Your right, 32 Million people? Psh. That's nothing. I can take them all at once. Throw them all in a cage with my unborn child. He can take them all.Sabin wrote:It's not.
80th Annual Academy Awards
-
OscarGuy
- Site Admin
- Posts: 13668
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
- Location: Springfield, MO
- Contact:
Let's put this in context.
The Super Bowl, a entity that it used to come in frequently second place to brought in more than 90M.
American Idol this season is bringing in around 20M or more each week.
The past four season premieres of American Idol brought in no fewer than 33.4 M. The second and 5th season finales of AI brought in 34.24 M and 36.38 M respectively.
In perspective, the Oscar cast was generally the second-most watched program of the year behind the super bowl. It has now drifted into the lower 10 of the year. That's a dismal prospect indeed.
The Super Bowl, a entity that it used to come in frequently second place to brought in more than 90M.
American Idol this season is bringing in around 20M or more each week.
The past four season premieres of American Idol brought in no fewer than 33.4 M. The second and 5th season finales of AI brought in 34.24 M and 36.38 M respectively.
In perspective, the Oscar cast was generally the second-most watched program of the year behind the super bowl. It has now drifted into the lower 10 of the year. That's a dismal prospect indeed.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
-
OscarGuy
- Site Admin
- Posts: 13668
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
- Location: Springfield, MO
- Contact:
Oscars TV Rating At All Time Low
This year's 80th Annual Academy Awards ceremony has been snubbed by millions of viewers - with figures showing it attracted the lowest TV audience since 1974. The three-hour broadcast on ABC only pulled in an average of 32 million viewers - one million less than in 2003, which was aired just one day after the U.S. invaded Iraq. Last year's ceremony was watched by an average of 41 million people, but Sunday's viewing figures have gone down as the worst since the ratings system first began in 1974. The most-watched Oscars broadcast was in 1998 when 55 million Americans tuned in to witness box office blockbuster Titanic scoop 11 awards. ABC says in a statement that this year's ratings did not account for an increasing number of people watching the ceremony on personal video recorders.
This year's 80th Annual Academy Awards ceremony has been snubbed by millions of viewers - with figures showing it attracted the lowest TV audience since 1974. The three-hour broadcast on ABC only pulled in an average of 32 million viewers - one million less than in 2003, which was aired just one day after the U.S. invaded Iraq. Last year's ceremony was watched by an average of 41 million people, but Sunday's viewing figures have gone down as the worst since the ratings system first began in 1974. The most-watched Oscars broadcast was in 1998 when 55 million Americans tuned in to witness box office blockbuster Titanic scoop 11 awards. ABC says in a statement that this year's ratings did not account for an increasing number of people watching the ceremony on personal video recorders.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6398
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
Nathaniel Rogers of TheFilmExperience.net wrote about the issue.
It's a very good read.
It's a very good read.
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19377
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
I don't think Oscar voters think about the ratings of the Osarcast when filling out their ballots.
The question is it possible to reverse the trend of recent years in which the public couldn't care less about seeing the Oscar nominated films and thus have some rooting interest in who or what wins?
It wasn't so many years ago that Oscar nominations in the major categories created a had to see phenomenon. Now with films more accessible than ever through almost immediate DVD releases of films once they leave theatres, it's possible to have seen most of the nominees by awards time, yet few people bother. Why? Have movies fallen behind reality TV and electronic games in the general interest to such an extent that the decline in Oscar viewership is going to continue until it reaches the level of the Tonys? It's quite possible.
The question is it possible to reverse the trend of recent years in which the public couldn't care less about seeing the Oscar nominated films and thus have some rooting interest in who or what wins?
It wasn't so many years ago that Oscar nominations in the major categories created a had to see phenomenon. Now with films more accessible than ever through almost immediate DVD releases of films once they leave theatres, it's possible to have seen most of the nominees by awards time, yet few people bother. Why? Have movies fallen behind reality TV and electronic games in the general interest to such an extent that the decline in Oscar viewership is going to continue until it reaches the level of the Tonys? It's quite possible.
-
The Original BJ
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4312
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm
And one more thing I forgot:
I really hope the low ratings for this ceremony doesn't encourage voters to overlook the smaller titles next year. I don't have a problem if they skew more populist if 2008 produces another Rings, but over the past couple years voters have moved away from studio dinosaur candidates like The Green Mile and Seabiscuit, and I'd personally like that trend to continue.
I really hope the low ratings for this ceremony doesn't encourage voters to overlook the smaller titles next year. I don't have a problem if they skew more populist if 2008 produces another Rings, but over the past couple years voters have moved away from studio dinosaur candidates like The Green Mile and Seabiscuit, and I'd personally like that trend to continue.
And so was Simone Signoret, and Claudette Colbert was born in France. Perhaps they're confusing the fact that Cotillard is the first to win Best Actress for a French-language film.flipp525 wrote:Why are all the news sources reporting that Cotillard's the only French actress to win an Oscar? Last time I checked Juliette Binoche was French as well.
"...it is the weak who are cruel, and...gentleness is only to be expected from the strong." - Leo Reston
"Cruelty might be very human, and it might be cultural, but it's not acceptable." - Jodie Foster
"Cruelty might be very human, and it might be cultural, but it's not acceptable." - Jodie Foster
The Original BJ wrote:Oh, and if anyone had any doubt, Amy Adams has DEFINITELY arrived. I think she's an absolutely delightful performer, and behind Marion Cotillard, she was definitely the belle of the ball, nomination or not. I expect a win in the next few years.
I completely agree, BJ. I could even see Adams pulling off a nomination for Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day next year. I think she is an absolute delight and was robbed of a nomination this year.
Why are all the news sources reporting that Cotillard's the only French actress to win an Oscar? Last time I checked Juliette Binoche was French as well.
Edited By flipp525 on 1204088820
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
-
The Original BJ
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4312
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm
A few more thoughts:
You're right about the kill-joy precursors, Tee. Swinton was hardly even mentioned as a win candidate until AFTER SAG, yet it seems like among late-breaking predictors, she was the most widely predicted victor. (And should I be the first to say some of us probably owe OscarGuy an apology re: Amy Ryan...)
I obviously wasn't rooting for Marion Cotillard, but I think it's unfortunate that some people want to close the book so soon on how history will view this win. (Sometimes I can understand it; I liked Jennifer Hudson's performance, but I'd be shocked if she were anything more than an Oscar one-off.) For me, at least, Cotillard made an impression in the few films I'd seen her in before La Vie en Rose (particularly A Very Long Engagement), so it's certainly not outside the realm of possibility that her international profile would remain strong in the coming years. (Certainly a great role in the film of Nine will only help that.) Whether or not she returns to the Oscars could be a different story -- as Uri mentioned in the other thread, even the international stars who are recognized usually only get a chance or two. But should La Vie en Rose be the beginning of a great career in the French cinema, might not people look back in decades to come and be glad Oscar voters recognized her when they did? I'm definitely playing devil's advocate here -- I was disappointed she won (and, just to be controversial, I'll even say I think the oft-maligned Roberts, Berry, and Theron all gave more impressive performances) -- but I hate to see her beat up. I agree with Sonic -- she is very charming and likable, and if Hollywood needs a new princess, this French beauty is a welcome antidote to most of the bland starlets on our side of the pond.
It's a pity voters didn't go for Altman in '01. Beginning with Soderbergh, this decade would be one clean auteurist sweep for Director winners.
Oh, and if anyone had any doubt, Amy Adams has DEFINITELY arrived. I think she's an absolutely delightful performer, and behind Marion Cotillard, she was definitely the belle of the ball, nomination or not. I expect a win in the next few years.
You're right about the kill-joy precursors, Tee. Swinton was hardly even mentioned as a win candidate until AFTER SAG, yet it seems like among late-breaking predictors, she was the most widely predicted victor. (And should I be the first to say some of us probably owe OscarGuy an apology re: Amy Ryan...)
I obviously wasn't rooting for Marion Cotillard, but I think it's unfortunate that some people want to close the book so soon on how history will view this win. (Sometimes I can understand it; I liked Jennifer Hudson's performance, but I'd be shocked if she were anything more than an Oscar one-off.) For me, at least, Cotillard made an impression in the few films I'd seen her in before La Vie en Rose (particularly A Very Long Engagement), so it's certainly not outside the realm of possibility that her international profile would remain strong in the coming years. (Certainly a great role in the film of Nine will only help that.) Whether or not she returns to the Oscars could be a different story -- as Uri mentioned in the other thread, even the international stars who are recognized usually only get a chance or two. But should La Vie en Rose be the beginning of a great career in the French cinema, might not people look back in decades to come and be glad Oscar voters recognized her when they did? I'm definitely playing devil's advocate here -- I was disappointed she won (and, just to be controversial, I'll even say I think the oft-maligned Roberts, Berry, and Theron all gave more impressive performances) -- but I hate to see her beat up. I agree with Sonic -- she is very charming and likable, and if Hollywood needs a new princess, this French beauty is a welcome antidote to most of the bland starlets on our side of the pond.
It's a pity voters didn't go for Altman in '01. Beginning with Soderbergh, this decade would be one clean auteurist sweep for Director winners.
Oh, and if anyone had any doubt, Amy Adams has DEFINITELY arrived. I think she's an absolutely delightful performer, and behind Marion Cotillard, she was definitely the belle of the ball, nomination or not. I expect a win in the next few years.
-
Mister Tee
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8675
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
Thanks, dws. He sure does look like Stamp.dws1982 wrote:Mister Tee wrote:Speaking of best actress: was that Terence Stamp alongside Julie Christie? I realize they go back far (and madding), but are they some item I don't know about?
I think that was her husband (with whom she's been since 1979, but only married a few months ago), journalist Duncan Campbell, who does look a lot like Terence Stamp, now that you mention it.
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19377
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore