the films that year, before going into the nominees for that year, which was performed by the orchestra, and it was absolutely stunning. And I remember the audience really got into it. I also remember the year Quincy Jones produced the show, there being a small fashion show type segment to celebrate the costume design in films for that year.

 

I agree that they should maybe use some of the time wasted on awkward host banter, to show the nominees for Sound Mixing or something explaining what it is they really do because judging by some anonymous ballots, many of the Academy voters don't seem to know the difference between Sound Mixing and Sound Editing. I just really think they need to make the show about what they say it is - celebrating films and those who brought it to life; the directors, actors, writers, etc. That and they really need to do a better job of tightening things. It is simply unacceptable in my opinion for the show to be going over by almost an hour.

Edited February 23, 2015 by truthaboutluv

[Rick Kitchen]

I'm sure he did, but not as hard as Redmayne.  He got married; he showed up to every single screening of his movie.  Any little thing they could trot him out for -- he was there, shaking a lot of hands and kissing a lot of babies.  He basically pulled an Anne Hathaway.  Actually, he outdid Anne Hathaway.

 

And he's probably going to be back next year because he's got another baity role with The Danish Girl.  If there's a chance he could pull a back to back, the campaigning is going to get worse.

 

I just feel bad for Michael Keaton because that was his only chance.  He should've been included in the Birdman sweep.

 

Getting married is campaigning?

[Vixenstud]

My Oscar musings:

 

NPH was okay, went a bit overboard with the Octavia Spencer 'watch my predictions' joke.

 

Was beyond thrilled at the very handsome J.K. Simmons winning BSA....still, he'll always be Vern Schillinger in my mind.  I must see Whiplash though, the clips I saw had me wincing.

 

Julianne Moore's win was way overdue, I wish she had won for Boogie Nights.  Her hubby was hot looking, yum!

 

Michael Keaton and his glasses were fucking sexy....now if I can just get him out of those damned tighty-whities!  Wish the BA had been a tie, Eddie Remayne's speech was sweet.

 

Eddie Murphy and Ben Affleck - If you guys didn't want to be at the ceremony, ya'll should have stayed home....they both had serious cases of pickle puss face.

 

I don't like Lady GaGa....I think she's a pathetic 'look at me, look at me' kind of mess.  However, tats aside (and with her jerking her dress a few times, I expected a pork chop to fall to the floor!), her Julie Andrews tribute was lovely.  Shonda Rhimes, STFU please!  Thanks.

 

Mr. Stud thought Terrence Howard was on 'that shit' but IDK, I thought he was emotional.

 

Am I the only one that was pissed when I'm Not Going To Miss You did not win best song?  First of all, Garth Brooks should have sung it instead of Tim McGraw.  That being said, I was reduced to tears whilst listening to the lyrics.  Jesus Christ, for a loved one to write such a song and give to his family in memory...blows me away.  Common was looking hot in his tux, but his rap in the Selma song was unnecessary IMO....I would have felt more for the song if it had just been John Legend.

 

I can't look at John Travolta now, knowing that he has no hair....and his gushing over Idina made him sound like Martin Short in the Father of the Bride movies.

 

Sean Penn - Oy, really?  Love the guy, but that green card remark was so not necessary.  He too had pickle puss face.

 

Fashion hits:

 

Ladies

Felicity Jones

Lupita Nyong'o

Jennifer Lopez

 

Men

J.K. Simmons

Common

The Rock and Idris Elba (sweet LAWD!)

Edited February 23, 2015 by Vixenstud

[Umbelina]

I can't even find a list of the tech award winners (or the others not shown on the broadcast show.)  Anyone?

 

http://www.oscars.org/

 

Again, my comments about changes to the show only relate to two things.

IF they want ratings.

IF they want this to make people want to go see movies and documentaries.

 

Oh, and I am old enough to remember when the Oscars always had dance numbers.  Hee.

Edited February 23, 2015 by Umbelina

[aradia22]

 

 

Less "joke" routines.

Less singing.

More movie clips, of all the films, including documentaries.  This is a show about the movies, not stand up, not music.

That's how we got the montage year.

 

Why in hell does JLo rate a seat in the front row? Other than the bottom of her dress needed the room, I fail to see how she rates a front row seat.

Eh. Worth it for that gif of her and Meryl.

[Umbelina]

My point is, I left not knowing a damn thing about what the documentaries were about (other than what I'd read previously.)

