POLL: What did you think of the Oscarcast?

Posted by · 7:41 am · February 23rd, 2009

Very easy thumbs up, thumbs down poll this week.  But please, keep your opinions of the winners out of it.  We’re interested in what you thought of the actual show.  Let Bill Condon and Larry Mark know what you thought in the sidebar poll.

→ 27 Comments Tags: , , , | Filed in: Daily

27 responses so far

  • 1 2-23-2009 at 7:44 am

    Bill said...

    Hugh Jackman was good, the screenplay presentation was very cool, and the 5 presenters for the acting honors was quite nice.

    But Bill Maher acted like a douchebag and should never have been invited to present. How could he be wondering why he wasn’t nominated while behaving like that?

  • 2 2-23-2009 at 7:59 am

    Simon Crowe said...

    Summarizing what I wrote on my blog: Jackman did well and provided a good deal of energy and humor that has been missing in recent years. The presentation of the acting awards was way too self-congratulatory, all of these people already know they’re pretty. If you want to feature past winners and classic stars, scatter them throughout the ceremony as presenters. The acting presentations and the irrelevant number with Beyonce took time away from music; the original score stuff felt tacked on and the absence of Peter Gabriel must be regarded as a major embarrassment. (Especially since you know this would have been handled differently if Springsteen had been among the nominees.)

  • 3 2-23-2009 at 8:16 am

    McGuff said...

    Things I agree with Simon about: Jackman’s energy, Beyonce’s uselessness, and the embarassing absence of Peter Gabriel.

    Things I disagree with Simon about: everything else.

  • 4 2-23-2009 at 8:36 am

    Jon said...

    First half an hour or so was excellent. It was all downhill from there with some decent moments sprinkled throughout.

    The Beyonce/Jackman segment was plain useless, the musical is not back because Mamma Mia made money.

  • 5 2-23-2009 at 8:41 am

    Midy said...

    I thought the presentation of the acting awards was quite wonderful. Just a lovely way of inducting the nominees into the club.

  • 6 2-23-2009 at 8:49 am

    Ronn said...

    “In Memoriam” was a TV disaster I thought. I can imagine it was wonderful Live though.

    Bringing 5 previous winners out as an inclusion into “The Club” was absolutely brilliant. It made it feel even more of an honor then it clearly already is.

    The Beyonce song and dance number was pointless. I’m sure it filled Peter Gabriel’s spot but if length of show is an issue then get rid of that wasted 4 minutes.

    Hugh Jackman is just hard not to like. I give him credit for diving in like that.

    All in all… I wasn’t disappointed with the event.

  • 7 2-23-2009 at 8:51 am

    Ronn said...

    I also forgot to mention that they did an excellent job of showing the sadness in the eyes of so many different people in the audience while Kim Ledger gave his speech. It was deeply moving seeing the pain in people eyes. Great, great job in capturing those moments.

  • 8 2-23-2009 at 8:56 am

    Ryan said...

    I loved it. One of the better ceremonies I’ve seen in awhile. Hugh Jackman was a delight and I highly enjoyed the presenting of the acting categories. Very emotional, very personal, and just plain lovely.

    Sure there’s a few bits and pieces that were meh, but overall it was a great ceremony.

  • 9 2-23-2009 at 8:59 am

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    Not sure why it wasn’t registering but it’s there now guys.

  • 10 2-23-2009 at 9:01 am

    McGuff said...

    To anyone who has seen, and more, remembers a lot of these: is my intuition correct that this was the best series of acceptance speeches from the winning actors in a long time? I rewatched all of them this morning, and I think they all were delightful. Penn was poignant and self-aware. Winslet was beaming and emotional. Cruz was overcome with joy. The Ledgers were heartfelt.

    In the end, the acceptance speeches always become my favorite part of the night. This time around, they didn’t disappoint.

  • 11 2-23-2009 at 9:02 am

    Nicolas Mancuso said...

    I loved the presentation of the acting awards. It retained the last-year’s-winner tradition while making the nomination itself even more special.

    I did, however, think that it was exceedingly cheesy: “Philip, you masterfully brought this character to life in a way that profoundly touched my heart. Way to go, buddy. You are a true actor.” Or something like that.

    I think they should keep the format. It’s a great idea. But they can tweak it in future years to make it a little less over-the-top. Perhaps each presenter can say something a bit shorter, then introduce a clip that demonstrates what he/she has described. I did miss the clips. Very much. But I’m not as much of a bitch about it as Nikki Finke.

    I disliked the ghettoization of the music nominees, as well as the restless camera during the In Memoriam segment. Also, despite what Condon and Mark promised, the dead people were still forced to compete in a popularity contest.

    I did like the sequences of crafts categories. Brisk and to-the-point, but still singled out and celebrated the craftspeople the way they deserved, perhaps even more so than usual.

    Ultimately, I wasn’t blown away by the show like Kris was, but I thought it was good and a step in the right direction. And some elements were ingenious and should set new standards for the Oscar show.

