Discuss: Make the Academy Awards More Like the Super Bowl
Every year, it's the same old story: the Academy Awards are out of touch with "the people." The Academy Awards TV show must be changed. The ratings are down! The sky is falling! Every year, the Academy swears this year will be different: the broadcast will be less than seven hours, it'll be relevant, it won't be boring. Every year they fail.
The New York Times on Sunday reported that host Hugh Jackman will "sign off the broadcast with fresh 10-second snippets of two dozen new movies, to run on a split screen with the end credits." To which I say: Academy, are you really that insanely stupid? Or do you really think we, the audience, are that stupid?
I have great respect for the craftspeople working behind the scenes, but nobody stays to watch the bloody end credits! By that point, it's always way past midnight on the East Coast, and people have gone to bed because, you know, the rest of us have to get up in the morning and go to work. Who cares about 10-second snippets? That's insulting.
Monika wrote this afternoon about more unindentified "risks" that the show will be taking, with "big surprises" in store for "cinematographers, editors, composers." (Notice, no "actors" mentioned there.) Well, if the Academy really wants to be 'risky" and change things up, all they need to do is cast a look at the most-watched TV broadcast of the year: the Super Bowl. Year after year, the Super Bowl attracts viewers who never watch football, people who don't even know who's playing, and wouldn't know an Arizona Cardinal from a Pittsburgh Steeler if they encountered one in full uniform at the local supermarket. How do they do it?
After the jump: four ways to make the Academy Awards more like the Super Bowl.
1. Embrace the length. Why not do a one-hour pre-show presenting the documentary and short subject winners? I know, equal footing, etc., but this way you could show the short subject winners in their entirety and a good 15-minute chunk of the documentary feature winner. That could do more to reach a targeted audience than any 45-second acceptance speech.
2. Let the nominees introduce themselves. Forget the celeb presenters. If you really want to honor the 'below the line' talent, tape the film editors and costume designers introducing themselves in advance, just like NBC does with their NFL game broadcasts. They get their moment of worldwide glory, they say their name and their hometown, and when they win, we see their smiling face(s).
3. Reduce the acceptance speeches to 10 seconds. Sorry, too many are too long and boring. No one outside the industry cares about your agent and manager. If you want to appeal to people beyond the industry -- like, the rest of the world -- follow the examples of Super Bowl MVPs to time immemorial: say thank you, thank your family, your coach (director), your teammates in toto (cast and crew members), and the fans -- you know, the people who make your career possible.
4. Add a halftime show with film critics. After hour one of the broadcast, let A.O. Scott and Manohla Dargis of the New York Times (or other high-caliber critics) analyze the winners and explain why they deserved to win -- or alternatively, why they were surprised that they won. They could use film clips to explain their reasoning. Then they could analyze and predict the winners in the remaining part of the broadcast. Then they could introduce Bruce Springsteen and let him and the E Street Band play for 15 minutes. It worked for the Super Bowl -- why not the Academy Awards?
What are your ideas for changing the Academy Awards TV broadcast? Get as radical as you like -- we all know the show is badly in need of far-reaching changes, not just keeping the presenters secret and letting Hugh Jackman sing and dance.
Tom Cruise and J.J. Abrams Reunite for 'Mission Impossible 4'
'Big Top Pee-Wee': The Original Benicio Del Toro Wolfman
Spin-ematical: New on DVD and Blu-ray for 2/9
Watch This: Brilliant Oscar-Nominated Short 'Logorama'
Chris Nolan to Lead 'Superman' Reboot!?
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
2-03-2009 @ 9:42PM
avant576 said...
i love the oscars BECAUSE it's not like the super bowl. it's obscurity is what makes it special. though, some of your suggestions would be welcome
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 10:35PM
Tamara said...
I have never watched the superbowl in it's entirety so I will have to believe your suggestions as accurate - I have however watched the academy awards for the last 12 or so years with only 2 notable exceptions - that being said - I think your ideas are great! Like seriously, can you bend someone's ear at the academy about this?
