No matter how much clout the Oscars may have in Hollywood, there are people, even the high brow movie snobs, who declared the Oscars as a self-congratulatory pat on the shoulder which relishes in showing off designer clothing.
The Academy, in response, has been looking for ways to appeal to other film fans, mostly by pandering to them through the ceremony, and nothing seems to be working. Even with their best attempts, they just can’t seem to get high ratings they want. Every year, the Oscars experiences a low score in the ratings, but ABC doesn’t seem to care because the advertising rates are through the roof, and money rolls in. So, you want to know how and why the Oscars get no ratings? Well, we have some suggestions for you.
High ratings can be achieved without gimmicks. Who can forget the horrible hosting job by Chris Rock whose monologue was absolutely weak, and whose jokes were flat. Who can forget the random cuts to many African stars whom weren’t even involved in film. 50 Cent? P. Diddy? That’s odd. Who can forget the stupid skit with Rock about how many black people don’t know any of the films from the Oscars? Big fucking whoop. It’s common knowledge average movie-goers don’t know what these films are. Who can forget the odd cameo from Martin Lawrence? Who can forget lining up the nominees for Best Documentary and have them take the walk of shame when neither won? Stop with the gimmicks, here’s some suggestions we have for you that we think can help improve ratings and interest.
INCLUDE GOOD GENRE FLICKS
The Oscars are alienating, and that’s just how they like it. But if you’re trying to get an audience, stop alienating them. Stop making this a country club and lower the membership standards. You don’t complain there aren’t enough members for a club when you’re not even allowing blacks or women to join. Get my drift? Start including good genre flicks and fans will watch, it’s that simple. If people loved these films, they’d watch the ceremony to hope they won. It’s hard to set apart what’s good and what isn’t in the film industry since so few genre films are actually good or watchable, but the good genre films are there, and deserve some recognition, too. This doesn’t have to be those wretched “Blockbuster” awards, but it can be fun and classy at the same time.
Here are some genre flicks that we think qualify as art too, most recently:
Sin City
I read the graphic novels, and “Sin City” the movie was amazing. I loved it. First, “Sin City” should have been nominated for “best adapted screenplay” in which Rodriguez was able to turn three separate stories in to an episodic parable about the dark corners in Sin City much like “Pulp Fiction”. The story was sleek, exciting, and riveting. Meanwhile, Rodriguez pulled of some beautiful special effects that paid homage to the novels. It was realistic without feeling artificial, and Rodriguez pulled it off with flying colors. Sure about 98 percent of the scenery was artificial, but it looked immensely realistic which should have earned a “Best Visual Effects” nomination, and then there was the cinematography, excellent direction by Rodriguez as usual, and don’t hold “Sharkboy and Lava Girl” against him.
This man is Oscar bait, and let’s not forget the great performance by Mickey Rourke who embodied the character of Marv. Ever read the books? You sucker, you have no idea what you’re missing. Marv was a great character, and I can say with knowledge that Rourke aced the character, he channeled him, he was Marv. And that’s why everyone loves Marv. Personally I prefer Owen’s character Dwight, but hey, I have that bad habit. And Owen is just a great actor, period. In a film with many bad performances i.e. Brittany Murphy, Michael Madsen, Rutger Hauer, and Jessica Alba, you can’t forget the good performances by Rourke, Owen, Dawson, DelToro, and Nick Stahl. “Sin City” could’a been a contender. And to quote DeNiro in “Cop Land”: You blew it!
Batman Begins
What wasn’t good about this new film for a new franchise? Based on the Frank Miller “Year One” novel, “Batman Begins” chronicles the start of Batman. Where do I begin? Christopher Nolan’s direction is excellent as he’s able to capture the mood and atmosphere Burton, and Schumacher couldn’t. Yeah, that’s right, I said it. Meanwhile, there’s startling cinematography, a story that’s actually exciting while focusing on three-dimensional characters we can root for. The acting was excellent from Liam Neeson who was great as Bruce’s mentor.
He was the type of character Qui-Gonn should have been, while Tom Wilkinson pulls in a great performance as the threatening mob boss Falcone, Michael Caine is both engrossing, and classy as Bruce’s butler and sidekick Alfred, and Christian Bale pulls in the quintessential performance as Bruce Wayne, the young conflicted, and frightened man who hasn’t grieved for his parents’ death and seeks vengeance against the face of danger and possible death. But the standout? Of course, Cillian Murphy who is scene stealing as Dr. Crane aka The Scarecrow who is the perfect hybrid of slimy, conniving, and frightening. Then there’s the phenomenal special effects, and the wonderful script by Al Gough.
The Machinist
I’m simply shocked and appalled that this horrifying and truly insightful glimpse at the face of painful guilt didn’t at least warrant consideration by the Academy. “The Machinist” was a very sad and meaningful opus about how much damage our mind can do to us when burdened with demons. The direction is beautiful with bleak and almost hellish landscapes and gorgeous cinematography, while Christian Bale literally looks like a skeleton playing a man who can not sleep or eat and is tortured. Bale’s performance warranted an Oscar not because of the fact he drastically changed his appearance, that trivializes it, but because he gave such an excellent performance as he’s been doing from the beginning of his career. Original writing, cinematography, direction and best actor are the nods this film deserved, and it was robbed and snubbed.
Serenity
Hey, hey, hey, don’t roll your eyes. I may be a hardcore “Firefly” fan, but I know quality and this was quality, plain and simple. What? It’s too lowbrow nominating a movie adapted from a genre television show? Well, what about “The Fugitive”, smart ass? Yeah, you better shut up. Well, original screenplay should have been noted seeing as how Joss Whedon, in spite of not being a fan of his work, is a very good writer, and secondly he was able to fit in a lot of story in only two hours without it feeling cluttered. And then there was the excellent direction by Whedon, the excellent special effects, some beautiful cinematography, and excellent performances by Nathan Fillion, the heir apparent to Han Solo, who gives a great performance as a captain leading his team in truly desperate times, while Gina Torres’ performance is sublime as his sidekick, and Summer Glau is sympathetic and powerful as River who is still trying to get a sense of her origins and what she’s supposed to be doing that she can’t quite understand just yet. “Serenity” is a contender, and it should have at least been considered.
Star Wars Episode 3: Revenge of the Sith
Oh come on, stop looking away in annoyance. Sure, some of the acting was bad, and the plot had holes in it, but then there were many positives. Ewan McGregor not only paid homage to Alex Guiness, but added a sense of distinction with his portrayal as Obi-Wan Kenobi. The desperation of a man trying to keep his best friend from straying to evil was something McGregor pulled off with flying colors. He made my favorite character even better with raw emotions and beautiful acting, he pulled in a great performance, while Ian McDiarmid should have been given a nod for his portrayal as the budding evil sith lord Emperor Palpatine. Sure, it’s essentially the same character from before, but this is a man who secduced Anakin, and then revealed his own true colors by manipulating everyone to his will. He pulled off such a great performance here, and it’s a shame. And then there was the cinematography, and set designs which were beautiful and well worth looking at while the drama unfolded. And let’s not forget the costumes, and visual effects which featured some amazing battle scenes and character designs. I know Oscar is trying to keep it low key this year, but a good movie is a good movie. I personally loved this movie, and it’s sad it wasn’t really noticed for something other than technical aspects.
And I’m basically scratching the surface. You can make the argument that quality overrules appeal, but these films have quality and appeal.
NO STUNT CATEGORY
We appreciate the hard work you guys do, and we’re happy you want to be acknowledged, but the Oscars are for direct production roles, and not stunts. It’s understandable you work hard and want to be recognized, but after you then what? Then what will happen? Best boom mic operator? Best sound gaffer? Best caterer? Best teamster union? Best performance by an extra? Best trailer? Best voice over in a trailer? There has to be a limit here, fellas. And you’re asking for too much. Sure, I know it’s not easy work, and I know it’s life threatening, but there’s really no need to clutter up another ridiculously cluttered awards ceremony. It’s bad enough I have to sit through “Best Costume Design”, and “Best Sound Mixing”, but I really don’t want to sit through more rants from a stuntman.
You can’t have everything in one show, so give me a break here. There’s no room for you. You want to set yourselves apart from Hollywood and be original? Well, stop displaying vanity by begging for a category and just do your job, get paid, and let it go. You can’t get everything you want, and you can’t always get the credit. Firefighters and Police Officers have life threatening jobs and they get zero credit unless there’s a death. There are writers whom are sure they’re excellent and have never been published. That’s just how it is, sometimes. You can’t get a category. That’s it. Stop being so “Hollywood” by begging for credit. Instead, show your dignity and do your damn job. Nothing wrong with that. Move on.