  • 12 2-23-2009 at 9:03 am

    Edgar said...

    The show is better than the previous ones. I did’nt like that Javier Bardem and Daniel-Day Lewis was not there to pass on the title! They should put that in the actor’s contract if there is one.

    I like the bringing up the 5 previous winners! Great idea! Hugh Jackman is gay as ever!

    On to Meryl Streep for Julie and Julia!

  • 13 2-23-2009 at 9:09 am

    Michael Shetina said...

    “How could he be wondering why he wasn’t nominated while behaving like that?”

    Behaving like what? His documentary is ABOUT the dangers of religious irrationality, so what’s the problem? It’s refreshing when people say what they mean about religion rather than sugar coat it.

    Also, I loved the five past winners presenting, but do agree that they need to work on de-cheesifying them. That Eva Marie / Viola moment just about had me in tears as well, though.

    The intimate feel of the ceremony was a great touch, but next time, I can do without Hugh Jackman. Hearing Beyonce sing Irving Berlin was an experience I never want to relive.

  • 14 2-23-2009 at 9:17 am

    Josh Hall said...

    In response to Bill Maher comments – his documentary wasn’t particularly wonderful, but his presentation of the award wasn’t completely disastrous and he has a nice stage presence.

    Sure, the Beyonce segment was pointless, but the show would have been boring without it. I wanted more musical/variety show feel, actually. They did a good job for the most part, but those animation/romance/action montages were the most useless part of the evening.

    Also, I hate how they cheesily describe each pre/post production nominee AND announce them officially. Couldn’t they integrate these and speed things up? The use of one presenter for multiple categories was a nice efficiency touch, though.

    Overall a unremarkable evening, but I like where they went with the telecast. At least they’re trying something new.

  • 15 2-23-2009 at 9:22 am

    Ronn said...

    I actually thought the Bill Maher segment was hilarious because, in my opinion, he was making fun of himself. It came out in the tabloids, albeit true, after the Nominees were announced that he was unhappy he didn’t get a nom. To poke fun at himself and continue the joke I thought was funny. It’s like his words may have been off putting to some but I thought his demeanor and tone came across well, as in making fun of himself.

  • 16 2-23-2009 at 9:28 am

    Speaking English said...

    Had a marvelous time, and the winners gave some of the best speeches in years. Loved the Japanese guy! Mr. Roboto.

  • 17 2-23-2009 at 10:25 am

    Bing147 said...

    I was NOT a fan. The In Memoriam they managed to actually ruin. How do you do that? But the camera work was not only unneeded, it was terrible. I couldn’t read a number of the names. I recognized the people but if I hadn’t recognized, say for example, Cyd Charisse’s clip, I’d have never known it was her. Plus, the singing didn’t add anything and was slightly distracting, though Latifah sounded great.

    The genre clips, though funny at times, particularly the Apatow group’s things, were something more out of the MTV movie awards than the Oscars. And they showed impeccably bad taste in what was shown. I mean, Waltz With Bashir, a movie nominated for an award at the show, doesn’t get shown in the animation one yet Madagascar 2 and Star Wars get shown?

    The Ode to musicals was a disaster, Luhrmann looked embarassed after the fact. They have time for that but not for the nominated songs to actually be sung?

    Plus, it got really old seeing tween stars on the stage. I assure you, most Oscar viewers could care less about the stars of High School Musical.

    I didn’t hate it all. There were some very funny skits, the Pheonix one, the Pineapple Express one, I enjoyed the opening number though more in a sort of that’s alright way than a that’s fantastic way. Jackman had a lot of energy and pulled it off although he wasn’t great… The way of presenting the acting winners was kind of cool though I missed the clips and frankly, doing that in this category and not the others is borderline insulting. And there’s no way you could do that for every category, it’d take WAY too long.

  • 18 2-23-2009 at 10:39 am

    entertainmenttoday... said...

    For the most part the telecast was a good one. They got alot of things right and moved the show pretty good for a 3.5 hr event. Despite the fact that I still would have liked to see a comic host (One that touched on the current state of the country) Hugh Jackman was entertaining and highly likeable. There were many good moments and it really felt different. NO Jack Nicholson- Can’t remember when he wasn’t at the Oscars. I like Bill Maher alot but that was not the time or place for that remark especially coming after the late Heath Ledger’s award. Overall enjoyable.


  • 19 2-23-2009 at 11:29 am

    Kokushi said...

    To many facking dance numbers, it got boring after two, it was cool to see the past winners presenting the nominees but i wanted to see the clips of the performances.

  • 20 2-23-2009 at 3:13 pm

    Isaac Richter said...

    Am I the only who absolutely hated the acting presentations. That was one thing I felt should’ve been left as is, because I love it every year (seeing last year’s winners passing the torch, and the acting clips). The five-previous-winners idea was cool, but I hate the way it was executed. It was too long, it was cheesy, it was self-congratulatory, and I saw nothing of the performances, which is what they are rewarding and should be showing. I feel the way it was donw, it was just celebrities congratulating celebrities, instead of showing something for their performances. I want them to go back to the old format next year (though, from the reception I;m seeing, they might not).

  • 21 2-23-2009 at 3:14 pm

    Isaac Richter said...

    Loved the acting winners and their speeches, and there were some really cool presentations on the way, but I wanted to cringe every time the acting presentations cam along.

  • 22 2-23-2009 at 10:10 pm

    CJ said...

    I thought Hugh’s opening number was great fun and looked forward to more of the same but he was then given very boring material.
    Baz Lurhmanns so called musical number just reinforced what a hack he really is.

  • 23 2-24-2009 at 12:08 am

    Rebecca Parker said...

    I was not a fan of the five previous winners announcing the nominees. First and foremost, I missed the clips. I love when they show clips – it lets the actor’s work speak for itself, and also has the added benefit of shining a spotlight on movies people may have passed up (The Visitor is a perfect example of a movie that needed a spotlight). It also took too long and, with the exception of a few speeches, came across as the scripted BS the presenters usually give.

    I liked the singing during the In Memoriam, but the camera needed to stay in one place, and I was really disappointed to hear the clapping when I was promised I wouldn’t.

    Also, no more Beyonce. She is a famewhore and she totally overpowered everyone else in the musical montage. I was looking forward to hearing Amanda Seyfried sing again and Beyonce completely overpowered her.

    Also, more Hugh.

    Overall, I liked it but the clip issue just really made me angry.

  • 24 2-24-2009 at 12:09 am

    Ross said...

    I have to admit that I expected more.

    The good things:

    the acting presenters – it was a very good idea and it obviously worked and created some excitement and sense of being part of something (they had Sophia Lorren, Eve Marie Saint, Robert De Niro, Anthony Hopkins, Whoopie and it was really something great), BUT I didn’t like these long speeches about the nominees. I still prefer the clips.

    Hugh’s opening number was great fun really, but Baz Luhrman’s musical tribute was A-W-F-U-L! And I don’t think we needed to see the High School musical star appearing twice in a single night.

    Actually, WHY the number (7 minutes in length) and NO RESPECT FOR THE SONG NOMINEES, which got 90 seconds each?!!! That’s absurd! So they could have found time for this ridiculous tribute, but no time for the nominees? And that was in the year when they were expected to focus on the nominees? YEAH YEAH…

    And then again – acting presentations lasting for ten minutes (!) and the technical winners don’t get to speak!!!! That was ridiculous! They were pressed to choose somebody to speak for the group?! And most of them couldn’t even say thanks to their families?!! Ridiculous!

    No Honorary Oscar! That was a really bad thing! Why? It would have been done in 10 minutes, as much as the musical tribute or all these Actions in 2008, Comedies in 2008.

    And having a presenter announcing four categories in a row was kind of … meh!

    Anyway, I liked the set (it worked!), I liked the atmosphere Hugh created and I liked the sentimental feelings in the acting presentations! And I LOVE LOVE LOVE Steve Martin and Tina Fey!

  • 25 2-24-2009 at 12:49 am

    Tommy Jay said...

    Hugh Jackman was charming and the opening number was great. The Beyonce number with Hugh Jackman was not great and was embarrasing. talk about two people with zero chemistry together.

    I loved seeing five past winners present the Oscar, but wonder why they didn’t do that with the other categories. Surely you can find five past directors. And it would have been fun to have five animated characters presnt the animated movie. They should have stuck better with the theme.

    I was glad to see Jerry Lewis receive the humanitarian award, but he should have recieved the lifetime award for film. This was sort of an insult.

    Tina Fey and Steve Martin were hilarious and watching Jennifer Aniston squirm in front of Brad and Angelina was great fun.

    The part that made me the maddest was during the In Memoriam. Not only was it hard to see the people because of the way the camera was moving, but where was George Carlin!!! There were a couple of others missing too, but omitting Carlin was plain mean.

    And where was Jack Nicholson? Weird Oscars this year, but I liked it better than the past few years.


  • 26 2-24-2009 at 12:55 am

    Tommy Jay said...

    Oh yeah one more thing…Anne Hathaway. She belongs in her own category for babe of the year. She’s going to be a huge star.


  • 27 3-23-2009 at 10:00 pm

    John Goldeneagle said...

    The whole thing was brilliant in my book…definitely fresh. Lots of new ideas. Fantastic set and format, or maybe ‘unformat.’ It worked as a show. Favorite moment: Sean Penn’s wonderful joking scold about “you homo-loving commies” (or something like that). I can see why people would find him lovable. Best improvement, among so many: having previous year’s winners speak to the nominees. A little like we’re eavesdropping on their private awards banquet/tribal ceremony.
    Good job, guys.