Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-27 Thread Kevin M. 
Yeah, but how many of those people were hate-watching the telecast?*

* I’ve long suspected that if all the liberals watching FoxNews looking for
things to be offended by were to stop watching, the network’s ratings would
be virtually nil.

On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 2:28 PM Steve Timko  wrote:

> Revised ratings; 10.4 million.
>
>
> https://deadline.com/2021/04/2021-0scars-tv-ratings-academy-awards-low-abc-disney-1234744135/
>
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 9:25 AM Mark Jeffries  wrote:
>
>> I didn't realize that the pre-show was an E!-length marathon, so I was
>> pissed when the two Best Song nominees that I had true interest in (Diane
>> "Susan Lucci" Warren's song and the song from "Eurovision," which would've
>> been a pick-me-up for the main Oscarcast) didn't air in the 7 p.m. hour.
>> I'm even guessing they aired in the half-hour in Chicago where WLS
>> interrupted the pre-show for a newscast.
>>
>> Mark Jeffries
>> spotligh...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:05 AM Melissa P 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree with just about everything Dave said.
>>>
>>> I tuned in at 8 pm ET, the start of the show, only to discover that the
>>> recordings of the 5 nominated songs were broadcast before 8 pm.  If I want
>>> to see that footage, I guess I'll have to search for it online.
>>>
>>> That was what I found most annoying.
>>>
>>> The endless, bad, humorless speeches are a close second.  Why were
>>> the winners and others allowed to talk so long?
>>>
>>> Everyone on camera was just plain dull.
>>>
>>> Questlove was not the right person for the job.
>>>
>>> Not only did the In Memoriam move too fast, the speed changed throughout
>>> the piece (Why?  Are some more worthy than others of being remembered?),
>>> and the background song, whatever it was, was a poor choice.
>>>
>>> My only compliment goes to the setting.  Having spent time at Union
>>> Station (train trips to Santa Barbara and to the East Coast), it made an
>>> impressive backdrop.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 6:50 AM 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV <
>>> tvornottv@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>>>
 In an opinion that I'm sure will shock no one, I thought it was one of
 the most inept and pointless spectacles I've ever witnessed, and will,
 hopefully, kill the Oscarcast for the future.

 There was almost nothing to recommend it. The format was dull, the
 speeches too long, and -- even moreso than usual -- had no reason to exist.
 While I certainly don't want the return of the Billy Crystal years, with
 lousy renditions of mediocre songs, forced banter, and skits, I also don't
 want a spectacle that has all the panache and verve of a presidential
 funeral.

 Probably the most baffling part of the whole farrago was the music
 quiz, which would have been bad enough in any telecast, but really entered
 sore thumb territory because of its timing (2:40 into an interminable
 broadcast), and the decision to suddenly decide to do written material (And
 then it was -that-?).

 Obviously, fate -- and the voters -- didn't play along with the
 intended finale, but there should have been a contingency plan. If
 Hopkins's presence was verboten because -- like any sensible octogenarian,
 he didn't want to sit in a London theatre in the middle of the night on the
 off chance he might win -- then there should have been a Plan B that went
 beyond Phoenix's more-baffled-by-life-than-usual signoff. (One of the many,
 many things that prove the ineptitude of the Oscars -- other than, yet
 again, choosing a mediocre-at-best film as the "best" -- is that Phoenix
 has one.)

 While I did like the set design and attempt to keep things intimate,
 the processed video (described by Harry Shearer as looking like VHS) was
 pointless and ruined most of the effects.

 I'm trying to somehow end this on a positive note, but I'll be damned
 if I can think of anything in the whole twelve hours of the telecast that
 worked.

 --Dave Sikula

 On Sunday, April 25, 2021 at 9:10:30 PM UTC-7 PGage wrote:

> I thought they did a great job on this show. Union Station is a great
> space (nice to have Harrison Ford reference Blade Runner there), and would
> be great to retain some sense of the grouped tables even when they return
> to the big auditorium, which is a call back to the Oscar origins.
>
> Mostly though, I loved that they did not place such a hard limit on
> the speeches. They saved time with shorter walk ups to the podiums, and
> moving the songs to the pre-show, and not having any opening monologue or
> production number (besides that long walking shot), bit still went over
> about 17 min, but for me very worth it. A number of the speeches were
> heartfelt and interesting, and the very first one would have no doubt been
> interrupted by playoff music just as the guy started talking

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-27 Thread Steve Timko 
Revised ratings; 10.4 million.

https://deadline.com/2021/04/2021-0scars-tv-ratings-academy-awards-low-abc-disney-1234744135/

On Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 9:25 AM Mark Jeffries  wrote:

