The Academy Awards barely recognize comedic talent in film, so it’s kind of ironic that the Oscars have typically been hosted by a comedic personality. Since the Academy primarily honors serious movies and performances, it’d be more fitting to have Sean Penn leading the show. But TV audiences love a funny variety program, and the tradition has worked out well thanks to humorists like Will Rogers, Bob Hope and Billy Crystal, so the comedy has been a constant.
This year, however, the ceremony will feature Hugh Jackman as emcee, and the joke-filled monologue has been axed. But is it still ironic that an actor best known for playing a superhero is hosting an award show that fails to regularly celebrate blockbuster franchises like his X-Men series? And are the producers capitalizing on this irony by hiring Jackman, who will certainly be promoting his upcoming spin-off, X-Men Origins: Wolverine?
When the choice was announced, plenty of people immediately thought of the ratings-boosting possibility of having Jackman wear his Wolverine costume while performing his hosting duties. For an Oscars ceremony that may end up nominating a superhero film for Best Picture and will be secretly recognizing Robert Downey Jr.’s performance in Iron Man as much as in Tropic Thunder (if he’s indeed nominated for the latter), the singing, dancing Australian is quite appropriate for the gig.
But despite his ratings appeal to comic geeks and old ladies who read People magazine, could this relatively humorless host be setting himself up for a roast? Here’s hoping he’s at least better than the following Oscars embarrassments:
…Read more
Every year it seems we see the same post-Oscars article about how the ratings for the telecast are down. But this year’s show may have been the worst ever. The Associated Press has called it a “dud” and reports that preliminary ratings point to this being the least-watched in history — 14% worse, in fact, than the previous least-watched telecast, in 2003. There was a lot of speculation going in that it would receive a poor viewer turnout, mostly because the nominated films weren’t as well-known or seen and because the writer’s strike allowed for little definite planning. Aside from the lack of mainstream appeal, though, this year’s ceremony is also being considered a bore, whether due to its predictability or its shortage of interesting, exciting or hilarious moments.
So, I’ve been wondering how the Oscars could both draw more viewers and be more entertaining to those of us who tune in every year, no matter what. I have my own ideas, I’ve asked friends and family and I’ve searched the blogosphere for what the people want. Hopefully the Academy will pay attention:
…Read more