 

If they want to honor them, and showcase them?  TELL us more than the name and who produced it.  Add a sentence, if not a clip, or why not both?  Since they don't, including them is basically BS.

 

"This touching documentary shows us what is is like for children working in sweatshops, and follows them home to their hovel with 15 siblings."  Or "_______ shows us the continuing devastation of _______, and what we could do to stop it." 

Edited February 23, 2015 by Umbelina

[ruby24]

The problem with the things like the short categories and some of the techs, like sound, is that the majority of Oscar voters don't even vote on them! They haven't seen them, they don't know the difference, so why should the audience pay attention to them if the Academy doesn't even know what they're voting on? They have to cut out some of the stuff that just doesn't work, and those are a few they can do away with.

 

I agree, the funny presenters not being there at all was something that was definitely missing. And the argument about nominating box office hits doesn't have to include comic book/superhero stuff (unless it's somehow really, really good, like The Dark Knight). But they can include more movies that get good reviews and also reach a wider public.

 

The thing about the popular movies not being "good enough" assumes all the stuff they nominate that no one saw was good, and often times it really isn't. Seriously, just because a movie was tiny and no one saw it doesn't mean it was necessarily better than a more popular, accessible well reviewed movie. Or that all movies that made money can't also be "art."

[Kromm]

Very surprised at the inappropriateness of Sean Penn's "who gave this sunavabitch a green card".  I mean, like, wow.  I know it was supposed to be a joke but it came across as horribly racist and not funny.   I was a bit uncomfortable with the reverse racism throughout the night.  Yes, all of the acting nominees were white.  That was a travesty and was mentioned many times leading up to the awards.  But there's also something to be said for overcompensating.  I don't think I will be able to ever not feel like Alejandro Inirratu and Birdman won in part because he was the only minority among the directors and among the director and acting nominees.  Also, all of the black presenters.  I think I read that 25% of the presenters were black.  Like, really?  The Academy didn't nominate any acting nominees so they try and make up for it by inviting black actors to read the nominations?  Neil Patrick Harris calling on Octavia Spencer to watch the briefcase, enabling him to constantly mention her throughout the show.

"Reverse racism" is quite a charge, and not really the same thing as "overcompensating".  The second can be true without the first being so, but even the second is pretty seriously in doubt based on the kind of evidence you're giving.  So 25% of the presenters were black?  Big deal.  That's probably fairly in line with their membership numbers in the Academy, so what's the beef here?  And drawing a racial conclusion about why the admittedly stupid NPH joke was there?  Good lord.

[FineWashables]

From the lack of starpower on the Red Carpet to awards for movies that haven't really captured the public's heart, this was a boring, boring show.  I agree with all those upthread who point out that it's hard to be invested in an awards show when there's no real audience investment in the movies nominated.

 

The opening musical number was dreadful and pointless and not funny and had nothing to do with the Oscars, as far as I could tell.  I mean, Billy Crystal wasn't the best presenter in the history of award shows but his opening musical skit was always funny and always related directly to the movies under consideration.  It didn't help that NPH's lyrics were completely drowned out by the orchestra, and it didn't help even more that the number dragged on and on and on.  The musical number with Anna Kendrick was pointless as well.  Adam Levine sounded terrible.  It looked like Rita Ora was lip-synching.

 

I've never been a Lady Gaga fan but I will admit she sounded great last night.   Add me to the list of those who don't understand why she personally got grief for where she was slotted into the program.

 

 

I bet a lot of Gaga fans simply stop watching Shonda's shitty TV shows now.

 

I bet that very very few care at all, let alone care enough to stop watching Shonda's shows.  If Lady Gaga still had lots of fans, they would have showed their support by buying that awful last album of hers.  

Edited February 23, 2015 by FineWashables

[UsernameFatigue]

Am I the only one that was pissed when I'm Not Going To Miss You did not win best song?  First of all, Garth Brooks should have sung it instead of Tim McGraw.  That being said, I was reduced to tears whilst listening to the lyrics.  Jesus Christ, for a loved one to write such a song and give to his family in memory...blows me away.  Common was looking hot in his tux, but his rap in the Selma song was unnecessary IMO....I would have felt more for the song if it had just been John Legend.

 

Yep, agree with every word you posted. And for those who think Michael Keaton should have won Best Actor because it may be his last chance, this really was Glen Campbell's last chance. And he deserved it to boot.

[ABay]

I'm just catching up, fastforwarding through most and trying to stop at the points that you all mentioned or that were mentioned in day-after recaps.