> I didn't realize that the pre-show was an E!-length marathon, so I was
> pissed when the two Best Song nominees that I had true interest in (Diane
> "Susan Lucci" Warren's song and the song from "Eurovision," which would've
> been a pick-me-up for the main Oscarcast) didn't air in the 7 p.m. hour.
> I'm even guessing they aired in the half-hour in Chicago where WLS
> interrupted the pre-show for a newscast.
>
> Mark Jeffries
> spotligh...@gmail.com
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:05 AM Melissa P 
> wrote:
>
>> I agree with just about everything Dave said.
>>
>> I tuned in at 8 pm ET, the start of the show, only to discover that the
>> recordings of the 5 nominated songs were broadcast before 8 pm.  If I want
>> to see that footage, I guess I'll have to search for it online.
>>
>> That was what I found most annoying.
>>
>> The endless, bad, humorless speeches are a close second.  Why were
>> the winners and others allowed to talk so long?
>>
>> Everyone on camera was just plain dull.
>>
>> Questlove was not the right person for the job.
>>
>> Not only did the In Memoriam move too fast, the speed changed throughout
>> the piece (Why?  Are some more worthy than others of being remembered?),
>> and the background song, whatever it was, was a poor choice.
>>
>> My only compliment goes to the setting.  Having spent time at Union
>> Station (train trips to Santa Barbara and to the East Coast), it made an
>> impressive backdrop.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 6:50 AM 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV <
>> tvornottv@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In an opinion that I'm sure will shock no one, I thought it was one of
>>> the most inept and pointless spectacles I've ever witnessed, and will,
>>> hopefully, kill the Oscarcast for the future.
>>>
>>> There was almost nothing to recommend it. The format was dull, the
>>> speeches too long, and -- even moreso than usual -- had no reason to exist.
>>> While I certainly don't want the return of the Billy Crystal years, with
>>> lousy renditions of mediocre songs, forced banter, and skits, I also don't
>>> want a spectacle that has all the panache and verve of a presidential
>>> funeral.
>>>
>>> Probably the most baffling part of the whole farrago was the music quiz,
>>> which would have been bad enough in any telecast, but really entered sore
>>> thumb territory because of its timing (2:40 into an interminable
>>> broadcast), and the decision to suddenly decide to do written material (And
>>> then it was -that-?).
>>>
>>> Obviously, fate -- and the voters -- didn't play along with the intended
>>> finale, but there should have been a contingency plan. If Hopkins's
>>> presence was verboten because -- like any sensible octogenarian, he didn't
>>> want to sit in a London theatre in the middle of the night on the off
>>> chance he might win -- then there should have been a Plan B that went
>>> beyond Phoenix's more-baffled-by-life-than-usual signoff. (One of the many,
>>> many things that prove the ineptitude of the Oscars -- other than, yet
>>> again, choosing a mediocre-at-best film as the "best" -- is that Phoenix
>>> has one.)
>>>
>>> While I did like the set design and attempt to keep things intimate, the
>>> processed video (described by Harry Shearer as looking like VHS) was
>>> pointless and ruined most of the effects.
>>>
>>> I'm trying to somehow end this on a positive note, but I'll be damned if
>>> I can think of anything in the whole twelve hours of the telecast that
>>> worked.
>>>
>>> --Dave Sikula
>>>
>>> On Sunday, April 25, 2021 at 9:10:30 PM UTC-7 PGage wrote:
>>>
 I thought they did a great job on this show. Union Station is a great
 space (nice to have Harrison Ford reference Blade Runner there), and would
 be great to retain some sense of the grouped tables even when they return
 to the big auditorium, which is a call back to the Oscar origins.

 Mostly though, I loved that they did not place such a hard limit on the
 speeches. They saved time with shorter walk ups to the podiums, and moving
 the songs to the pre-show, and not having any opening monologue or
 production number (besides that long walking shot), bit still went over
 about 17 min, but for me very worth it. A number of the speeches were
 heartfelt and interesting, and the very first one would have no doubt been
 interrupted by playoff music just as the guy started talking about his dead
 daughter.

 Even the cheesy “game show” had a pretty good pay off with Glen Close
 (I saw on the after show that they did set that up with her in advance, but
 did not expect her to actually do the dance).

 Nice to see our friend Jon Batiste get his Oscar moment, and he briefly
 shared the stage with QuestLove.

 I saw on Twitter a lot of

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-27 Thread Mark Jeffries 
I didn't realize that the pre-show was an E!-length marathon, so I was
pissed when the two Best Song nominees that I had true interest in (Diane
"Susan Lucci" Warren's song and the song from "Eurovision," which would've
been a pick-me-up for the main Oscarcast) didn't air in the 7 p.m. hour.
I'm even guessing they aired in the half-hour in Chicago where WLS
interrupted the pre-show for a newscast.

Mark Jeffries
spotligh...@gmail.com


On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:05 AM Melissa P 
wrote:

> I agree with just about everything Dave said.
>
> I tuned in at 8 pm ET, the start of the show, only to discover that the
> recordings of the 5 nominated songs were broadcast before 8 pm.  If I want
> to see that footage, I guess I'll have to search for it online.
>
> That was what I found most annoying.
>
> The endless, bad, humorless speeches are a close second.  Why were
> the winners and others allowed to talk so long?
>
> Everyone on camera was just plain dull.
>
> Questlove was not the right person for the job.
>
> Not only did the In Memoriam move too fast, the speed changed throughout
> the piece (Why?  Are some more worthy than others of being remembered?),
> and the background song, whatever it was, was a poor choice.
>
> My only compliment goes to the setting.  Having spent time at Union
> Station (train trips to Santa Barbara and to the East Coast), it made an
> impressive backdrop.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 6:50 AM 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV <
> tvornottv@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
>> In an opinion that I'm sure will shock no one, I thought it was one of
>> the most inept and pointless spectacles I've ever witnessed, and will,
>> hopefully, kill the Oscarcast for the future.
>>
>> There was almost nothing to recommend it. The format was dull, the
>> speeches too long, and -- even moreso than usual -- had no reason to exist.
>> While I certainly don't want the return of the Billy Crystal years, with
>> lousy renditions of mediocre songs, forced banter, and skits, I also don't
>> want a spectacle that has all the panache and verve of a presidential
>> funeral.
>>
>> Probably the most baffling part of the whole farrago was the music quiz,
>> which would have been bad enough in any telecast, but really entered sore
>> thumb territory because of its timing (2:40 into an interminable
>> broadcast), and the decision to suddenly decide to do written material (And
>> then it was -that-?).
>>
>> Obviously, fate -- and the voters -- didn't play along with the intended
>> finale, but there should have been a contingency plan. If Hopkins's
>> presence was verboten because -- like any sensible octogenarian, he didn't
>> want to sit in a London theatre in the middle of the night on the off
>> chance he might win -- then there should have been a Plan B that went
>> beyond Phoenix's more-baffled-by-life-than-usual signoff. (One of the many,
>> many things that prove the ineptitude of the Oscars -- other than, yet
>> again, choosing a mediocre-at-best film as the "best" -- is that Phoenix
>> has one.)
>>
>> While I did like the set design and attempt to keep things intimate, the
>> processed video (described by Harry Shearer as looking like VHS) was
>> pointless and ruined most of the effects.
>>
>> I'm trying to somehow end this on a positive note, but I'll be damned if
>> I can think of anything in the whole twelve hours of the telecast that
>> worked.
>>
>> --Dave Sikula
>>
>> On Sunday, April 25, 2021 at 9:10:30 PM UTC-7 PGage wrote:
>>
>>> I thought they did a great job on this show. Union Station is a great
>>> space (nice to have Harrison Ford reference Blade Runner there), and would
>>> be great to retain some sense of the grouped tables even when they return
>>> to the big auditorium, which is a call back to the Oscar origins.
>>>
>>> Mostly though, I loved that they did not place such a hard limit on the
>>> speeches. They saved time with shorter walk ups to the podiums, and moving
>>> the songs to the pre-show, and not having any opening monologue or
>>> production number (besides that long walking shot), bit still went over
>>> about 17 min, but for me very worth it. A number of the speeches were
>>> heartfelt and interesting, and the very first one would have no doubt been
>>> interrupted by playoff music just as the guy started talking about his dead
>>> daughter.
>>>
>>> Even the cheesy “game show” had a pretty good pay off with Glen Close (I
>>> saw on the after show that they did set that up with her in advance, but
>>> did not expect her to actually do the dance).
>>>
>>> Nice to see our friend Jon Batiste get his Oscar moment, and he briefly
>>> shared the stage with QuestLove.
>>>
>>> I saw on Twitter a lot of complaining about a seemingly rushed In
>>> Memoriam, and especially the decision to move Best Picture ahead of Best
>>> Actress and Actor. It did kind of seem like they were anticipating closing
>>> on an emotional note of Chadwick Bozeman winning posthumously, instead
>>> ending with a bit

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread davesik...@gmail.com 
 I didn't mind the size; cutting down on the bloat that has accumulated around 
this broadcast is something to be welcomed. Nor did I mind the lack of song and 
dance. To be honest, hearing the nominated songs, I could not have told you one 
from another even as they were playing. Now that original musicals are as dead 
as Arthur Freed, this is a category the Academy could easily lose.
I'll state up front (in case it wasn't obvious) that I think competitive award 
shows for the arts are stupid. I thought "Nomadland' was beautiful to look at, 
but condescending to the very people it pretended to venerate. Others found it 
moving and profound. Which of us is right? I thought Hopkins's performance was 
one-note with no evolution. (It didn't help that I'd seen Frank Langella play 
it on Broadway to devastating effect) Others were moved to tears. Are they 
wrong? Am I? It's all a matter of choice and taste, and Oscar has decades of 
making lousy decisions behind him.

What I objected to is that, if they're going to do a show that celebrates the 
art of film and entertainment, that they almost have an obligation to be 
Entertaining. I don't mean an evening of jokes and skits. I don't want Billy 
Crystal or Kevin Hart (or even the guy who did the trivia; the less of him, the 
better). I do want sharp, clever, and observant writing -- hell, even Sorkin 
could have done that better -- that talks about the place of the movies in a 
year like no other. What I got a self-important gasfest that looked cheap (I'm 
talking quality of image; not the venue itself, which mostly looked good) with 
too-long acceptance speeches that were mostly ill-conceived.
Maybe the one thing I did like was the way the end fell apart. There are just 
too many past cases of "sure" winners who crapped out at the end to take the 
chance of Boseman winning, so focusing the broadcast to build with that was a 
capital mistake I happy to see blow up in their faces. That it left a guy like 
Phoenix who would rather have been anywhere else on Earth to clean up the mess 
was the icing on the cake.
--Dave Sikula

On Monday, April 26, 2021, 8:04:04 PM PDT, PGage  wrote:  
 
