# Poll: Oscar show format, acting awards **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 24, 2009, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126 "2009-02-24T00:02:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Rin\_Twisted](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/82dd89/32.png) [@Rin\_Twisted](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rin_Twisted)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 8:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/21 "2009-02-24T08:00:53Z")
No, unless some modifications were made. I’m in the camp with **panache45** and **Eyebrows 0f Doom** - an interesting idea that was marred by how drawn out it was. It made all the compliments seem disingenuous and self serving, as if the point became who do the most ego stroking in one go. If there was a time or word limit imposed, I’d be interested to see it implemented again. > [@Equipoise](#): > > The brain-damaged director and producers thought that viewers would rather see Broadway-inspired song and dance productions (HEY CONDOM, THESE AREN’T THE TONY AWARDS!) This is exactly what I thought when I watched the opening. Those mostly uninspired musical routines are what made me grateful I had just tivo’d the whole thing last night. I did watch Queen Latifah crooning “I’ll Be Seeing You” during the tribute section. I thought it was understated and classy. ---
**Author:** ![Sigmagirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c89c15/32.png) [@Sigmagirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sigmagirl)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/22 "2009-02-24T14:00:06Z")
Yes, with qualifications. I watch the Oscars to see Big Stars. To see five Big Stars welcoming another into their fold was a great idea. They should have talked less while they were doing it, and introduced a film clip that showed why the nominee was nominated. ---
**Author:** ![Atomicflea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/58956e/32.png) [@Atomicflea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atomicflea)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/23 "2009-02-24T14:03:34Z")
Yes. I thought it was touching. You folks are made of stone! _Stone_, I say! ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/24 "2009-02-24T14:15:43Z")
No. It felt like it took forever (did it take longer than the clips? I’m not sure. But it _felt_ long), it looked like it was some kind of creepy initiation (not the good kind of initiation, but the kind that ends with chalices of blood), and the ones I didn’t TiVo through sounded poorly written. It also didn’t seem like the Oscars. Maybe something could be done with the concept to make it work - but what we saw Sunday was not good television. ---
**Author:** ![Zeldar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b77776/32.png) [@Zeldar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeldar)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/25 "2009-02-24T14:21:27Z")
A strong yes. To my way of thinking the Oscars are about the actors. Even when some of the more meaningful awards go to technical types and even when the more interesting races are in other categories, I think the majority of the draw the program has is due to the actors. Giving the spotlight to each individual nominee by way of a peer’s pointed commentary on that specific role in the context of that actor’s career gives the person (four of the five) a preliminary letdown from not winning the statue, and in a way it acknowledges that “winning” such an award is really “winning” a popularity contest. Just showing a brief clip of that nominated performance is a slight compared to this approach. The added bonus for the audience is in seeing the prior winners of the category again, and that helps to put into perspective what the specific award is about. Now if they can just find a creative way to stop the acceptance speeches from being lists of every person that individual knows. BTW, I’m posting this before reading other posts. I hope I haven’t duplicated other comments. Also, this is the first Oscars-themed thread I’ve even read. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/26 "2009-02-24T14:30:47Z")
> [@amarinth](#): > > what we saw Sunday was not good television. Odd, then, that [viewing was up 13%](http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/feb/24/2009-oscars-ratings-up). ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/27 "2009-02-24T15:01:02Z")
For those of you who think it was forced and fake, would you like it if the comments read of the cue cards came from the people who nominated and/or voted for the person? If, say, the nomination portion of the process was accompanied by a blank space for the person nominating the actress to write in WHY they thought that actress deserved the award that year? And if that was made clear to the audience where these compliments were coming from? Not by naming names, perhaps, but just by saying, “One nominator said…” or “You are held in esteem for this performance because you…” For what it’s worth, I don’t think these made the show demonstrably longer. What made it longer was the fact that they didn’t cut off a single acceptance speech for time. And it wasn’t really that much longer than normal, was it? ---
**Author:** ![MyFootsZZZ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/myfootszzz/32/12580_2.png) [@MyFootsZZZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MyFootsZZZ)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/28 "2009-02-24T15:18:26Z")
Yes, Once again sighting **WhyNot’s** , ‘It’s an honor just to be nominated’, comment. For me, while watching the Oscars, the less tension the better. I really think this format made the audience in the theater less tense and more relaxed, and both of those things made it less tense for the TV audience. I can appreciate what others have said against it. I’m sure some could even say it’s better as a tense experience. Since opinions are obviously mixed, I think it just depends on the type of person you are. ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/29 "2009-02-24T15:27:08Z")
Exit polling indicates: Yes: 12 No: 11 Keep the votes coming! ---
**Author:** ![jali](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecae2f/32.png) [@jali](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jali)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/30 "2009-02-24T15:28:10Z")
Yes! I was touched by the sincere (IMO) introductions and since it’s a night of tribute to the film industry, I think it added a sweet touch. Great to see the former winners introduce the next contenders - I hope it stays. ---
**Author:** ![AllShookDown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d9b06d/32.png) [@AllShookDown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AllShookDown)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/31 "2009-02-24T15:35:56Z")
No, I’d rather see the clips. ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/32 "2009-02-24T15:51:28Z")
Yes! A ten-second clip of somebody being emotional or whatever doesn’t do anything for me. A description of why the _entire_ performance was worthy of a nomination tells me more. To give that description in the form of direct praise, using second person pronouns, to me is far better than a clip. It makes a nomination a true honor, not just a tiny bit of screen time. Having former winners deliver it gave it gravitas and star power. The parts I didn’t like were when the praise was for the actor and not the performance. ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/33 "2009-02-24T15:54:08Z")
For those of you who loved it, what about the other awards? Should we have Colleen Atwood, Ngila Dickson, Sandy Powell, Milena Canonero, and Alexandra Byrne stand in a semi-circle and read cue cards about the fabric choices? Would that be equally as touching? I’m sure that it would have been an honor for this years’ nominees. The direct praise from their peers and acknowledgement of their achievement would make it an honor to be nominated. Or would you rather see a couple of seconds of the costumes? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Superhero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Superhero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Superhero)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/34 "2009-02-24T16:26:43Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > It went untelevised for over 20 years. It’s a show business awards \*show \*for people in show business. . . ie, former theater and band geeks. I assure you they love the big production numbers and schmaltz as much as the plebes do. More, probably. The fact that it went untelevised for over 20 years seems to be more an accident of timing, given that the first twenty years or so of the awards occurred when most people didn’t have television. It’s sort of like saying that it means something that the Gettysburg Address wasn’t broadcast on the radio. I completely reject the idea that the Academy Awards are exclusively for the benefit of Show People and us “plebes” are lucky to be able to get a glimpse of the proceedings. All the pomp-and-circumstance is for the benefit of the television audience. It’s worth noting that it never occurred to the Academy to have the ceremony anywhere but the Roosevelt Hotel until they started showing the thing on television. As a former theater geek myself, I’m all for a bit of razzle-dazzle. But spending fifteen minutes on each acting award to listen to Joel Grey tell Josh Brolin that he’s a good actor - basically, elementary school-style “Everyone’s a winner!” writ large - bored the crap out of me. YMMV, obviously - but to claim that the awards show exists JUST for the Fabulous Show People involved seems disingenuous to me. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/35 "2009-02-24T16:29:41Z")
I didn’t watch it, but I imagine it would have been much more realistic - and entertaining - if the previous winners had said something along the lines of, “Well, you got it this year, bucky, but don’t think that your halfassed performance could hold a candle to my performance last year.” ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/36 "2009-02-24T16:29:49Z")
A qualified yes. It was a nice idea, handled clumsily. For every highly-personal tribute (MacLaine to Hathaway, Hopkins to Pitt) was a less-personal cue-card speech that was either goofy (Gooding to Downey) or stilted and weird (Brody to Jenkins). It would have been better if they’d managed to find some individualized connection for every actor being honored. On the other hand, I really appreciated that they dug back into their legacy and invited stars of the past, like Eva Marie Saint, instead of just familiar faces from the last few years. Hollywood is terrible about discarding its faded beauties; my favorite thing about this format is that it was a nod not just to the current nominee but to the stars of previous decades. That said, as noted above, it was clumsily executed, and the implicit placement of the other categories on a lower tier, recognition-wise, stung a bit. I mean, the “Pineapple Express” sketch definitely demonstrated why you ask the actors to do the talking, and you don’t let the cinematographers do the presentation; I presume the technical specialists would have been even less polished. On the other hand, directors and writers are frequently well-spoken people, and even a few editors, like Walter Murch, can hold the camera effortlessly. Meh. Re the clips, I personally don’t need them; I’ve seen almost all the movies and know what the work was like. (Watching _Rachel Getting Married_, I leaned over to my girlfriend at one point and whispered, “There’s the Oscar clip.”) On the other hand, I know I’m in the minority for having seen most of the nominees, and it serves a useful purpose for the wider audience to get a taste of the less-well-known movies. Nobody needs to see Heath Ledger again, but it’d be great if we could pick out forty to sixty seconds of Melissa Leo’s brilliant performance, in the hope that more people would be intrigued enough to check out that phenomenal film. Net judgment: I liked it, but it had problems, and I don’t know that it should be repeated. ---
**Author:** ![Borborygmi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/borborygmi/32/217_2.png) [@Borborygmi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Borborygmi)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/37 "2009-02-24T16:29:54Z")
No. I love the idea; I’m sure it looked good on paper. Glad they tried it. But it just didn’t work. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/38 "2009-02-24T16:42:42Z")
> [@The\_Superhero](#): > > The fact that it went untelevised for over 20 years seems to be more an accident of timing, given that the first twenty years or so of the awards occurred when most people didn’t have television. Well, that is true! But my point was that they still held ceremonies for Academy members long before they shared it with the rest of the world. If it was exclusively for the viewing audience, they wouldn’t have had award ceremonies before there was broadcast television. As it was, the first Academy Awards show wasn’t televised until more than 10 years after commercial television existed. The form and details may change because of who’s watching, but there would still be some ceremony should they chose to eliminate outside-the-Academy observers. > [@](#): > > I completely reject the idea that the Academy Awards are exclusively for the benefit of Show People and us “plebes” are lucky to be able to get a glimpse of the proceedings. > \ > YMMV, obviously - but to claim that the awards show exists JUST for the Fabulous Show People involved seems disingenuous to me. Well, that’s good, 'cause so do I. In other words, nice straw man. Throw in a few “exclusives” and "JUST"s and you can make anyone’s argument look absurd. Let me be more clear: the awards show contains elements that are intended to appeal to the people being awarded, to the people watching the ceremony live in the theater \*and \*to the people sitting on their couches at home. ---
**Author:** ![AmericanMaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@AmericanMaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AmericanMaid)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/39 "2009-02-24T17:01:07Z")
Yes I found it touching. But it was awkward seeing Cuba Gooding Jr. on that stage since he has done nothing but crap since his win. ---
**Author:** ![Zeldar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b77776/32.png) [@Zeldar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeldar)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126/40 "2009-02-24T17:07:28Z")
> [@AmericanMaid](#): > > Yes > > I found it touching. But it was awkward seeing Cuba Gooding Jr. on that stage since he has done nothing but crap since his win. AMEN! His stealing the spotlight was so like Joe Scarborough or Chris Mathews or Bill O’Reilly. It’s not about you, jerk! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poll-oscar-show-format-acting-awards/487126.md?page=3)