 

P. Arquette: If you're going to make an impassioned plea for something, you might want to make sure you're quite clear about what it is. And you wrote it down so there's no excuse for flubbing it.

My mother had Alzheimers and I was a mess during Tim McGraw singing Glenn Campbell's song, I enjoyed the Lego song when I could understand what they were saying, I fast-forwarded through the rest.

Travolta reminds me of the robot Santa in The Santa Claus 3. And his gripping Menzel's face was very odd.

Loved the Polish guy.

 

OK, just arrived at the SoM tribute. I won't disagree with those who find Plummer hot in that movie, but it is definitely not his best acting. After a lifetime of viewing that movie, I still have no idea what his character is about. He's all over the place. But nice to look at.

Aww, that was lovely. Skirt-clasping aside, excellent job. And Julie Andrews rules.

 

Ooh--Julie Andrews, Helen Mirren, and Judi Dench should co-host next year.

 

 

That's as far as I've gotten so far.

Edited February 23, 2015 by ABay

[Umbelina]

I thought "I'm not gonna miss you" was the better song, but really?  I knew the Glory song would win, since it wasn't going to win best picture, and that was the only other nomination it got.

 

That said, I enjoyed the song, and the production of it quite a bit more than the other songs, it was close to a show stopper.  How much of that was all about the snub?  I'm not sure really.

[carrps]

I love that Reese has lines on her forehead - no Botox for her!

Huh? She totally was Botoxed. When she wrinkled her forehead, half of it was smooth as glass, but the upper part looked like a Klingon's forehead. 

[aradia22]

By the way, I only realized it today but some of the song choices to play the presenters on made no sense. Pretty much everyone who presents has been in a movie. Why are you playing these random songs? Two people who were not in Top Gun got Take My Breath Away from Berlin. Two people who were not in Moulin Rouge got Love Lifts Us Up Where We Belong. What the hell, Stephen Oremus? Are you just picking these out of a hat?

 

 

Speaking of the briefcase, while I thought the predictions were funny, I was expecting more of a payoff.  Like that somehow during the show, the briefcase vanished and nobody noticed.  Or that somehow the briefcase was secretly switched with an all gold one through a trap door or something, and nobody noticed.  I was waiting for Octavia to start screaming from the audience at some point that there was a new briefcase.  But I guess that would have spoiled his "amazing" predictions.

That would have been fantastic.

 

 

shonda rhimes        ✔ @shondarhimes

That was not okay. I mean, Idina is there. She is right there. RIGHT THERE. And oh dear God, Julie had to hear that. #Oscars2015

What? Gaga wasn't perfect but even though Idina says she had more of a legit voice in high school, she's not really known for having one now. They would be equally out of the box choices for a Sound of Music tribute. I could list some better names but no one in Hollywood is going to invite the theatre people.

[ABay]

Everyone should've thanked that guy's dog Larry. That would've been funny.

 

Damn. Graham Moore.

 

And Ben Affleck's inability to crack a smile continues.

Edited February 23, 2015 by ABay

[aradia22]

 

OK, just arrived at the SoM tribute. I won't disagree with those who find Plummer hot in that movie, but it is definitely not his best acting. After a lifetime of viewing that movie, I still have no idea what his character is about. He's all over the place. But nice to look at.

I make no apologies. ;)

[ruby24]

Yeah, Ben Affleck for some reason always looks like he's got a stick up his butt. I don't know what that's about, but I noticed it last year too. You'd think he'd be happy, since everyone in Hollywood clearly likes him so much that they rewarded Argo with Best Picture because of his director snub.

[Bruinsfan]

Gaga and Underwood are no Julie Andrews. But frankly, the only one in the world who can do and be Julie Andrews is the woman herself.

Sadly, even Julie Andrews can't do the things she used to either. But Lady Gaga did a better tribute to The Sound of Music than anyone could have without use of a time machine to bring 1960s Julie Andrews to the stage. I've enjoyed her music for years, but I had no idea she was capable of that good a singing performance.

[Maysie]

I was pleasantly surprised by Lady Gaga last night, and when I met my 70 year old friend at the movies today (for Still Alice; I cannot argue one bit with Julianne Moore's win) she was raving about Lady Gaga. It's hard to know what Shonda Rhimes meant, but I don't care. If she's trying to diss LG, then it shows her to be petty and mean-spirited. If it's a poor choice of words, it's a poor choice of words. I guess it will play out on twitter. But I don't think anyone can argue with LG's performance.

 

I liked Joan Rivers' comedy and I don't know what the appropriate venue is for a remembrance, other than the Emmy awards. I don't think her red carpet commentary at the Academy Awards should be what gets her into that memorial tribute, however. Look, I like to look at the pretty dresses and admire the glamor as much as anyone else, and I like to hear what people think about it, to an extent. But the red carpet has morphed into its own entity and I don't think in a good way. The women are dissected on their wardrobe choice, how they wear it, their hair, their makeup, their jewelry, their shoes . . . it's really gone over the top. It's almost like "and oh yeah, she acted in this movie." And that's why I changed the channel from E! to ABC -- I wanted to see the pretty, but I also liked actually hearing what some of the people on the red carpet had to say about their films. Ironically, when I changed the channel, I went from the E! people blathering on about I don't know who to Robin Roberts talking to Chris Kyle's widow -- a definite 180. Joan tapped into something people are interested in, and she was good at it, but I don't know that it really had much to do with the Academy Awards so much as it did pop culture and fashion's place in it. Really, given her red carpet stuff, she could be honored at just about every award show's "in memory" segment if that's the criteria.

[walnutqueen]

I remember Glen Campbells's cheesy but loveable 70s songs and then his awful DUI mugshot.  I had NO IDEA about the rest, but that song had me fucking sobbing, and I am not ashamed to admit it.  Also, Julie Andrews had the voice of a goddess, back in the day.\, and I was pleasantly surprised at Gaga's performance.

[truthaboutluv]

I think it was a pretty close call between Glory and I'm Not Going To Miss You and with most things art related, really comes down to personal taste and preference. I hear the argument that voters may have felt they had to vote for Glory after all the backlash for the Selma snub and it was the only nomination it had, aside from Best Picture which they were not going to win. That said, I feel like the Glen Campbell song was in many ways about the story attached to it - as noted above, it's his last chance for a career win like this, it's from a documentary about his dealing with Alzheimer's disease and this was the last song he recorded before the disease completely took over him.

 

So in other words there are other factors related on both ends besides the song itself. Because when you remove all these other factors, backstory, etc. you are just left with the song and the question of "was I'm Not Going to Miss You that much better than Glory" to say it was unfair or wrong that they won? Because in my opinion, not really. And that's where again it comes down to this being subjective. And then as is the case with most awards, the other factors do come back into play, the "politics" of it all and it's just a matter of which one mattered more to the voters. Just for the record, I personally loved Glory more. I think Campbell's song was incredibly beautiful and poignant but as a whole I loved Glory more and thought it was more emotionally powerful, for me.

[blackwing]

My interpretation of the Patricia Arquette speech was "It is tough to be a woman.  Woman get paid less and they go through childbirth.  Women should be treated as equals."  And then a "You go girl" from La Streep.  

 

Many of the technical awards are ALREADY separated, and they work hard too.

I just think two broadcasts are the answer, again, if they care about RATINGS.

I agree with you.  I will unashamedly say that sorry, but I really could give a crap about most of the "lesser" awards.  99% of the time, I haven't seen any documentaries or live action shorts.  I don't understand the difference between Sound and Sound Editing and can't really tell the difference between the winners and the losers.  And yes, I don't care to see the "unknowns" getting their awards, and I really don't care if it deprives them of their moment in the sun, like the "you know you've made it when your dress costs more than it cost to make your movie" lady from some years ago.  I watch the Oscars for star power.  It's Hollywood's biggest night.  I want to see stars, in their fanciest suits and dresses, being stars.  I loved the year the "lesser award" people had to accept from their seats.

 

I am presuming these other awards will be kept in the telecast.  If so, they at least need to have a timetable and let us see a schedule of what awards are coming up next and at what expected time.  That way I can take a break and leave the room and do other things without feeling like I have to be stuck on the couch for fear of missing something.  I realise they usually announce what awards are coming up as they go to commercial, but that's often a tease.  I think at 11:05 PM eastern, the announcer claimed that coming up was awards for Best Actor and Actress and Best Director, and then there was other stuff in between.

 

Or what would be nice is if there was a clip as the recipient is walking to the stage of WHY this particular movie won.  They can prerecord all of them in advance, some expert from each category can explain what was great about each nominated film and then play the appropriate winner's clip.  For example, show scenes of the Sound people doing sound things.  "The sound mixers on American Sniper used Tinker toys and champagne corks and assorted kitchen objects to recreate the sounds of war."  Or "The costumer used 18th century fabric discovered in a secret underground room in a Paris bordello to create 200 authentic period dresses for the movie."  Would help a lot to add interest for me, as opposed to, some guy won and when's the next big award.