HORROR AND COMEDY ARE ART TOO
Ever seen the Marx Brothers? Chaplin? “Animal House”? “Airplane!”? “Young Frankenstein”? Ever seen “The Exorcist”, “Dawn of the Dead”, or “Halloween”? This is not just comedy and horror, this is comedy and horror that are also art. It’s like that old adage from the dying man: “Dying is easy, comedy is hard”. It’s much harder to make people laugh than to make people cry, and it’s a known fact that this has been accepted as truth. Being a comedy actor is tough, and writing a script or novel that people will find funny is grueling, and it’s about time you realize that. Very few comedies are funny these days, that’s true, but sometimes when a good comedy comes along, you have to give it its due. Have the academy watch these movies if you want to play it safe, and for god sake, don’t leave it up to audiences to vote on the best comedy. They’ll just end up picking some shit like “Scary Movie 2”, or “Napoleon Dynamite”.
As for horror, let’s talk about horror. It’s not a low brow genre, not anymore. Horror never was a low brow genre. Horror films can have incredible production qualities that should be acknowledged and it’s about time you join us in the twenty-first century here. Sure, indies can be excellent, and dramas are nice, but throw in a horror movie here and there. Some with production qualities like crazy. But don’t leave it to the audience. They’ll just pick some shit like “Cabin Fever”, or “House of Wax”. And how can anyone lose? Once Oscar starts acknowledging horror and comedy, you know what? People will tune in to see their favorite movies get Oscars, and then studios will be inspired to make quality horror and comedies, and the fans win yet again! Box office will probably go up to. You’re not the South. Get with the times, learn to evolve with the film audience. And instead of following them, set an example.
DON’T PANDER TO POP CULTURE CRAZES
Don’t pander to pop culture crazes that we’ll forget in a few months. American audiences, especially young ones, have a short attention span, and they won’t give a crap, and you’ll only make yourself look like a fool when in three years we’re seeing reality show numbskulls parading with celebrities. No reality show contestants. No tabloid celebrities. No music stars. No Ashton Kutcher. No Punk’d references. Okay? Remember the American Music Awards being hosted by those numbskulls the Osbournes? Remember Mark McGrath hosting the Grammy’s? Stop trying to appeal to the modern audience with such ridiculous gimmicks, and most of all don’t copy MTV. Is it really wise to copy a network who has sold out and provides incredibly dumb, mind-numbing “entertainment” based on reality shows and bad music? Not to us. Don’t talk down to audiences by featuring stupid reality show morons, and tabloid celebrities like Paris Hilton. No Ryan Seacrest, Simon Cowell, no Jeff Probst, or Ashlee Simpson. You can appeal to the mainstream without becoming lowbrow. It’s possible, you just have to have the right creative team and not just hacks trying to kiss up.
STOP… BEING ODD
This is a short one, but one I’m still wondering about. Why, when Scarlett Johansenn presented the winner for the technical awards was she on an empty balcony in what looked like an empty theater in the South Bronx? Was it a pre-filmed sequence before the ceremony, or was she too tired so they set up a prop balcony? Why did you line up the “Best Documentary” nominees and then have the losers walk off like it was a fourth grade spelling bee? Did you stop and think how embarrassing that would be to them? They’re not big stars exactly. What was Martin Lawrence doing popping up in a skit? Why… were Donald Sutherland and Glenn Close announcing the commercial breaks two years ago in the back alley of the theater next to a KFC’s? Seriously, that was a bit weird. I think I saw a hooker walk by at one point. Were there no seats left so they stuffed them there? Were they short on announcers? Did they sneak in only to have an “I Love Lucy” moment where they beat up the announcers and put on their clothing? Were they just humoring them?
Oscar crony: Hello, Mr. Sutherland! How would you like to come to the Oscars this year?
Donald: Really? That would be wonderful, was I nominated?
(Long awkward silence)
Oscar crony: Uh–no, sorry.
Donald: Oh, no… no.
Oscar crony: But–you can be the commercial break moderator!
Donald: Sounds fun, what do I do?
Oscar crony (in condescending tone): Well, you sit on a fold out chair from the stock room on a matted table, and Glenn Close will be sitting with you and you can announce the commercial breaks, and wear a neat headset, it will be fun!
