Academy Award Party Thread!

[kh92463]

He is so freakin HOT and I'm so glad he won!

[MickeS]

Was it just me, or did they go crazy with the montages this year? They seemed to be showing clips before and after every award. Yeah it's the 80th Oscars, but geez... 80 isn't normally THAT celebrated is it? Yes, we get it, there were Oscars before this one! Who knew?

[eddyj]

Probably a result of the strike, since the montages do not require writers...

[Joules1111]

Originally Posted by eddyj

Probably a result of the strike, since the montages do not require writers...

But the strike is over, no?

[eddyj]

Originally Posted by Joules1111

But the strike is over, no?

But they did not have a lot of lead time. I suspect this show has been in the works for months, and the strike was just over a couple of weeks ago.

[Joules1111]

Originally Posted by eddyj

But they did not have a lot of lead time. I suspect this show has been in the works for months, and the strike was just over a couple of weeks ago.

They made a couple of jokes reference montages (like the binocular one and waking from a bad dream) but I'd think most of the other ones were intentional and not a result of the writer's strike. Unless, of course, the jokes were tongue-in-cheek and indicated that they were STILL having to do a lot of montages BECAUSE of the writer's strike.

[Neenahboy]

Maybe it was just me, but I felt there were either just as many or less montages than in previous years (yes, there usually are that many).

Originally Posted by eddyj

But they did not have a lot of lead time. I suspect this show has been in the works for months, and the strike was just over a couple of weeks ago.

It's actually only been in the planning stages for 1-2 months tops, and they had two teams of writers instead of the usual one in place as soon as the strike broke. Aside from the binocular montage, I think they were all intentional. Also, keep in mind that more can be expected in a milestone year like this (it was the 80th, after all).

[jsmeeker]

Originally Posted by laststarfighter

Random thoughts

• I am a little disturbed that shaky-cam Borne Ultimatum won for "Best Film Editing." I think this means there is no end to shaky-cam any time soon. I'm still recovering from my headache from Cloverfield.

Camera work would be a cinematography thing. Not an editing thing.

[laststarfighter]

Originally Posted by jsmeeker

Camera work would be a cinematography thing. Not an editing thing.

Yeah, I know but it doesn't help my head when you combine quick cuts with those shaky-cam close ups.

[That Don Guy]

Originally Posted by QueenBee

Were there only 3 cartoons made this year?

No, but since there were fewer than 16 with Oscar eligibility, only three were nominated in the category. (Had there been five nominees, Shrek the Third almost certainly would have been one, and probably either The Simpsons Movie or Meet the Robinsons as the other.)

Besides, they could have nominated every animated film from 2007 - do you really think the outcome would have been different?

-- Don

[That Don Guy]

Originally Posted by Neenahboy

Hmmmm, they haven't given a shoutout to the independent auditors yet, unless they think the Sid Ganis speech counts.

Actually, they stopped doing it a number of years ago (I think that clip with Robin Williams was the last time they were introduced onstage; way back when, they were introduced when the rules were read at the beginning of the show). When they showed celebrities on the red carpet during the opening credits, rather than having an entire half-hour show dedicated to it, they would mention the two or three PriceWaterhouseCoopers (for those of you who don't know, Price, Waterhouse merged with Coopers & Lybrand a few years ago) accountants with the envelopes.

They showed them during one of the pre-shows this year, although it might have been the Richard Roeper-hosted one that aired only in the west while the Barbara Walters special aired in the east.

-- Don

[smak]

I'm still wondering what would have happened if No Country For Old Men won best editing.

-smak-

[appleye1]

Originally Posted by atrac

Judging by the lack of interest in a thread on here, I'd say this is going to be a low ratings year for the Oscar.

Not exactly right about the thread, but you were dead on on the ratings.

The 80th anniversary edition of the Academy Awards, dominated by European stars and films that played poorly at the box office, averaged 32 million viewers, entering the record books on Monday as the least watched Oscar telecast ever....

Sunday's broadcast, with comedian Jon Stewart making his second appearance as Oscar host, now ranks as the smallest U.S. TV audience for the Oscars since 1974, when actual viewer totals first became available.

The national household rating of 18.7 also marks the lowest level by that measure going back to the very first televised Oscars in 1953.

By contrast, the most watched Oscar broadcast on record was the 1998 show, when the box-office blockbuster "Titanic" sailed off with a record-tying 11 awards, including the prize for best picture. Some 55 million Americans tuned in that year.

[cwoody222]

Originally Posted by cwoody222

My local affiliate forgot to switch back to HD for the last segment. Idiots.

When the Cohens got up for their director award there was an audio glitch... some folks from the control room or something were speaking. Not sure if it was on the HD feed too. Pretty funny. Just their reaction to the win and a woman asking "What's it about?"

I guess what I heard was a local error.

http://www.buffalonews.com/entertain...ry/284549.html

[Mr. Soze]

Cool ad, Sheryl. I didn't realize it was for American Express.

[nyny523]

Originally Posted by Mr. Soze

Cool ad, Sheryl. I didn't realize it was for American Express.

Yeah - it WAS pretty cool, right?