[CherryMalotte]

I'm not one to get rid of the tech awards either.  It takes an enormous amount of work on just about any movie to get sound correct, to edit well, costume, and slather on the make up.  Lots and lots and lots of work and dedication.  This is probably why I love Face Off so much, because it's using your imagination and skill to create what is needed for a particular look.  But, I digress.

 

I actually have gotten into an argument with people elsewhere about NPH - they were going on about how it was so shocking that he did the underwear bit, and even when told it was a nod to Birdman they still thought it was horrible.  I don't know...why does one watch if they haven't seen and enjoyed the films?  It seems silly just to watch for a dress.

 

Glen Campbell had and has a wonderful voice.  If anyone was going to win over Selma, that should have been the one.  

 

Shonda Rimes can suck it.

Edited February 23, 2015 by CherryMalotte

[cynic]

"Reverse racism" is quite a charge, and not really the same thing as "overcompensating". The second can be true without the first being so, but even the second is pretty seriously in doubt based on the kind of evidence you're giving. So 25% of the presenters were black? Big deal. That's probably fairly in line with their membership numbers in the Academy, so what's the beef here? And drawing a racial conclusion about why the admittedly stupid NPH joke was there? Good lord.

Cosigned. Talking about racism or spotlighting a racial issue isn't "reverse racism". Even an attempt to address institutional racism isn't "reverse racism". There may have been some over compensation going on in the choice of presenters, I don't really know, but I don't really see it as an issue. The presenters don't matter in the scheme of things and I'm sure most years skew overwhelmingly the other way with no one even blinking an eye.

Exactly. All but two of the top 15 grossing movies of 2014 are either Sci/Fi or Animation, and one of those is American Sniper. The other is 22 Jump Street. There are many mindless movies (bad acting, bad writing, etc.) that are big box office draws. I don't see the Acadamy nominating undeserving pictures just to get people to tune into a long overdrawn awards ceremony. ...

I've never understood the idea that scifi/fantasy movies are somehow less deserving or less artistic than dramas. Sure, there are plenty of brainless popcorn flicks in that genre, but that's true for all genres. I personally believe there are many scifi/fantasy projects that are just as well-crafted with strong and developed characters/plots that get completely overlooked because Academy voters don't respect the genre. It's particularly confounding to me, because scifi/fantasy is often used to delve into issues just as weighty as big Oscar bait dramas and do it in a much more subtle way. Emmy voters are the same way. At least the Emmys have comedy categories, which is another genre often snubbed by the Oscars.

I enjoyed Lady Gaga last night, but agree that the SoM tribute as well as Jennifer Hudson should have been cut for time. Or Hudson should have sung during the tribute. Also, I prefer the photos they used to use to the water color portraits.

I also agree with the majority that NPH did a mediocre job and a lot of his bits should have been cut also.

I like the presentations of the original songs and think they break up the monotony. I particularly enjoyed Glory. What a powerful, moving performance!

I thought several of the speeches were awesome including Arquette, Common/Legend, and the screenwriter for Enigma.

My favorite look of the night was Zoe Saldana. I can't believe she just had twins. She looks even better now than before. She was rocking that gorgeous dusty pink with an amazingly curvy silhouette.

Edited February 23, 2015 by cynic

[topanga]

Or what would be nice is if there was a clip as the recipient is walking to the stage of WHY this particular movie won.  They can prerecord all of them in advance, some expert from each category can explain what was great about each nominated film and then play the appropriate winner's clip.  For example, show scenes of the Sound people doing sound things.  "The sound mixers on American Sniper used Tinker toys and champagne corks and assorted kitchen objects to recreate the sounds of war."  Or "The costumer used 18th century fabric discovered in a secret underground room in a Paris bordello to create 200 authentic period dresses for the movie."  Would help a lot to add interest for me, as opposed to, some guy won and when's the next big award.

This would be awesome.

[cpcathy]

Yeah, Ben Affleck for some reason always looks like he's got a stick up his butt. I don't know what that's about, but I noticed it last year too. You'd think he'd be happy, since everyone in Hollywood clearly likes him so much that they rewarded Argo with Best Picture because of his director snub.

 

 

So true!  He always looks either pissed off or, frankly, drunk, at these awards shows. He's still upset about not getting a best director nod? Dude, you're a good looking movie star with a pretty wife and three cute kids, you have an Oscar for screenwriting with your lifelong best friend. Go the fuck away!

[JBC344]

Getting married is campaigning?

Lol of course it is.  Eddie also spent an extra two hours in LA during the voting month. He also smiled at a woman on the street who was later revealed to be the sister-in-laws, baby cousin Tracy, who is in fact a voting member.  I also heard that he orchestrated the Sony hacks so that voters would look down on American Michael Keaton and he could slide in as the sympathetic Brit. 

 

Or maybe, he just participated in the general awards season like 90% of other nominated people and actually may have given a performance that people thought was better than Keaton's.  Maybe just maybe.

[Inquisitionist]

From a review in The New Yorker:

 

We at home were still trying to get our heads around “John Stephens and Lonnie Lynn,” as Legend and Common were referred to as they strode up to accept their statuettes. Since when must performers be reminded, before a global public, of their discarded birth names? Did the Best Actor award in 1936, for “The Story of Louis Pasteur,” go to Frederich Meshilem Meier Weisenfreund, rather than plain Paul Muni? I think not.

 

I wonder if Joan Crawford's Oscar is inscribed to Lucille Fay LeSueur. 

[Umbelina]

I think Shonda was pissed because the Glory number was a show-stopper, and would have been more noticed/honored, except Gaga blew it away soon after.  ???  It seemed like a race thing, and again, probably based on the snub.

 

Or what would be nice is if there was a clip as the recipient is walking to the stage of WHY this particular movie won.  They can prerecord all of them in advance, some expert from each category can explain what was great about each nominated film and then play the appropriate winner's clip.  For example, show scenes of the Sound people doing sound things.  "The sound mixers on American Sniper used Tinker toys and champagne corks and assorted kitchen objects to recreate the sounds of war."  Or "The costumer used 18th century fabric discovered in a secret underground room in a Paris bordello to create 200 authentic period dresses for the movie."  Would help a lot to add interest for me, as opposed to, some guy won and when's the next big award.

 

 

Exactly.  Same with the documentaries.  If you don't elaborate, don't expect us to care.  If they are so important to include, then show why.  Also, I still can't find the other technical award winners (presented at a separate ceremony) listed anywhere on the Oscar page.  Or the other (a different separate ceremony) either.  So I guess only SOME Oscars winners are important.  ?

 

Maybe do the awards most people care about in Part 1, and then do the rest in Part 2?  I'd watch both.  Instead they do one people care about, then a bunch most don't, to keep you watching until the ones most people care about again. 

 

They can't spare a moment or a sentence to elaborate, but they can interview seat fillers?  Yeah, no. 

[slowpoked]

Sadly, even Julie Andrews can't do the things she used to either. 

 That's also part of the point. If the poor woman warbled her way last night instead of someone else, someone would be complaining about why the producers let her sing when they know she couldn't competently sing anymore. There's just no pleasing people. I don't have a problem with Shonda Rimes saying she thinks Lady Gaga is wrong for the tribute - it's her opinion. What I find funny is her indignity saying "Julie Andrews is RIGHT THERE!!!!" Like how dare Lady Gaga sing one note of SOTM with the royalty being there on the same place with her. I'm sure Julie Andrews herself knows she can't sing that way anymore, and lovely as she is, she has been nothing but graceful with the tribute for a movie that was 50 years old. As part of the old guard, that's all you can really ask for - movies will always move on to the future but you hope that they remember and respect the past.

[McManda]

We at home were still trying to get our heads around “John Stephens and Lonnie Lynn,” as Legend and Common were referred to as they strode up to accept their statuettes. Since when must performers be reminded, before a global public, of their discarded birth names? Did the Best Actor award in 1936, for “The Story of Louis Pasteur,” go to Frederich Meshilem Meier Weisenfreund, rather than plain Paul Muni? I think not.

 

Unless that's how John Legend and Common submitted the nomination to the Academy. We don't know they were forced into using a birth name over a stage name. I think the New Yorker article should chill a bit.

Edited February 23, 2015 by McManda

[Bruinsfan]

Washington Post's take on creepy John Travolta

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style-blog/wp/2015/02/23/how-did-john-travolta-get-so-creepy-yet-another-weird-oscars-moment/?tid=sm_fb

 From that link, Travolta's defense of his creepiness:

 

“As I get backstage I run into Goldie Hawn,” Travolta said, explaining his flustered behavior. “Now Goldie Hawn is charismatic, sexy, beautiful — got the amazing thing — and I was starstruck. I’m starstruck, hugging and loving her up, and forgetting I have to go and do this bit.”

Does anyone buy being blown away by Goldie Hawn's stunning beauty as Travolta's excuse for acting weird? Now if he'd run into Chris Evans or Channing Tatum backstage, maybe...

[Umbelina]

On Kimmel Travolta went on to say that while talking to Goldie, the handler mumbled something to him about changing the spelling on the prompter to "phonetic" and he missed it, mostly since the first handler missed the cue, so a second rushed him to the stage.

 

When he read the phonetic spelling of her name he had no idea what he was looking at.

 

I believed him on Kimmel, where he was fine, if old.

[Notwisconsin]

Eddie Murphy and Ben Affleck - If you guys didn't want to be at the ceremony, ya'll should have stayed home....they both had serious cases of pickle puss face.

...and miss out on those quarter million dollar gift bags? It may be "in kind" but all that money for ten minutes work is too much to pass over (unless you're Woody Allen).

 

Unless that's how John Legend and Common submitted the nomination to the Academy. We don't know they were forced into using a birth name over a stage name. I think the New Yorker article should chill a bit.

Lot's of people in the music business use stage names when performing and their real names in regular life. Mark Twain signed his checks "Samuel Clemmons" and George Orwell "Eric Blair." It's a privacy thing.

Edited February 23, 2015 by Notwisconsin

[McManda]

Does anyone buy being blown away by Goldie Hawn's stunning beauty as Travolta's excuse for acting weird? Now if he'd run into Chris Evans or Channing Tatum backstage, maybe...

 

That might explain "Adele Dazeem" (and even that story is odd ... why would they make a phonetic spelling on a teleprompter? It's not like people hadn't heard of Idina Menzel. That was the height of "Let It Go"!), but it doesn't excuse the weirdness of him cooing over her and stroking her face last night. It's like he tried to fix the awkward ... buy making it more awkward?

 

Idina Menzel has to be the best sport ... ever.

 

Also .. maybe he's living in the past where he also didn't look like plastic? Denial is a powerful thing.

Edited February 23, 2015 by McManda

[truthaboutluv]

Unless that's how John Legend and Common submitted the nomination to the Academy. We don't know they were forced into using a birth name over a stage name. I think the New Yorker article should chill a bit.

 

Yeah I'm pretty positive that's how they submitted their nomination. Many singers use their real names in their writing credits and when they register the song to ASCAP. As I noted in another post, when Eminem won the Best Song for Lose Yourself, the song was credited to Marshall Mathers which is his real name. I know Lorde for example, lists her writing credits under her real name Ella. That's why when she won SOTY for Royals, some people thought she didn't write the song when the presenter announced the winner using her real name. Seems an odd thing for the New Yorker to be irritated about.

Edited February 23, 2015 by truthaboutluv

[CherryMalotte]

Exactly.  Same with the documentaries.  If you don't elaborate, don't expect us to care.

 

I want to say they did this years and years ago, or made it part of the announcing the nominees on the stage, but haven't done it in a long while, maybe back in the 80's?  

 

Being a doc fan, I have to defend just a wee bit.  The Academy does put out updates via their website for the documentaries (and other catagories as well) that are in contention for nomination, so there's one way to follow them, and as early winter starts the field is narrowed.  They are out there, sometimes showing up on Netflix early and the Sundance and IFC channels.  I can tell you that Alex Gibney's Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison Of Belief is showing up in theatres in May and HBO right around that time.  You just have to search them out.   

Edited February 24, 2015 by CherryMalotte

[Maysie]

I meant to ask -- is there something wrong with Michael Keaton? I've seen a number of references about this being a last chance for him to win an Oscar, similar to Glen Campbell (which, though I was never a fan, I truly feel sorry for him, particularly after watching Still Alice).

[kili]

We at home were still trying to get our heads around “John Stephens and Lonnie Lynn,” as Legend and Common were referred to as they strode up to accept their statuettes. Since when must performers be reminded, before a global public, of their discarded birth names?

 

That's just silly. I would think the New Yorker would know this. The song award is given to the song-writers, not the singers. Song writers register their songs by their legal names, not their performance names.

