(UPDATE: Yes, it’s official. Check out the full AMPAS press release after the cut.)
Nikki Finke is reporting over at Deadline that the Academy has asked actors James Franco and Anne Hathaway to host the 83rd annual Academy Awards, and that the pair has accepted the offer. No official word yet and Finke is tossing around “looks like” in quotes, so take it with a grain for the moment. (How does it “look like” someone has accepted something, by the way?)
If true, the duo will follow on the heels of another tandem, Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin, who hosted for producers Bill Mechanic and Adam Shankman last year. Both Franco and Hathaway have films in the race this year (as Baldwin and Martin did last year with “It’s Complicated”), but in separate titles — “127 Hours” and “Love & Other Drugs.”
Franco is virtually a lock for a nomination this year. So that would be unique to say the least. Fittingly, Finke hedges her bets later in the report by noting, “That might be the main reason one or both of the stars decide to beg off.”
Hathaway probably turned heads at the Academy two years ago with her song and dance routine with host Hugh Jackman, and she also was tapped last year to reveal the nominees on live television with Academy president Tom Sherak. So it’s not surprising she’d be approached. Franco is an outside-the-box pick but he’s also quite the showman himself so it would be interesting.
What are your thoughts? A good choice? A bad choice? We’ve already run down our preferences but if you haven’t spoken up on the issue, feel free to use the space below to offer up your thoughts on who should host.
(Franco, by the way, recently participated on Variety’s actors on actors profiles, offering up praise for Mila Kunis in “Black Swan.”)
The official press release:
Beverly Hills, CA – James Franco and Anne Hathaway will serve as co-hosts of the 83rd Academy Awards®, Oscar telecast producers Bruce Cohen and Don Mischer announced today. Both have previously appeared on the telecast but not in hosting capacities.
“James Franco and Anne Hathaway personify the next generation of Hollywood icons— fresh, exciting and multi-talented. We hope to create an Oscar broadcast that will both showcase their incredible talents and entertain the world on February 27,” said Cohen and Mischer. “We are completely thrilled that James and Anne will be joining forces with our brilliant creative team to do just that.”
Franco, who currently can be seen in “127 Hours,” will be making his second appearance on an Oscar telecast. His other film credits include “Eat, Love, Pray,” “Date Night,” “Milk” and “Pineapple Express.” Franco is also known for his portrayals of Harry Osborn in the “Spider-Man” trilogy.
Hathaway will be making her fifth appearance on an Academy Awards telecast. She was recently seen in “Alice in Wonderland” and currently can be seen in “Love and Other Drugs.” Hathaway’s other film credits include “Bride Wars,” “Becoming Jane,” “The Devil Wears Prada” and “The Princess Diaries.” She was nominated for an Oscar in 2008 for her lead performance in “Rachel Getting Married.”
Academy Awards for outstanding film achievements of 2010 will be presented on Sunday, February 27, 2011, at the Kodak Theatre at Hollywood & Highland Center, and televised live on the ABC Television Network. The Oscar presentation also will be televised live in more than 200 countries worldwide.
[Photo: Just Jared]
Comments
56 responses to “Franco and Hathaway to host the Oscars”
In a weird way, you could say, this bodes really well for “King’s Speech”
I like them both but I feel the one draw back is that neither of them would poke fun at the actors, which is what I feel the best hosts do well.
@Matthew Starr, exactly. Also, I feel that they might fail in the comedy department, even though the two of them can be funny individually. I say, hire the SNL writers for the show–especially Tina Fey.
when are we going to fully realise that no one is ever happy when it comes to Oscar hosts, only thing guaranteed is a bunch of monday morning quarterbacking from critics.
I feel its almost irrelevant if these 2 are any good at it. I have enjoyed people who get trashed the next day, Jon Stewart, Steve Martin, including last year.
But the most boring, Hugh Jackman was praised to the high skies letting me know its a different type of breed these oscar afficionados.
I’ll pass. This is silly, just get Wanda Sykes, Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart, Ellen or Chris Rock to host these.
The only plus side to Franco and Hathaway is that Franco might be midly entertaining since he will likely be high as a kite while doing them.
Interesting and unique so I can’t really knock it. I like both performers, particularly Hathaway who has this likable quality that I can’t explain. Be weird though if Franco is a lock and he will be hosting.
I think this sounds not half bad.
I don’t like the idea of a nominee hosting. Feels kind of like a conflict of interests. Simply a stunt to bring in younger viewers.
And once again I shall say…
KEVIN SPACEY.
AMPAS (@theacademy) just tweeted it which must mean it’s official.
Wow. I’m not sure what to think.. But it’s certainly something different, at least, so why not?
I can see Hathaway…but Franco? He’s just so…uncharismatic…
Posted this elsewhere but I am so annoyed I’ll repost here. I don’t understand why they bend over backwards to try and attract a teen market. Everything they’ve done recently has been designed to attract a larger (and primarily younger) viewing audience. Young people have the teen choice awards, or MTV awards, they don’t care about this.
