MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

The Oscar Ratings…

Up in overnights… we’ll see what the finals are.
Still… irrelevant to the issue of whether the show worked.
Very relevant as to whether the producers this year created, with The Academy, a sense of anticipation that has been missing in recent years.
I wish the ratings obsession and the shallow reporting on it would disappear.

Be Sociable, Share!

21 Responses to “The Oscar Ratings…”

  1. Joe Leydon says:

    Yeah, David, but you have to admit: If there hadn’t been a slight ratings spike this year, we’d be hearing a whole hell of a lot more screeching from Dark Knight fanatics about… well, you know. And just think: We’ve been saved from that. Think of it as a mitzvah from Nielsen. Life is good. God is kind.

  2. David Poland says:

    The fact, Joe, that we indulge the idiocy of that is what is wrong with so many of us in the media right now.
    This is why I keep braying about Nikki.
    It’s not a story because it is not factual, thoughtful thinking… not because circumstance made it not a story.
    This is how the lies get perpetuated for years.

  3. Blackcloud says:

    There was no where to go but up, right? The Oscars clawed back the ground they’d lost. The question is whether they’ll hold onto it. Until then, this isn’t anything to write home about. Simply akin to driving the enemy back from the last fifty feet they conquered. Call me when you’ve reconquered France.

  4. IHeartThatCurtis! says:

    Joe: if the Dark Knight had gotten there. Everything would have been up more then six lousy percent in the overnights. If you really think these Oscars went up, when Nascar ran right up to the only award people wanted to see last night. Well, really, I’ve got a pair of super expensive nikes for you. Air 1985s! Wooo!!!
    Please explain to me the sense of anticipation? Outside of my fool-hearty nature in believe that the Academy are never so predictable. Please point out where the anticipation was in this event? Everyone got all hot and bothered over Crash ’09, we knew this before the nominations, and we knew it would win like a week after.
    So please explain to me what was so exciting last night? Heck. The Academy could not even get the Mickey Rourke story right. Would that not be anti-climatic? Sure does seem like it.

  5. LYT says:

    Is obsession with ratings substantially different from obsession with box-office grosses?
    I realize it’s not an exact analogy, but both are the standards, in their respective mediums, by which something is determined to have “won” the day.
    Or am I missing something?

  6. MDOC says:

    I’m watching these painful song and dance numbers and I’m thinking “who is this targeted towards?” Women over 60? Gay Men? I would rather see Jackman as Wolverine in a mock up fight with the human toad character than prancing around with a top hat.

  7. IHeartThatCurtis! says:

    If only we had Wolverine appear on that stage. It would have at least been interesting, and involved wick ass mutton chops!

  8. IHeartThatCurtis! says:
    Third lowest in history. It was a nice try Academy, but you must bring back MC KEYS! There was no show this decade better than the first one of the decade. Go back to the beginning, and everything should be fine.

  9. Joe Leydon says:

    Is the glass half-empty, or half-full? Well, the ratings were up, not down. Trust me: That’s a good sign. Just ask the producers of 24 and Lost.

  10. IHeartThatCurtis! says:

    Joe: they played to their core audience of women and gay men. No; it does not make you gay if you like it, but they still played to a core audience. Which is cool and all, but the medium of film is driven by the cash of men to varying degrees. So you have to give a reason for the hetero men out there to watch this show, and this year’s show possibly did not work for many hetero men. It didn’t work for me, and I love a good show tune.
    So I hope this leads to the Academy going back to the drawing board, re imagining the show again, and bringing back MC KEYS or an MC for that matter. I swear to goodness, that 2000 broadcast was enthralling. It had great music, it moved at a pretty decent clip, and did not feature a “WE SAY YOUR NAME” moment with the acting noms. Go back there for the gods sake, and see if you can make a show that’s HIP FOR EVERYONE!

  11. leahnz says:

    blame canada
    oh curse you and the horse you rode in on, ioiheart, but when you’re right you’re right…the 2000 oscars were killer: killer flicks, killer noms, killer actors, killer songs
    and speaking of killer flicks and songs from that telecast – arguably the last great one – here is a musical interlude from a terrific movie and one of my all-time fave noms:

  12. LexG says:

    You can either get on the FUCKING BUS or not. Up to you.

  13. Leah, what did you think of Hugh’s New Zealand joke? I actually thought of you as I was laughing my arse off. :/
    “I’m watching these painful song and dance numbers and I’m thinking “who is this targeted towards?” Women over 60? Gay Men? I would rather see Jackman as Wolverine in a mock up fight with the human toad character than prancing around with a top hat.”
    Perhaps not women over 60, but definitely not teenage boys who would be the only ones not laughing out of the utter stupidity of all.
    But, really, how many Dark Knight fans would have watched the Oscars if it was nominated for Best Picture. REALLY. I would imagine that most would know it didn’t have a hope in hell of winning and wouldn’t bother watching.
    Lex, would it help if someone cast you in a show where you got run over by a bus? I’d probably watch that and you’d finally get your screen time.

  14. that bit with “utter stupidity of it all” was meant to continue with “of having a silly mock fight on stage at the Oscars.” etc.

  15. Joe Leydon says:

    According to the NYT, the ratings spike may have been even higher than initially reported. Bood news/bad news: “Ratings for the 81st Annual Academy Awards on Sunday night were up significantly over last year

  16. Filipe says:

    Also, it’s worth to point out the increase came ina year in which everything on TV is down in ratings by a decent margin.

  17. leahnz says:

    kam, i missed the enzed joke, i must have been distracted or not listening properly, what part of the show was it in? go on then, tell it to me, i think i’ve heard ’em all but you never know!

  18. IHeartThatCurtis! says:

    Thanks leah. That aside; the ratings were not horrible. They were not last year, but this show is steal losing audience, and has been for close to 11 years. There has to be a way to get everyone hyped. Right?
    I ask because outside of a BEST ACTION FILM of the year award. It seems the Academy really loves ignoring the movie-going public for films they like. That’s all fine and good, but where’s the fun in that?

  19. christian says:

    IHeart, stick with the MTV Movie Awards. It’s exactly what you’ve been crying out for.

  20. Cadavra says:

    “It seems the Academy really loves ignoring the movie-going public for films they like.”
    It would be more correct to say the movie-going public ignores quality films in favor of mouth-breathing crap. Wasn’t always the case.

  21. IO, I doubt the Oscars will ever get back to the astronomical heights they were reaching as recently as 1998. It’s just the way people watch their programming these days. And, let’s face it, it’s not that hard these days to jump on the internet to see a) who won and b) what people wore. There’s less a fascination of seeing celebs looking hot and more of a fascination of seeing them flash their bits by accident when they go to get coffee.
    And, as I already asked and yet you conveniently didn’t answer because you probably know there’s no answer that’ll fit your opinion, would Dark Knight fans have really truly honestly have sat through a three hour plus telecast just to see it lose (which every single person watching would have been able to guess, even if Slumdog hadn’t steamrolled throughout the season.)

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon