Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

Jefforey Smith wrote:I liked the infusion of humor & little random comments during the ceremony. It was a nice change of pace. Sometimes it's so serious & solemn.

I agree with this. I like the presentation. Although I don't think they should be doing it EVERY year.

Why are you on a naval base? Practicing maneuvers?

As predicted, it was totally amateur hour. The jokes were not funny (a Meryl Streep gag, really?). Stone announcing that the Best Supporting Actor roster were all past winners took away any sense of surprise that might've been included (like a first-time nominee--poor MM or Dwight Henry sitting at home watching that). Seth McFarlane seemed incredibly full of himself, too. There was an air of class that was entirely absent and I missed the gravitas of having a former nominee/winner on hand. Fail.

I thought the deviation from the alphabetical order was annoying and pointless. Like OscarGuy, I'd already figured out the combinations that would alert to shakeups in each category (Sally Field announced first would most likely result in a Kidman/Smith round out) and was thrown off.

All in all, I thought it sucked. What sucked even more was that, being on a naval base, and having all the televisions around me set to Fox News, I was forced to watch it streaming on my iPhone.

I liked the infusion of humor & little random comments during the ceremony. It was a nice change of pace. Sometimes it's so serious & solemn.

She doesn't seem remotely heterosexual to me.

With her career choices, she won't be going Lohan.

And I know plenty of people who find her damned sexy. Hell, I think she's sexy in the Gangster Squad trailer, so I guess we just disagree.

In fairness, she's probably gonna be an Oscar nominee anyway within the next 5 to 10 years assuming she doesn't go Lindsay Lohan on us.

OscarGuy wrote:Wow, flipp...I didn't realize you disliked Emma Stone that much. I think she's the bee's knees, so it's nice to see her there.

I don't dislike her, per se. I thought she was pretty near perfect as Skeeter in The Help, for example. And I enjoyed her in Easy A. She's likable. I just about laughed out loud when I saw her in that preview for Gangster Squad though. She seemed really out of her league. To me, she has very little sex appeal which that part seems to require.

I still maintain that she's not a good choice to be reading off Oscar nominations. Perhaps for the MTV Movie Awards.

Wow, flipp...I didn't realize you disliked Emma Stone that much. I think she's the bee's knees, so it's nice to see her there.

I believe Marisa Tomei was gonna announce the 1993 nominees and Christine Lahti was the last-minute replacement.

mlrg wrote:

Mister Tee wrote:
Incidentally, Quincy Jones -- though a nominee for music -- wasn't the scheduled presenter that year. I believe it was Marisa Tomei, but a blizzard kept her from travelling from NY, so Jones filled in on an emergency basis. So, the idea till now has always seemed to be to have a winning or at least nominated performer as the co-announcer.

I think it was Holly Hunter who was scheduled to present, but Damien's book might clear it.

It's possible I have two years confused. I know Tomei had a cancellation one year she was scheduled to announce (some of us even commented, when she came back years later, that she was finally being given her delayed shot); I also know Quincy Jones' fill-in was on an emergency basis. But it may be they're two separate incidents that my brain has conflated into one.

Mister Tee wrote:Per Hollywood Reporter, Seth MacFarlane & Emma Stone will make the announcements Thursday morning.

I could be wrong, but this seems a break with tradition. At least in the TV era, I think all performers making the announcement have been at least nominees -- frequently from the year just previous.

And for MacFarlane, this is probably a way to let most of America know just who the hell he is.

I could be wrong, but I don't think "most of America" watches the Oscar nominations.

Emma Stone seems a little junior varsity for this, frankly. (She also looks way out of her league in that new Gangster Squad film. 1940s femme fatale you are not, dear.)

Mister Tee wrote:
Incidentally, Quincy Jones -- though a nominee for music -- wasn't the scheduled presenter that year. I believe it was Marisa Tomei, but a blizzard kept her from travelling from NY, so Jones filled in on an emergency basis. So, the idea till now has always seemed to be to have a winning or at least nominated performer as the co-announcer.

I think it was Holly Hunter who was scheduled to present, but Damien's book might clear it.

And the TV era only began with 1986, with Anjelica Huston/Don Ameche that first year, Shirley MacLaine for 1987, Anne Archer for '88, and Geena Davis for '89. So this does mark a break from precedent.

Incidentally, Quincy Jones -- though a nominee for music -- wasn't the scheduled presenter that year. I believe it was Marisa Tomei, but a blizzard kept her from travelling from NY, so Jones filled in on an emergency basis. So, the idea till now has always seemed to be to have a winning or at least nominated performer as the co-announcer.