Who cares about viewing figures for the Oscar telecast anyway? It doesn’t need to attract advertisers and it’s not as if it’s ever going to struggle in its time slot anyway. No rational person can possibly think these two will be better than Steve Martin, Billy Crystal or even Whoopi Goldberg. Neither are natural comedians, which kind of helps when you hosting an entertainment show. Neither will command the stage either. Neither has the gravitas.
I can imagine the horribly embarrassing song and dance routine now – a la the one Anne Hathaway was involved in with Hugh Jackman. This sucks.
Let’s get Taylors Swift and Lautner to cohost next year and really try and corner that young crowd. What a sick joke. Way to go to ruin a perfectly enjoyable night’s viewing.
The AMPAS press release just dropped, so it’s official. I’m out and about, otherwise I’d link the release here.
Well, I guess we’ve both seen them host SNL, so it’s not completely thinking outside the box after Martin and Baldwin, and considering all the Tina Fey buzz.
My guess is still NPH. He’s likeable, a good showman, and last year’s opening could well have been a sort of audition for the big part.
And I’ll say it again: Tina Fey and Jon Stewart or Emma Thompson and Hugh Laurie.
Yes, it’s official, Franco and Hathaway will host. They are young, they are cute, that doesn’t hurt; with the right material I think they can be funny too. Might not be a bad idea…
Bring back Billy Crystal. Please.
Otherwise, I’m actually pretty ok with these choices.
I like the pairing, but also find it uncomfortable that a likely nominee will be hosting. I know this was brought up last year with Alec Baldwin and It’s Complicated, but that buzz died down soon after the movie screened while Franco is clearly in the running.
Maybe they could consider not submitting Franco on the reminder list for 127 Hours or something, but obviously I doubt that will happen. On a somewhat related note, I wonder if I am the only one who feels that, while Franco is good in 127 Hours, he did the best work of his career in Howl.
@Adam,
For the love of all things holy, don’t compare Franco and Hathaway to the likes of Taylor Swift, Lautner, Bieber and so on. Yes, comparatively speaking they are all young compared to the median age of Oscar hosts, but it’s not like teens have posters of Franco or Hathaway on their walls. I can’t imagine them hosting the Oscars having an enormous impact in drawing a younger audience. And while neither may be comedians in the broadest sense, they’ve both certainly done comedy to great success. With the right material, who knows?
All I’m saying is, why trash them sight unseen and demand the same old hosts instead of giving them a chance? It’s not like any host has ever really, truly ruined a show singlehandedly, so why not embrace something that at the very least is different from the usual?
If anyone (either critics of the choice or producers of the telecast ) thinks that hiring Franco & Hathaway as hosts has anything to do with attracting a teen audience, he doesn’t know much about teens. They may be among the youngest hosts ever*, but they’re certainly not “teen idols.”
* Jerry Lewis, Diana Ross and Goldie Hawn were all 30 when they co-hosted in ’56, ’74 and ’76 respectively.
Hello Graysmith. ;-)
I think this choice is interesting, gutsy, but a little desperate, too.
I feel that Hathaway has the charm, singing, dancing, comedic timing, and audience projection to pull it off.
Franco, though I really like him, I have doubts with.
Well, I’ll say this much: Hottest. Oscar. Hosts. Ever.
If Franco hosted on his own I’d watch, he’s just so naturally charismatic and funny, but duoing him with Hathaway might produce good results. The two seem like they’d play well together, and unlike last year’s ceremony, the pairing of man and woman may fair better in terms of jokes and staging of a special song-and-dance, maybe.
@graysmith and Paul,
I completely agree that this won’t attract a younger audience I’m simply stating that the producers in their deluded wisdom *think* this will attract a younger audience. After all, these are the sort of people that think people want to watch interpretive dance.
I mean, let’s get serious, you poll a thousand people who watch the Oscars every year who they’d have liked to host this one and how many do you think would have mentioned James Franco?
There’s a very good reason the answer to that would be zero.
Maybe – maybe – one person would have said Anne Hathaway. It’s just as bizarre though.
This will be just as successful as that ‘inspired’ idea to have Hugh Jackman host, which is to say not very.
Ehh, this will be lame, but it doesn’t matter. None of the big stars go to the Oscars anymore unless they’re nominated anyway. I bet money that Clooney, Pitt, Jolie, Roberts, Cruise, Smith, Washington, etc. won’t show up.
I think it’s a bad decision.
One, neither has proven to be able to do something like this (SNL or live theatre don’t really count).
Two, it’s so clearly a demo grab that will have the opposite intended effect or no effect at all. Tina Fey was the way to go.
Hey AMPAS, if you want higher ratings for the Oscars you need to have popular films nominated. It’s pretty cut and dry.
If James replicates his character from Pineapple Express while on stage and gets Seth Rogen and crew to join him in some shenanigans it could be entertaining.
Like I said though the major problem is that as actors they most likely won’t make fun of other actors.
One of my favorite bits in past years was when Billy Crystal did that “what are they thinking” routine with various audience members like Russell Crowe and Arnold. Just seeing their facial expressions was gold.
One person who I would have always liked to host is Patton Oswalt. Sure he may look like a bridge troll (his words not mine) but his geekiness of film juxtaposed with his great sense of humor always made me wonder how good of a Oscar host he could be. But that’s just me.