 I am not surprised to be in the minority on this, but a little push-back 
against the Compact Majority:
1. Marin is repeating a complaint on Twitter that simply is not true. They did 
have clips for; they never have clips for all or even most categories. I guess 
the biggest difference was for the acting categories, which they sometimes, but 
not always have.
2. It’s odd to hear people criticize it for being too small; COVID restrictions 
are such that I would have thought the main critique would be it was too big. 
The comparison should be with the Zoom based award shows of the last 4 months, 
not the traditional shows of the past. A live band was precluded by health 
safeguards, for example, which did not dictate but added to the decision to 
move the songs to the pre-show (I think most of them pre-recorded). Again, I 
thin keeping in mind the many limitations, they did a fantastic job.
3. I’m surprised people seem to miss the big production numbers and lame 
presenter patter, since for me this is always the worst part of the show. 
Clearly the worst part of last night was the one comedy bit they did try.
4. Award shows are about the acceptance speeches, that’s what they are about, 
thats  what I like about them. If you don’t like them then yes, I can see why 
you don’t like the Oscars. I think Soderbergh thought it would be a good idea 
to have the presenters comments be a way of sharing something personal about 
each nominee, which does sound good in the abstract, but in principle was 
longish and kind of boring. I would do less of that, and bring back the style 
where they have 3 professional comics come out and do 3 min each through the 
show to add some humor.
5. I like the movies. I like in particular Oscar type movies, which is to say 
middle brow films that are not quite art but aim for artistic entertainment. (I 
also watch my share of higher brow films, but rarely enjoy them as much, and 
lower brow films, but rarely enjoy thinking about them after as much. I grew up 
in Southern California, and while not connected to the film industry I grew up 
with the children of lots of famous and not so famous actors, and hair stylists 
and editors and whatever, and I am interested in what they do, the people who 
do it with them, and the end result. I don’t watch the Oscars for a production 
that resembles is a bad movie version of itself, but to appreciate and 
celebrate the craft of movie making.








  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/493825849.699066.1619501666275%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread PGage 
 Doubt anyone really thought that was spontaneous.

I loved the song choice for the In Memoriam, much less maudlin and
sentimental than usual, but still appropriate. I wonder how many people who
were offended actually know the song?

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 at 7:49 PM Paul Murray  wrote:

> I only watched the first 15-20 minutes, then watched the In Memoriam reel
> on YouTube. Based on what I saw and read, some of the experiments paid off,
> and some did not (spectacularly so).
>
> I'm impressed that they found new ways to screw up the In Memoriam reel.
> Bad song choice, terrible pacing, overwrought and too long intro by Angela
> Bassett. It's hard to escape the feeling that somebody thought the
> traditional way was too much of a downer.
>
> The music trivia sounded awful. (It reminded of me of what I thought was
> Letterman's fatal flaw when he hosted -- interrupting the ceremony to do
> stupid pet tricks. Otherwise I thought he was fine.) To do it when the show
> was on final approach? Terrible. And the one seemingly spontaneous moment
> that people talked about turned out to be preplanned.
>
> I will say this: If you want to take risks, you might as well do it when
> you're going to have low ratings anyway.
>
> On Monday, April 26, 2021 at 8:42:42 PM UTC-4 Bob Jersey wrote:
>
>> Still, Variety reviewer Caroline Framke agrees with many here:
>> https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/oscars-review-academy-awards-2021-1234960324/
>>  (link)
>>
>> B
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TVorNotTV" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/3c2dfe13-9d78-46ba-9ea6-a18faa80c140n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
-- 
Sent from Gmail Mobile

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2BEhL-Y%3DcrXKnaag_Jr%3D-ZDBgX5X_0qoECaHcb46un2hw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread PGage 
I am not surprised to be in the minority on this, but a little push-back
against the Compact Majority:

1. Marin is repeating a complaint on Twitter that simply is not true. They
did have clips for; they never have clips for all or even most categories.
I guess the biggest difference was for the acting categories, which they
sometimes, but not always have.

2. It’s odd to hear people criticize it for being too small; COVID
restrictions are such that I would have thought the main critique would be
it was too big. The comparison should be with the Zoom based award shows of
the last 4 months, not the traditional shows of the past. A live band was
precluded by health safeguards, for example, which did not dictate but
added to the decision to move the songs to the pre-show (I think most of
them pre-recorded). Again, I thin keeping in mind the many limitations,
they did a fantastic job.

3. I’m surprised people seem to miss the big production numbers and lame
presenter patter, since for me this is always the worst part of the show.
Clearly the worst part of last night was the one comedy bit they did try.

4. Award shows are about the acceptance speeches, that’s what they are
about, thats  what I like about them. If you don’t like them then yes, I
can see why you don’t like the Oscars. I think Soderbergh thought it would
be a good idea to have the presenters comments be a way of sharing
something personal about each nominee, which does sound good in the
abstract, but in principle was longish and kind of boring. I would do less
of that, and bring back the style where they have 3 professional comics
come out and do 3 min each through the show to add some humor.

5. I like the movies. I like in particular Oscar type movies, which is to
say middle brow films that are not quite art but aim for artistic
entertainment. (I also watch my share of higher brow films, but rarely
enjoy them as much, and lower brow films, but rarely enjoy thinking about
them after as much. I grew up in Southern California, and while not
connected to the film industry I grew up with the children of lots of
famous and not so famous actors, and hair stylists and editors and
whatever, and I am interested in what they do, the people who do it with
them, and the end result. I don’t watch the Oscars for a production that
resembles is a bad movie version of itself, but to appreciate and celebrate
the craft of movie making.

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 at 11:44 AM Kevin M.  wrote:

> From Marc Maron’s WTF email newsletter:
>
> I will say that this year’s Oscars seemed like the most honest ceremony in
> years. Because of the limitations and the choices that were made by the
> producer Stephen Soderbergh to make it intimate and sparse it came off as
> small. It felt like an in-house corporate awards ceremony that could be
> taking place at a hotel ballroom. It looked like the people who were there
> stopped by before they were going somewhere else. There was nothing on the
> tables, no real audience, no clips, no comedy, no songs, no dancing, no
> pomp and circumstance or big celebrity presence. It seemed egalitarian and
> boring but human. This year’s Oscars make the argument to never televise
> them again.
>
>  Maybe what we have learned during this last year is that some
> institutions need to be salvaged and saved and some no longer serve the
> common good or interest or they just need to be what they are. It seemed
> that the scope and tone of this years Oscars matched their cultural
> relevance. Though I was happy to see diversity on all levels was being
> recognized. Attempted egalitarianism. Humanity sans the pomp and song and
> dance.
>
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 9:05 AM Melissa P 
> wrote:
>
>> I agree with just about everything Dave said.
>>
>> I tuned in at 8 pm ET, the start of the show, only to discover that the
>> recordings of the 5 nominated songs were broadcast before 8 pm.  If I want
>> to see that footage, I guess I'll have to search for it online.
>>
>> That was what I found most annoying.
>>
>> The endless, bad, humorless speeches are a close second.  Why were
>> the winners and others allowed to talk so long?
>>
>> Everyone on camera was just plain dull.
>>
>> Questlove was not the right person for the job.
>>
>> Not only did the In Memoriam move too fast, the speed changed throughout
>> the piece (Why?  Are some more worthy than others of being remembered?),
>> and the background song, whatever it was, was a poor choice.
>>
>> My only compliment goes to the setting.  Having spent time at Union
>> Station (train trips to Santa Barbara and to the East Coast), it made an
>> impressive backdrop.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 6:50 AM 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV <
>> tvornottv@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In an opinion that I'm sure will shock no one, I thought it was one of
>>> the most inept and pointless spectacles I've ever witnessed, and will,
>>> hopefully, kill the Oscarcast for the future.
>>>
>>> There was almost nothing to

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread Paul Murray 
I only watched the first 15-20 minutes, then watched the In Memoriam reel 
on YouTube. Based on what I saw and read, some of the experiments paid off, 
and some did not (spectacularly so). 

I'm impressed that they found new ways to screw up the In Memoriam reel. 
Bad song choice, terrible pacing, overwrought and too long intro by Angela 
Bassett. It's hard to escape the feeling that somebody thought the 
traditional way was too much of a downer.

The music trivia sounded awful. (It reminded of me of what I thought was 
Letterman's fatal flaw when he hosted -- interrupting the ceremony to do 
stupid pet tricks. Otherwise I thought he was fine.) To do it when the show 
was on final approach? Terrible. And the one seemingly spontaneous moment 
that people talked about turned out to be preplanned. 

I will say this: If you want to take risks, you might as well do it when 
you're going to have low ratings anyway.

On Monday, April 26, 2021 at 8:42:42 PM UTC-4 Bob Jersey wrote:

> Still, Variety reviewer Caroline Framke agrees with many here: 
> https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/oscars-review-academy-awards-2021-1234960324/
>  (link)
>
> B
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/3c2dfe13-9d78-46ba-9ea6-a18faa80c140n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread 'Bob Jersey' via TVorNotTV 
Still, Variety reviewer Caroline Framke agrees with many here: 
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/oscars-review-academy-awards-2021-1234960324/
 (link)

B

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/105f8bb7-b8bd-4bd0-b9af-e67c6aad20fan%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread 'Bob Jersey' via TVorNotTV 
ABC's Rob Mills Q with Variety's Michael Schneider...

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/oscars-order-da-butt-glenn-close-in-memoriam-1234960635/
 (link)

B

Steve Timko, to MelissaP, April 26th:

> The endless, bad, humorless speeches are a close second.  Why were 
>> the winners and others allowed to talk so long?
>>
>> Everyone on camera was just plain dull.
>>
>
>
> I think the aim was for more intimacy, less spectacle. To return the focus 
> to film and the industry.
> Some cheered that lesser categories got more screen time. Some booed.
> The ratings are a record low. I think that means a lot of boos. Regina 
> King was maybe not the first face viewers saw.
>
>
> https://deadline.com/2021/04/2021-0scars-tv-ratings-academy-awards-low-abc-disney-1234744135/
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/5d9af004-8bfe-45d5-8ad9-eabad9bdc580n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread Steve Timko 
On Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:05 AM Melissa P  wrote:

>
>
> The endless, bad, humorless speeches are a close second.  Why were
> the winners and others allowed to talk so long?
>
> Everyone on camera was just plain dull.
>


I think the aim was for more intimacy, less spectacle. To return the focus
to film and the industry.
Some cheered that lesser categories got more screen time. Some booed.
The ratings are a record low. I think that means a lot of boos. Regina King
was maybe not the first face viewers saw.

https://deadline.com/2021/04/2021-0scars-tv-ratings-academy-awards-low-abc-disney-1234744135/


>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAH5J8yyQtwpSq5o4WXJxXeJz6p99_q%2BezqKiw2gw-2GJF0DRJQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread Kevin M. 
>From Marc Maron’s WTF email newsletter:

I will say that this year’s Oscars seemed like the most honest ceremony in
years. Because of the limitations and the choices that were made by the
producer Stephen Soderbergh to make it intimate and sparse it came off as
small. It felt like an in-house corporate awards ceremony that could be
taking place at a hotel ballroom. It looked like the people who were there
stopped by before they were going somewhere else. There was nothing on the
tables, no real audience, no clips, no comedy, no songs, no dancing, no
pomp and circumstance or big celebrity presence. It seemed egalitarian and
boring but human. This year’s Oscars make the argument to never televise
them again.

 Maybe what we have learned during this last year is that some institutions
need to be salvaged and saved and some no longer serve the common good or
interest or they just need to be what they are. It seemed that the scope
and tone of this years Oscars matched their cultural relevance. Though I
was happy to see diversity on all levels was being recognized. Attempted
egalitarianism. Humanity sans the pomp and song and dance.

On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 9:05 AM Melissa P 
wrote:

> I agree with just about everything Dave said.
>
> I tuned in at 8 pm ET, the start of the show, only to discover that the
> recordings of the 5 nominated songs were broadcast before 8 pm.  If I want
> to see that footage, I guess I'll have to search for it online.
>
> That was what I found most annoying.
>
> The endless, bad, humorless speeches are a close second.  Why were
> the winners and others allowed to talk so long?
>
> Everyone on camera was just plain dull.
>
> Questlove was not the right person for the job.
>
> Not only did the In Memoriam move too fast, the speed changed throughout
> the piece (Why?  Are some more worthy than others of being remembered?),
> and the background song, whatever it was, was a poor choice.
>
> My only compliment goes to the setting.  Having spent time at Union
> Station (train trips to Santa Barbara and to the East Coast), it made an
> impressive backdrop.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 6:50 AM 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV <
> tvornottv@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
>> In an opinion that I'm sure will shock no one, I thought it was one of
>> the most inept and pointless spectacles I've ever witnessed, and will,
>> hopefully, kill the Oscarcast for the future.
>>
>> There was almost nothing to recommend it. The format was dull, the
>> speeches too long, and -- even moreso than usual -- had no reason to exist.
>> While I certainly don't want the return of the Billy Crystal years, with
>> lousy renditions of mediocre songs, forced banter, and skits, I also don't
>> want a spectacle that has all the panache and verve of a presidential
>> funeral.
>>
>> Probably the most baffling part of the whole farrago was the music quiz,
>> which would have been bad enough in any telecast, but really entered sore
>> thumb territory because of its timing (2:40 into an interminable
>> broadcast), and the decision to suddenly decide to do written material (And
>> then it was -that-?).
>>
>> Obviously, fate -- and the voters -- didn't play along with the intended
>> finale, but there should have been a contingency plan. If Hopkins's
>> presence was verboten because -- like any sensible octogenarian, he didn't
>> want to sit in a London theatre in the middle of the night on the off
>> chance he might win -- then there should have been a Plan B that went
>> beyond Phoenix's more-baffled-by-life-than-usual signoff. (One of the many,
>> many things that prove the ineptitude of the Oscars -- other than, yet
>> again, choosing a mediocre-at-best film as the "best" -- is that Phoenix
>> has one.)
>>
>> While I did like the set design and attempt to keep things intimate, the
>> processed video (described by Harry Shearer as looking like VHS) was
>> pointless and ruined most of the effects.
>>
>> I'm trying to somehow end this on a positive note, but I'll be damned if
>> I can think of anything in the whole twelve hours of the telecast that
>> worked.
>>
>> --Dave Sikula
>>
>> On Sunday, April 25, 2021 at 9:10:30 PM UTC-7 PGage wrote:
>>
>>> I thought they did a great job on this show. Union Station is a great
>>> space (nice to have Harrison Ford reference Blade Runner there), and would
>>> be great to retain some sense of the grouped tables even when they return
>>> to the big auditorium, which is a call back to the Oscar origins.
>>>
>>> Mostly though, I loved that they did not place such a hard limit on the
>>> speeches. They saved time with shorter walk ups to the podiums, and moving
>>> the songs to the pre-show, and not having any opening monologue or
>>> production number (besides that long walking shot), bit still went over
>>> about 17 min, but for me very worth it. A number of the speeches were
>>> heartfelt and interesting, and the very first one would have no doubt been
>>> interrupted by playoff music just as

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread Melissa P 
I agree with just about everything Dave said.

I tuned in at 8 pm ET, the start of the show, only to discover that the
recordings of the 5 nominated songs were broadcast before 8 pm.  If I want
to see that footage, I guess I'll have to search for it online.

That was what I found most annoying.

The endless, bad, humorless speeches are a close second.  Why were
the winners and others allowed to talk so long?

Everyone on camera was just plain dull.

Questlove was not the right person for the job.

Not only did the In Memoriam move too fast, the speed changed throughout
the piece (Why?  Are some more worthy than others of being remembered?),
and the background song, whatever it was, was a poor choice.

My only compliment goes to the setting.  Having spent time at Union Station
(train trips to Santa Barbara and to the East Coast), it made an impressive
backdrop.



On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 6:50 AM 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV <
tvornottv@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> In an opinion that I'm sure will shock no one, I thought it was one of the
> most inept and pointless spectacles I've ever witnessed, and will,
> hopefully, kill the Oscarcast for the future.
>
> There was almost nothing to recommend it. The format was dull, the
> speeches too long, and -- even moreso than usual -- had no reason to exist.
> While I certainly don't want the return of the Billy Crystal years, with
> lousy renditions of mediocre songs, forced banter, and skits, I also don't
> want a spectacle that has all the panache and verve of a presidential
> funeral.
>
> Probably the most baffling part of the whole farrago was the music quiz,
> which would have been bad enough in any telecast, but really entered sore
> thumb territory because of its timing (2:40 into an interminable
> broadcast), and the decision to suddenly decide to do written material (And
> then it was -that-?).
>
> Obviously, fate -- and the voters -- didn't play along with the intended
> finale, but there should have been a contingency plan. If Hopkins's
> presence was verboten because -- like any sensible octogenarian, he didn't
> want to sit in a London theatre in the middle of the night on the off
> chance he might win -- then there should have been a Plan B that went
> beyond Phoenix's more-baffled-by-life-than-usual signoff. (One of the many,
> many things that prove the ineptitude of the Oscars -- other than, yet
> again, choosing a mediocre-at-best film as the "best" -- is that Phoenix
> has one.)
>
> While I did like the set design and attempt to keep things intimate, the
> processed video (described by Harry Shearer as looking like VHS) was
> pointless and ruined most of the effects.
>
> I'm trying to somehow end this on a positive note, but I'll be damned if I
> can think of anything in the whole twelve hours of the telecast that worked.
>
> --Dave Sikula
>
> On Sunday, April 25, 2021 at 9:10:30 PM UTC-7 PGage wrote:
>
>> I thought they did a great job on this show. Union Station is a great
>> space (nice to have Harrison Ford reference Blade Runner there), and would
>> be great to retain some sense of the grouped tables even when they return
>> to the big auditorium, which is a call back to the Oscar origins.
>>
>> Mostly though, I loved that they did not place such a hard limit on the
>> speeches. They saved time with shorter walk ups to the podiums, and moving
>> the songs to the pre-show, and not having any opening monologue or
>> production number (besides that long walking shot), bit still went over
>> about 17 min, but for me very worth it. A number of the speeches were
>> heartfelt and interesting, and the very first one would have no doubt been
>> interrupted by playoff music just as the guy started talking about his dead
>> daughter.
>>
>> Even the cheesy “game show” had a pretty good pay off with Glen Close (I
>> saw on the after show that they did set that up with her in advance, but
>> did not expect her to actually do the dance).
>>
>> Nice to see our friend Jon Batiste get his Oscar moment, and he briefly
>> shared the stage with QuestLove.
>>
>> I saw on Twitter a lot of complaining about a seemingly rushed In
>> Memoriam, and especially the decision to move Best Picture ahead of Best
>> Actress and Actor. It did kind of seem like they were anticipating closing
>> on an emotional note of Chadwick Bozeman winning posthumously, instead
>> ending with a bit of an anticlimax.
>>
>> Still, overall I thought it was a good show, with mostly great nominated
>> films and performances, even if it will inevitably be the lowest rated
>> Oscars in history.
>> --
>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TVorNotTV" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/23c91d78-37c8-460a-b179-e962b654148fn%40googlegroups.com
>

Re: [TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread Steve Timko 
The opening was dynamic. I loved the music. The change of location was
great. But I missed the funny opening. The Oscars, for me, are escapism.
Humor is a grat escapism.
So cut the walk in half and add humor.
I wonder how many tuned out after the tone of the opening.


On Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 3:50 AM 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV <
tvornottv@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> In an opinion that I'm sure will shock no one, I thought it was one of the
> most inept and pointless spectacles I've ever witnessed, and will,
> hopefully, kill the Oscarcast for the future.
>
> There was almost nothing to recommend it. The format was dull, the
> speeches too long, and -- even moreso than usual -- had no reason to exist.
> While I certainly don't want the return of the Billy Crystal years, with
> lousy renditions of mediocre songs, forced banter, and skits, I also don't
> want a spectacle that has all the panache and verve of a presidential
> funeral.
>
> Probably the most baffling part of the whole farrago was the music quiz,
> which would have been bad enough in any telecast, but really entered sore
> thumb territory because of its timing (2:40 into an interminable
> broadcast), and the decision to suddenly decide to do written material (And
> then it was -that-?).
>
> Obviously, fate -- and the voters -- didn't play along with the intended
> finale, but there should have been a contingency plan. If Hopkins's
> presence was verboten because -- like any sensible octogenarian, he didn't
> want to sit in a London theatre in the middle of the night on the off
> chance he might win -- then there should have been a Plan B that went
> beyond Phoenix's more-baffled-by-life-than-usual signoff. (One of the many,
> many things that prove the ineptitude of the Oscars -- other than, yet
> again, choosing a mediocre-at-best film as the "best" -- is that Phoenix
> has one.)
>
> While I did like the set design and attempt to keep things intimate, the
> processed video (described by Harry Shearer as looking like VHS) was
> pointless and ruined most of the effects.
>
> I'm trying to somehow end this on a positive note, but I'll be damned if I
> can think of anything in the whole twelve hours of the telecast that worked.
>
> --Dave Sikula
>
> On Sunday, April 25, 2021 at 9:10:30 PM UTC-7 PGage wrote:
>
>> I thought they did a great job on this show. Union Station is a great
>> space (nice to have Harrison Ford reference Blade Runner there), and would
>> be great to retain some sense of the grouped tables even when they return
>> to the big auditorium, which is a call back to the Oscar origins.
>>
>> Mostly though, I loved that they did not place such a hard limit on the
>> speeches. They saved time with shorter walk ups to the podiums, and moving
>> the songs to the pre-show, and not having any opening monologue or
>> production number (besides that long walking shot), bit still went over
>> about 17 min, but for me very worth it. A number of the speeches were
>> heartfelt and interesting, and the very first one would have no doubt been
>> interrupted by playoff music just as the guy started talking about his dead
>> daughter.
>>
>> Even the cheesy “game show” had a pretty good pay off with Glen Close (I
>> saw on the after show that they did set that up with her in advance, but
>> did not expect her to actually do the dance).
>>
>> Nice to see our friend Jon Batiste get his Oscar moment, and he briefly
>> shared the stage with QuestLove.
>>
>> I saw on Twitter a lot of complaining about a seemingly rushed In
>> Memoriam, and especially the decision to move Best Picture ahead of Best
>> Actress and Actor. It did kind of seem like they were anticipating closing
>> on an emotional note of Chadwick Bozeman winning posthumously, instead
>> ending with a bit of an anticlimax.
>>
>> Still, overall I thought it was a good show, with mostly great nominated
>> films and performances, even if it will inevitably be the lowest rated
>> Oscars in history.
>> --
>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TVorNotTV" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/23c91d78-37c8-460a-b179-e962b654148fn%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAH5J8yyK3nUfW2c7gyDcq6fE0VJ0wXSyUf%3DUo1p4xrnWZWdMLw%40mail.gmail.com.

[TV orNotTV] Re: Oscars So Good

2021-04-26 Thread 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV 
In an opinion that I'm sure will shock no one, I thought it was one of the 
most inept and pointless spectacles I've ever witnessed, and will, 
hopefully, kill the Oscarcast for the future.

There was almost nothing to recommend it. The format was dull, the speeches 
too long, and -- even moreso than usual -- had no reason to exist. While I 
certainly don't want the return of the Billy Crystal years, with lousy 
renditions of mediocre songs, forced banter, and skits, I also don't want a 
spectacle that has all the panache and verve of a presidential funeral. 

Probably the most baffling part of the whole farrago was the music quiz, 
which would have been bad enough in any telecast, but really entered sore 
thumb territory because of its timing (2:40 into an interminable 
broadcast), and the decision to suddenly decide to do written material (And 
then it was -that-?).

Obviously, fate -- and the voters -- didn't play along with the intended 
finale, but there should have been a contingency plan. If Hopkins's 
presence was verboten because -- like any sensible octogenarian, he didn't 
want to sit in a London theatre in the middle of the night on the off 
chance he might win -- then there should have been a Plan B that went 
beyond Phoenix's more-baffled-by-life-than-usual signoff. (One of the many, 
many things that prove the ineptitude of the Oscars -- other than, yet 
again, choosing a mediocre-at-best film as the "best" -- is that Phoenix 
has one.)

While I did like the set design and attempt to keep things intimate, the 
processed video (described by Harry Shearer as looking like VHS) was 
pointless and ruined most of the effects.

I'm trying to somehow end this on a positive note, but I'll be damned if I 
can think of anything in the whole twelve hours of the telecast that worked.

--Dave Sikula

On Sunday, April 25, 2021 at 9:10:30 PM UTC-7 PGage wrote:

> I thought they did a great job on this show. Union Station is a great 
> space (nice to have Harrison Ford reference Blade Runner there), and would 
> be great to retain some sense of the grouped tables even when they return 
> to the big auditorium, which is a call back to the Oscar origins.
>
> Mostly though, I loved that they did not place such a hard limit on the 
> speeches. They saved time with shorter walk ups to the podiums, and moving 
> the songs to the pre-show, and not having any opening monologue or 
> production number (besides that long walking shot), bit still went over 
> about 17 min, but for me very worth it. A number of the speeches were 
> heartfelt and interesting, and the very first one would have no doubt been 
> interrupted by playoff music just as the guy started talking about his dead 
> daughter.
>
> Even the cheesy “game show” had a pretty good pay off with Glen Close (I 
> saw on the after show that they did set that up with her in advance, but 
> did not expect her to actually do the dance). 
>
> Nice to see our friend Jon Batiste get his Oscar moment, and he briefly 
> shared the stage with QuestLove.
>
> I saw on Twitter a lot of complaining about a seemingly rushed In 
> Memoriam, and especially the decision to move Best Picture ahead of Best 
> Actress and Actor. It did kind of seem like they were anticipating closing 
> on an emotional note of Chadwick Bozeman winning posthumously, instead 
> ending with a bit of an anticlimax. 
>
> Still, overall I thought it was a good show, with mostly great nominated 
> films and performances, even if it will inevitably be the lowest rated 
> Oscars in history. 
> -- 
> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/23c91d78-37c8-460a-b179-e962b654148fn%40googlegroups.com.