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 10:37PM
viewdrix said...
You know, this whole idea of exclusive clips from upcoming movies would work if they put one at the beginning and end of every commercial break.
But no, do them all at the very end. I'll totally stay up for those. They totally won't be on the Internet the next day.
Reply
2-04-2009 @ 12:17AM
Mike D said...
It would be more like the Super Bowl, if Bruce Springsteen had been nominated! On the other hand, why the hell would you want the Oscars to be like a football game? Makes no sense. By "more like the Super Bowl", do you mean packed with the cheesiest commercials imaginable?
Reply
2-04-2009 @ 1:40AM
Chet said...
Wanna fix the Oscars? Stop televising 'em.
No, seriously. The Academy has such disdain for television. They want the money but they don't want to play to the medium's strengths. To hell with them.
In fact, turn it completely around. Let it be as insider glad-handing old-fashioned long-winded boring as it wants to be, and put it on pay-per-view at $50 a pop.
Reply
2-04-2009 @ 10:09AM
Alex said...
I have to partly agree with Chet... I think the Academy Awards are a waste of our time. I don't think it's a matter of making it more interesting for "the people". The Oscars are not about us or what we like or being "in touch" with us. These awards are like an employee of the month award. These are internal awards - a time for actors to recognize their agents.
Somehow the Academy marketed this to us in a way that it became important to us when it shouldn't matter to us at all. It has nothing to do with us and never will. I think the ratings are down because people are starting to figure this out and making it like the Super Bowl won't help.
Reply
2-04-2009 @ 12:35PM
juwan808 said...
It's very simple. Probably about half the people who tune in to watch the Super Bowl watch it for the commercials. I don't know why they haven't though of it before, but filmmakers HELLO!? You guys are supposed to be the best in the business? Beef up the commercial breaks. Get the sponsers involved. Get big time directors and producers to do spots. Have a competition for amatuer filmakers to get their stuff seen. They can win a mini oscar or something. Let the fans vote for stuff like best dressed or worst hair. Show big summer movie previews. Steal from MTV. Steal from everybody. Whatever, just loosen up and make it fun. Make it an event the fans can't miss.
But who am I kidding? It's the Oscars.
Reply
2-04-2009 @ 3:00PM
Gary said...
I really don't know why you have a problem with the winners speeches. Why limit them to 10secs? I say extend them. I don't watch the Oscars for the dresses, or the sneak views of celebs, I don't watch for the humour of the host or even the guest stars.
I watch the Oscars because I love films, especially indie films and love watching some of my favourites get recognised and like to see the artists involved happy about winning. Even for the mega-rich celebs it is great to see them care about winning rather than the obscene amount of money they seem to be earning.
Bring on longer speeches I say, is it not the whole point of the show? You would rather have half time fireworks and hotdog stands? I would rather it was about the films and the people who make them.
PS - I hope Danny Boyle speaks for 30mins!
Reply
2-04-2009 @ 4:29PM
Dan said...
I like some of the ideas, not all of them wholeheartedly, but I definitely agree changes need to be made. On the other hand, Springsteen playing an Oscar halftime show would be epic. That Super Bowl performance was awesome!
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 3:40AM
Bill said...
It's all about the movies. The best Academy Awards shows had lots of film clips, lots of behind the scenes stuff. The film clips were stuff that hadn't been put out in trailers or promotional clips previously shown. Then they showed costumes, too - not the gimmick where they put the costumes on professional models and then zoomed in on the models' faces so you couldn't see the costumes. People we don't really know shouldn't get a thank you speech at all. Say, "thank you." Leave. We don't care. For the main movies the writers, song writers, musical score writers, actors, directors and producers get pro-rated speech time. Everyone else, including those who made documentaries and short subjects get to say "thank you" only. But, and get this, it's about the movies. Everything else and everyone else is of lesser importance and I don't want to see any runway models anywhere near the place. Thank you.
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 5:25PM
Zach said...
You're right, it's all about the movies, but I think it's stupid to say the technical winners should only say, "Thank you." Remember when they had some of the nominees and winners stand and accept the awards in their seats? That was tacky and embarrassing. The show wasn't any shorter or more entertaining.
I say, let them have their cake and eat it too. *Messing with the general format of the awards presentation won't make the overall show and the hosting of the show between awards any more entertaining.*
But I agree about the costumes. No runway models just so we can see their faces. We need more interesting but ENTERTAINING behind-the-scenes clips/mini-documentaries. But not simply montages of people talking as they've done in the past. Then it just comes off like filler.
2-05-2009 @ 3:51AM
mitchell said...
have the best movies in the competition.
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 3:53AM
mitchell said...
everyone else who posted has their heads in their asses
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 3:54AM
mitchell said...
besides dan.... the boss rocked.
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 4:25AM
AJ Wiley said...
If I hear one more complaint about the length of acceptance speeches, I'm killin' a chicken.
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 9:58AM
Sarah said...
Looks like AJ Wiley is killin a chicken, because I cannot let "Bill's" comment pass without mentioning how deplorable I think it is. I work in the "industry" and trained in it as well and have watched the Oscars since I was in the 6th grade and I can't tell you how overrated ACTORS are. Everyone is so quick to congratulate the actors and throw millions of dollars at them, when there are people going three and four days without sleep in order to make sure the show/film is lit right or constructed properly. And they never get any glory. And you're ready to take their ONE thing away from them? For shame.
On a separate note, I agree with the comment on commercials...I totally think the commercials could be a drawing piece for more viewers. Also, with the idea of a "pre-show" I don't necessarily agree that any awards should be given away before any others, because it sort of devalues it, but I do like the idea of airing the documentary and/or short subject materials. I also think the performances of the songs and scores (which eats up a good half hour of the broadcast) could be conducted in a pre-show.
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 2:08PM
Yaz said...
... Marry me? Please?
2-05-2009 @ 10:58AM
Tony said...
They should only televise the major awards--best picture, director, actress, actor, supporting actor and actress. No one cares about the rest of the awards, let's be honest. This way, the broadcast would be 2 hours max.
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 11:42AM
Tanner said...
Add some pyrotechnics. Pyro makes everything better.
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 11:57AM
Rico said...
Get rid of the lifetime achievement award. That'll cut-out half an hour.
Do what Jimmy Kimmel does and take the awards out to the street. The freaks on Hollywood Blvd. are just outside the Kodak theater's footsteps and they could provide some much-needed comic-relief in some interspersed segments.
Do a Jay-Leno "Jaywalking"-type segment where you take your "out-of-touch" reputation and make fun of yourself with it. Ask people on the streets what they thought of Frozen River or what they think Gomorrah is about and watch their clueless expressions and convoluted synopses because they've never even heard of those movies. People watching the show will be able to relate to that.
Have celebrity supermodels wear the nominated costumes and have them (or celebrity fashion designers) present the costumes and makeup winners.
Have a competition for a short film that would screen during the broadcast and present the winner (chosen by America) with an honorary Oscar.
Make the Best Song category a full-blown performance (half-time type thing.) Add other songs and high-profile performers to fill in more time.
Do something with American Idol. They're on TV during the same time of year, have huge numbers and they use the same venue to crown their winners (the Kodak theater.)
Have every day people (fans) submit videos (maybe a YouTube tie-in) expressing why they think their favorite films, actors, etc. should win. Play these videos throughout the broadcast leading up the awards.
During the acceptance speeches, have "pop-up windows" that give you interesting facts about the winner: previous works, people associated with them, how they got started, etc. That will also give credit to people they forget to mention in their speech. It would almost be like "credits" rolling during their speech to let you know who made their award possible.
I think this would make the winner more inclined to give a shorter speech.
Do what the DirecTV commercials do and re-create famous movie clips with new dialogue presenting the current nominees and presenting the award that way--on a video screen as opposed to having the presenters there creating awkward and forced banter.
Just a few suggestions...will post more when I think of some.
Reply