There are few things in life more boring than the yearly Oscar telecast. I have a Chia Pet on my windowsill that provides more entertainment and laughs-per-second than any Oscar marathon ever has … and yes, I’m including David Letterman’s disastrous “Uma … Oprah” bit as well.
The brain trust behind the upcoming telecast have heard our collective yawns, and have decided to make a 180-degree turn with the hiring of Hugh Jackman as this year’s host. Yes, HUGH JACKMAN. The guy with the knives coming out of his fists.
The choice isn’t as misguided as it initially sounds. Jackman-hosted Tony Award gigs have netted the highest ratings in its history; of course, out of a sampling audience of fifteen, even one more viewer exponentially increases the ratings. I mean, seriously – who watches the fucking Tony Awards?!?!? Even the gays avoid that shit like it’s AIDS.
The bigger pull for the Academy in hiring Jackman is his huge worldwide following. The movie industry no longer exists in a fishbowl just off the California coast. There are hotspots around the world for motion picture product from Hollywood and elsewhere; hell, half of a movie’s total gross now comes from the world outside of the United States … GASP!!!! Jackman’s inclusion in this long-winded tradition ensures a massive worldwide audience that Whoopi Goldberg could never hope for in a thousand careers.
Personally, I think the spectacle needs to be trimmed of the fat, and Jackman is a good choice. My initial reaction was revulsion, but, after careful consideration, I think it might be refreshing to be rid of the awkward comedic bullshit and strained attempts to entertain.
When you think about it, the best moments in Oscar’s long history occur randomly and unscripted: Jack Palance doing one-armed push-ups … the streaker running behind David Niven … Michael Moore’s inflammatory anti-Bush tirade … Sacheen Littlefeather refusing Marlon Brando’s Oscar. Some hosts have been able to humorously roll with these unexpected punches, the best being Billy Crystal and Steve Martin. But, overall, the host has little to do with the success of the show.
So … what do you guys think about Jackman’s appointment as your next Oscar host???
5 Comments
I like Jackman but I don’t agree with the choice. The home audience tunes in to hear a few political Zingers and watch the host take a shot at the industry crowd. Once you remove that, there’s NO fun to the show. If you want to streamline it just copy the format of the Golden Globe telecast. Its the fastest moving and most watchable of all award shows!
Chuck
@ Chuck – For the last thirty years or so, The Oscars have been primarily hosted by personalities originated or boosted by television. This is no coincidence, of course, since the Oscars are shown on television. We are used to seeing television-style gags during an Oscar telethon because that is (a) the established style, and (b) because that is the medium of the show.
I think it’s great that Jackman is hosting, because the show might, for once, return to its glamorous, stage-oriented roots. The choice also allwos for some judicious trimming of Oscar fat, something we’ve all yearned for in the past.
Yeah! And he’s dead fit, right?
That he is. That he is.
The only way you can ever really trim the Oscar fat is not televise all the technical awards which take up an hr or more of the shows running time. Everyone’s different, but I still feel that the hosting job should go to a comedian. Obviously If The Dark Knight gets nominated for Best Picture that gives most viewers a strong rooting interest. That will be good for ratings. I loved when Titanic won because Im a huge fan of that film. Im not rooting against Jackman as i hope he does a good job. Its just not a direction I would have taken the telecast if I was making the decision!
Chuck