@Guy: There’s that, too. Haha.
Someone just get in a lot of laughs, good lines, and genuine chemistry between this two, and we’re in business. Personally, I can’t see this as a ploy to hook in younger viewers, maybe if they did this at the height of Hathaway’s Princess Diaries-inspired fame or Franco’s Spiderman run, but now? With Lautner, Stewart, and Pattinson, I don’t think so.
They’re good artists, individually. I think it’s safe to say that it’d be interesting, and worth one try, at least.
And ditto to ‘the other Mike’. The Oscar-watching public doesn’t really end up being 100% satisfied with whoever is chosen as the host, so it’s probably for the best to give everyone doing the job a bit of a break.
Will having Franco host make voters more or less likely to vote for him?
This is different so I fully support.
Hathaway and Franco are young, smart Hollywood. And with movies like Inception and The Social Network in the best picture conversation, the Academy is leaning that way as well with the show.
I don’t know why everyone else is so up in arms… I think it’s a nice change of pace for the AMPAS to think outside the box, and not only that, but to choose two young, charismatic and attractive young actors to host. I admit, Franco being the host/nominee is somewhat awkward, but Franco doesn’t strike me as the type to be a poor sport about losing, and I don’t think he even has an Oscar win or even nomination on his mind.
Did I mention they’re both attractive? Sorry, but I could watch Franco all damn day long! And Anne is naturally radiant, and was very funny both times she hosted SNL. TEAM FRATHAWAY!
I can’t say it’s a bad idea, it just feels awkward. These are young stars, not older character actors who’d likely go into a safe comedic routine about themselves not being all that attractive and being as old as the Academy ceremony. If I were Hathaway I wouldn’t do this, Hollywood is cruel to women. Although, I think she’d do a fine job, you want to be seen as a serious actress, and this sort of lowers that perception. Franco can do whatever he pleases, his affiliation with the gay community hasn’t adversely affected his career, he should go for it.
I like this in theory, but hope they figure out how to do the duo thing better than last year. But I will say having a likely nominee host it is very odd and a bit unsettling.
If Anne Hathaway’s SNL impression of Katie Holmes is any indication, she shouldn’t have too much trouble poking fun at her fellow actors.
These are definitely some outside of the box choices. I do quite like both of them, so I’m cautiously optimistic.
As a teenager, I’m wondering if this is some kind of attempt to get some younger audiences? I don’t think this will have an effect, if that is what they are going for.
I think it’d be fun if a host is a nominee as well, makes it seem more.. I can’t think of a word, just that I like the idea. There’s that unpredictability that if Franco wins he has to run out from backstage (although I’m guessing for that part he’ll have a seat in the audience?). Although one shouldn’t get ahead of one’s self just yet.. But I like it, it makes it seem more intimate, somehow, like the host is part of it all in a whole other way rather than being an “outsider”.
The hosts should not be up for awards, period. Hosts act as facilitators, cheerleaders. It’s declasse to celebrate onseself; you let other people do that.
I guess everybody else said no.
To Guy’s point, I never found Hathaway to be “hot.” She’s rather quite plain.
This is surreal. I…like it. though I kind of hope Franco backs out, and they have Hathaway host by herself.
A good host is someone you could drink with (or hang out with). I, personally, don’t feel that way about Franco or Hathaway. Not my crowd thus I’m not interested in that being the vibe the show is going for.
@Guy Lodge
agreed.
So many LOL-worthy replies to this announcement.
I get the feeling that once Franco is nominated, he will back out.
I want to read those actor on actor pieces on Variety but of course they are the only pay site in the film world. Good work guys no one can read your content!
I’m fine with them.. Looking forward to see something new… I didn’t enjoy the tandem of Alec and Steve last time… They were very predictable…
Though I thought Tina and Steve will be awesome…
I just don’t want a sure nominee this year like James to be on stage hosting… Why not let him relax at the front row?
I like both, and think it could go pretty well. Both are good comedic actors with Hathway having most her films being comedies, and Franco with Freaks and Geeks and Pineapple Express. I think it could work. It is weird, though, having Franco host and most likely being nominated. It was pretty funny though when NPH lost, and he tried to break the awkwardness.
It’s also good to see two of the younger actors in Hollywood, a theme that has been big this year. The Social Network, 127 Hours, Winter’s Bone, Blue Valentine, Black Swan, and Never Let Me Go all feature a young cast and/or leads which could produce nominations. This may turn out to be the year of the kids.
@Matthew Starr- Yeah, I hate Variety for that reason. Good thing Deadline breaks most things now a days.
I wanted Tina and Steve too… or even Tina by herself or with anyone… but oh well. This shouldn’t be terrible…
It just makes no sense that they get actors to talk about other roles they enjoyed this season and the only people that can read it are industry folk.
Can’t imagine any of us commoners paying $400 a year or whatever to read Variety online. Do they know even know what is going on in the online film journalism world to be charging such prices? Or hell charging ANYTHING at all.
Here is what Julia Roberts said about Natalie Portman in Black Swan
http://www.okmagazine.com/2010/11/julia-roberts-praises-natalie-portmans-black-swan-performance/