 

For instance, "Royals" won the Grammy last year for both the Best Song and Best Pop Performance. Best Song goes to the songwriter one of whom was Ella Yellich-O'Connor (who it was officially given to). Best Pop Performance goes to the performer and it was officially given to Lorde. They are the same person.

 

(oops - took to long to post). Adele is another example. Her performance wins are credited to Adele and her songwriting wings to Adele Adkins.

Edited February 23, 2015 by kili

[aradia22]

I just rewatched The Sound of Music tribute. If I hadn't been loopy from watching Oscar coverage since 5:30 I would have seen it last night. I wasn't off what I said she came to the Oscars dressed as Eva Peron. She was doing The Sound of Music as Patti Lupone. That's what was with all the gesturing and the skirt swishing. There was also a bit of Barbra with the way she brushed her hair out of her face. 

 

No, none of this is a criticism. It makes me like her more. 

[McManda]

That's just silly. I would think the New Yorker would know this. The song award is given to the song-writers, not the singers. Song writers register their songs by their legal names, not their performance names.

 

Additionally. the "official answer" from EW:

 

Q: Why did “John Stephens” and “Lonnie Lynn” win Oscars for Best Original Song instead of “John Legend” and “Common”?

A: The names on the Oscar ballot for Best Song are tied directly to songwriting credit, as the award is for writing, not performing. As a rep for Legend explains, “He writes under John Stephens, so writer awards would be to his legal name and performance awards to artist name.” Meanwhile, Common is registered with the American Society of Composers, Author, and Publishers as Lonnie Lynn, his birth name. For another example, see the Oscar-winning song “Skyfall”—awarded to Adele Adkins.

 

But it makes more sense to make it a social issue - why were the black men forced to stifle creativity and use their "discarded" birth names? -  ... right? /sarcasm. So yes, if Paul Muni had been registered with SAG as Frederich Meshilem Meier Weisenfreund, then that's what his award would have been awarded to. He wasn't, so to Paul Muni it went.

Edited February 23, 2015 by McManda

[biakbiak]

You can't get rid of those "smaller" categories because year after year at least one of the winners gives a great speech, this year there were a few!

I meant to ask -- is there something wrong with Michael Keaton? I've seen a number of references about this being a last chance for him to win an Oscar, similar to Glen Campbell

It's not that he is dying, it was just a fantastic role for a man who doesn't work that much, I mean the last major movie he was in was The Other Guys in 2010 and hasn't been in a movie that garnered any sort of awards attention (and not for him) since Jackie Brown in 1997.

Edited February 23, 2015 by biakbiak

[blackwing]

I meant to ask -- is there something wrong with Michael Keaton? I've seen a number of references about this being a last chance for him to win an Oscar

As far as I know, he's not ill or anything.  I think most people are saying it was his last chance because honestly, he's been in the business for 30 or 40 years and this is the first time he's ever been really recognised for any awards.  Doesn't seem like he would ever get noticed again.  I guess it's always possible, but he was basically playing a thinly veiled version of himself, which is why I think the role really resonated with voters.

 

That might explain "Adele Dazeem" (and even that story is odd ... why would they make a phonetic spelling on a teleprompter? It's not like people hadn't heard of Idina Menzel. That was the height of "Let It Go"!), but it doesn't excuse the weirdness of him cooing over her and stroking her face last night. It's like he tried to fix the awkward ... buy making it more awkward?

I don't buy his story.  Even if they made a phonetic spelling, I imagine it would have gone something like "ih - DEE - nuh  men - ZELL".   Not "uh - DEEL  da - ZEEM".   Where on the teleprompter would there be the second D for Dazeem?  Also, more importantly, the guy is an actor, and used to memorizing and repeating lines.  At some point, don't you think he would have been told, "Hey, you're going to introduce the 'Let it Go' singer Idina Menzel."  Isn't the practice session really supposed to make sure you are comfortable with names?

 

The face touching was exceeding awkward.  Not sure how NPH knew he was going to do it (assuming the predictions were truly made beforehand), unless it was done in rehearsal.  I also love the "get off me you creepy old man" looks exhibited by Scarlett Johannson in those red carpet photos.

[cooksdelight]

Glen Campbell had and has a wonderful voice. If anyone was going to win over Selma, that should have been the one.

I've not seen the documentary, but now I really want to. I wonder how the people who voted for the best song saw them....clips from the movie, or performed by someone, or merely a recording? I've got to think that if Glen were singing that song in the documentary, and people saw that, they'd have been crazy not to vote for him. Then again, Academy members do dumb things sometimes. To make a statement.