Donald: Yay! I’ll do it!
Seriously. Donny and Glenn deserve better. And… stop being odd.
SOMEONE ELSE BUT DISNEY… PLEASE?
Once again the animated category–which was just invented to keep the pressure off of the Academy from including animation in to the Best Picture noms–display their utter short-sightedness and their knack for nepotism and politics. Disney has put a monopoly on best animated features since the category was invented. Sometimes I think the category was invented solely for them. And don’t pop shit saying it’s because their movies are good, because Disney hasn’t made that many good films in a long while. This year alone is once again Disney territory with “Howl’s Moving Castle”. Sure, it’s created by Studio Ghibli, and directed by the master Hayao Miyazaki, but Disney bought distribution rights.
It’s great that it has competition with “The Corpse Bride” and “Wallace and Gromit” because that’s surefire competition. In 2004 we had “Finding Nemo” a good enough animated film, and “Brother Bear” a sub-par entry, in 2003, we had “Lilo & Stitch” a really bad buddy tale ripping from “ET” shamelessly, “Spirited Away” which is one of Miyazaki’s beautiful movies, and “Treasure Planet” a now obscure entry from Disney! Don’t pretend it’s coincidence. Now, “The Incredibles” is an excellent film, I’ll give you that, but if the Academy wants to win me over, pick the simple animated films over a Disney film for once this year. And Disney, whom ever you’re paying off or blackmailing in the academy, quit it, your movies now suck save for occasional quality films.
PICK YOUR HOSTS WISELY
John Stewart? Perfect. He’s funny, wry, and delivers the punch lines like actual punches. Steve Martin? He did a great job since America was going to war at that time. Johnny Carson? Magnificent. He’s Johnny Carson, need I say more? Bob Hope? He’s Bob Hope, funny is a prerequisite. These are examples of good hosting. If you want viewers, pick actual good hosts, please, or else, it’s annoying. Stop giving us the wildly unfunny Whoopi Goldberg and her outdated race jokes and gimmicky costume changes and “outrageous humor”. Stop giving us the boring and unfunny Billy Crystal.
Sure, he has a reputation and is almost synonymous with the ceremony, but this fella doesn’t like him. He’s not funny, never was. No more David Letterman. For the love of god. And, I’ll tell you this now: That had better be the last time I see Chris Rock hosting this show. The next time I want to see him on is as a presenter, or seat filler. Seriously, he sucks. And if you were pandering to “that certain audience” you could have chosen someone much funnier. Rock’s hosting falls in to the “Pop Culture Craze” category as well. Chris Rock is popular, sure, but do I want to see him host the Oscars? No. No, I say!
STOP CUTTING OFF THE SPEECHES!
What? I only have five sentences? Okay, I’ll hurry. Firstly, stop cutting these people off, they’re happy. Secondly, there’s really no point in cutting them off when you can easily refer to the suggestion below to cut your losses. I mean is there nothing more annoying than hearing these people talk and suddenly get cut off? Not even, most times they’re talking and then the orchestra starts and then they’re forced to get off. Why not have that guy with the cane from “The Apollo” come and pull them off with his giant hook thing? I mean, seriously it’s ru–
FINALLY, ENOUGH WITH THE MONTAGES
We know what “Gone with the Wind”, “Casablanca”, and “Citizen Kane” are. You don’t have to tell us every freaking year, for about twenty minutes, and then to make it worse, they’d have the montage and then have Billy Crystal sing about all the movies that are nominated that year, and or have been nominated in the past! Is that over kill? Redundancy? I think so. You want to cut down the long, long, l-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-ng run time for purposes of news? Well, cut the montages, this not only wastes time, and basically spells out every single great movie that’s ever been on the Oscar repertoire, but it’s typical. We know these movies, we’ve seen these movies, again, and again, plus it officially explains to the audience “We are better than you.
Look at the quality we have! You can sleep outside you “Stealth” loving, Paris Hilton glorifying bastards!” No, I’ve seen basically all of those movies, so do I really need another montage? Another damn montage, blech! Stop the montages, and stop the musical numbers, we don’t want to see interpretive dance, or ballet, or tap dancing, or clog dancing, or polka, or the hustle. Get to the damn awards, keep our attention, and cut down on the run time. If the “Independent Spirit Awards” can do it and not lose its style, then so can you. Case closed.