The Telecast

User avatar
rolotomasi99
Associate
Posts: 1913
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Postby rolotomasi99 » Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:05 am

Mister Tee wrote:
dws1982 wrote:Morgan Freeman, Helen Mirren, Meryl Streep would be good choices, but they might be a little bit old since the Academy is trying to court the young viewers.

Sadly, they probably would look at it that way...although it's hard to imagine a more perfect presenter than Morgan Freeman: a near-universally revered actor who's been in (and continues to be in, at least in subsidiary roles) major blockbusters.

Yeah, but then he slept with his step-grand-daughter, and things have been weird ever since. He is still admired as an artist, but much like Woody Allen or Roman Polanski there is the taint of his sexual proclivities surrounding him.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 3811
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN
Contact:

Postby ITALIANO » Thu Mar 03, 2011 11:58 am

TV directors - and I'm sure that the director of this particular tv program must have been chosen among the very best - are so quick, so smart, that I am sure he could have got the kiss if he had wanted to (or if he had been allowed to).

On Italian tv male-to-male (or female-to-female) kissing is so frequent, so fashionable even, that despite its good intentions it has become almost irritating. Like in the Oscar case, it's most of the times between two obviously straight persons, and because of this it's completely unthreatening, so I can only hope that this isn't a case of censorship (though I am afraid it was).

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12333
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Postby OscarGuy » Thu Mar 03, 2011 11:39 am

There's an article over on Hollywood Reporter about it and producer Bruce Cohen spoke on the matter. He said it was an unscripted moment and that the original intention was to cut from them walking in to a close up of Cruz and back to the podium. However, the fact that the transition was lengthened until they returned to the podium suggests purposeful ignorance. After all, they said it would have been a great "spontaneous moment" for the show. Would it?

They have all those monitors going up there, they can see what's going on and they could have cut back immediately and gotten most of what was going on. The problem I see is that Cohen, who either wasn't paying any attention or is blatantly being dishonest, or just wasn't in the trailer, said he didn't even know there was a kiss...yet, there's a legitimate photo out there...and it looks like a professional one at that, so there is no way he couldn't have known or found out about it. Instead, he seems like it was something he had just found out about.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 3811
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN
Contact:

Postby ITALIANO » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:39 am

danfrank wrote:Here is a blog post about the censorship.

Intentional or not (I think intentional), not the smartest decision ever - in such a generally flat evening, they missed their chance of a front-page picture on newspapers all over the world.

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6060
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Postby Mister Tee » Wed Mar 02, 2011 6:29 pm

HarryGoldfarb wrote:
Mister Tee wrote:
dws1982 wrote:Sidney Poitier presented Best Picture the year that Braveheart won. He rambled on incoherently for a few minutes; made absolutely no sense.

He also (to travel back to the distant past) gave out the prize to Oliver!

Which means that, in both his appearances, what he read out made people say "What?!"

Really? wasn't "Oliver!" some kind of expected winner?

Not even close. All season The Lion in Winter had been viewed as the favorite, and when it won the DGA prize, it seemed a shoo-in. But Carol Reed of Oliver! became the first director to win the Oscar despite the DGA victory. Still, going into best picture, it was close: Oliver! had won director, art direction, sound and adapted score (plus a special award for choreography); Lion in Winter had taken actress, screenplay and score. Oliver!'s upending of the DGA for film in addition to director was the last stunning award of a night of surprises.




Edited By Mister Tee on 1299108635

danfrank
Temp
Posts: 358
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:19 pm
Location: Oakland, CA

Postby danfrank » Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:36 pm

Here is a blog post about the censorship.

Franz Ferdinand
Adjunct
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 3:22 pm
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Contact:

Postby Franz Ferdinand » Wed Mar 02, 2011 3:25 pm

HarryGoldfarb wrote:By the way, back to the ceremony... has anyone read something else about the (apparently) censored segment of Brolin and Bardem dancing and even kissing on stage? Did it really happened? According to what I read, while they were doing so, the camera went for a long shot of Cruz... People applauded it but no one saw it through TV. Was it a (truncated) expression of support for gay marriage or something? Haven't they made any comment? or for that matter, hasn't ABC?

I was going to ask the same thing. When they walked out and met in the middle, they clearly embraced and it looked to me like they started to dance, while the camera abruptly changed for a long shot of (the lovely) Cruz.

Also, what was Bardem laughing so hysterically about after the nominees were read? I couldn't help but laugh along.

HarryGoldfarb
Assistant
Posts: 812
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 4:50 pm
Location: Venezuela

Postby HarryGoldfarb » Wed Mar 02, 2011 2:20 pm

Mister Tee wrote:
dws1982 wrote:Sidney Poitier presented Best Picture the year that Braveheart won. He rambled on incoherently for a few minutes; made absolutely no sense.

He also (to travel back to the distant past) gave out the prize to Oliver!

Which means that, in both his appearances, what he read out made people say "What?!"

Really? wasn't "Oliver!" some kind of expected winner?

By the way, back to the ceremony... has anyone read something else about the (apparently) censored segment of Brolin and Bardem dancing and even kissing on stage? Did it really happened? According to what I read, while they were doing so, the camera went for a long shot of Cruz... People applauded it but no one saw it through TV. Was it a (truncated) expression of support for gay marriage or something? Haven't they made any comment? or for that matter, hasn't ABC?
Life is painless for the brainless.
- Fiyero

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6060
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Postby Mister Tee » Tue Mar 01, 2011 4:41 pm

dws1982 wrote:Sidney Poitier presented Best Picture the year that Braveheart won. He rambled on incoherently for a few minutes; made absolutely no sense.

He also (to travel back to the distant past) gave out the prize to Oliver!

Which means that, in both his appearances, what he read out made people say "What?!"

dws1982
Tenured
Posts: 2850
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Postby dws1982 » Tue Mar 01, 2011 4:38 pm

Sidney Poitier presented Best Picture the year that Braveheart won. He rambled on incoherently for a few minutes; made absolutely no sense.

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12333
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Postby OscarGuy » Tue Mar 01, 2011 11:19 am

Actually, it wasn't I who posted the Deadline Hollywood article. That was Wes.
Wesley Lovell

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15195
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:57 am

HarryGoldfarb wrote:
Mister Tee wrote:I guess these days it's hard to come up with the preferred profile -- Oscar winners who are also big stars -- but couldn't they at least try Julia Roberts or George Clooney? Who else would anyone suggest?

It's not that hard to find deserving people to do the honor. It's just the producers are lousy.

Previous classic winners, maybe a couple of winners from the 60's like Julie Andrews and Cliff Robertson or Maximilian Schell. Or maybe Julie Christie and Sidney Poitier. Even Barbra alone! (instead of putting her to present Best Song! She's iconic enough to present Best Picture!). Or even Maggie Smith on her own too (with a short but elegantly edited montage of her films showing her from Othello to Harry Potter...)

Or maybe some veterans from the 70's like Gene Hackman with Jane Fonda. Even a couple made of Hoffman and Field would be classy enough for me... better than this craziness of Tom Hanks (or Tom Cruise presenting Best Director!)

I doubt they'd ask Robertson. He looks like death warmed over these days, and Hackman is apparently retired in the Norma Shearer/Greta Garbo/Irene Dunne manner - not interested in making public appearances.

The Oscars have a rule that presenters (except for nominees or previous year's winners) can;t appear on other awards shows prior to the Oscars, which let out Jane Fonda this year.

I doubt we'll get to see Maggie Smith unless she's nominated, she may well be next year. They got Cate Blanchett to present this year because there were I think three Aussie nominees (two in acting). Maybe if Maggie Smith and Vanessa Redgrave are nominated next year, they'll be able to entice more British stars like Julie Christie and Judi Dench to do the honors. As for Maximilian Schell and Sidney Poitier, I think if they gave them Best Picture or Director they might do it. For the most part, though, you're going to continue to see stars of upcoming films there if not to promote their new films outright at least to remind people that they're around.

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15195
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:48 am

Mister Tee wrote:Did anyone ever put forth a reason why Christoph Waltz and Mo 'Nique weren't there to present? Conflicts, or were they deemed not impressive enough for the duty? Mo 'Nique's absence was especially notable, given her appearance announcing the nominees. (Speaking of which -- what do you say to Melissa Leo filling that job next year? I assume when hell freezes over...)

Yes, it was in the lead-in to the Deadline Hollywood article that you refused to read Saturday. Wesley posted the article on CinemaSight after Nikki Finke removed the lead-in which got her barred from attending the show.

Waltz is filming Roman Polanski's new film in Paris with Kate Winslet and Jodie Foster. Mo'Nique refused to participate despite multiple requests. Maybe she didn't want to answer any more questions about her hairy legs showing through her evening gown. (that last part was mine)

And, no, I don't think they'll ask Sally, er Melissa, to announce the nominees next year.

User avatar
Sonic Youth
Laureate
Posts: 7375
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Postby Sonic Youth » Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:47 am

OscarGuy wrote:Waltz was filming in Europe, and I'm guessing Mo'Nique did the nominations announcement and decided she was through with it. Mo'Nique also has shown what type of person she is, I think. Giving a great performance and winning an Oscar does not make you a national treasure.

No, those who fancy themselves National Treasures are the one's who continuously return to the Oscars year after year, primping themselves up in the lastest fashions, and making sure they insert their lovely selves in our faces. She had other work commitments and couldn't get out of them, is all.

I suppose if Mo'nique really did fancy herself a national treasure, she wouldn't have bothered with the Oscars at all and not have co-announced the nominations. But you can't win for losing, can you?




Edited By Sonic Youth on 1298994496
"What the hell?"
Win Butler

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12333
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Postby OscarGuy » Tue Mar 01, 2011 7:21 am

Helen Mirren appeared in Red, which is already in line to get a sequel, plus she appeared in the last National Treasure film. Meryl has some serious box office cred as well, so both would be determined big enough to do the honors, methinks. You could also add the likes of Judi Dench or Jeff Bridges to the list. Perhaps even bring back Jack Nicholson (also notably absent at the Oscars this year)

They could always get Jerry Bruckheimer or Michael Bay to present it. ;)

And, as an FYI, I just heard from a "Hollywood Correspondent" on one of our radio local morning shows (Mike Evans if you've heard of him) who said the Academy has said that because Leo dropped the "F-bomb" she won't be invited to present next year. I think that's a bit reactionary, and I'm sure they'll renege on that, but...

Waltz was filming in Europe, and I'm guessing Mo'Nique did the nominations announcement and decided she was through with it. Mo'Nique also has shown what type of person she is, I think. Giving a great performance and winning an Oscar does not make you a national treasure.
Wesley Lovell

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin


Return to “83rd Nominations and Winners”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest