Oscars were horrible

[Benzadmiral]

I think the Academy lost its way when it started nominating nine pictures every year. That many is confusing! Five was just right. And I too miss Billy Crystal. Imagine what a tough time he'd have now, trying to integrate nine titles into his opening monologue/compilation.

Plus the Oscar telecast seems to be getting earlier every year. Wasn't it usually in March or April until pretty recently?

 

[Inkstainedwretch]

Let the people choose? Gee, how could that go wrong?

The problem with it is viewers would only want to vote for best picture, best actor/actress, maybe best director. How many give a thought to Best Achievement in Sound Editing?

 

[2jakes]

On the plus side, I've handled the
Oscar statues.
They're pretty hefty and would
make for some neat bookends.

Which is cool since only a few
have the luxury of doing this.

(From my times in Beverly Hills)

 

[Haversack]

Oscar statues do turn up in odd places. Back in the mid-80s when I was taking a series of drafting classes at a JC near Sacramento, a group of us took the train up to Eugene to check out the architecture school at the U of Oregon. We all stayed at the house belonging to an aunt and step-uncle of one of the group. On a book shelf, serving as bookends were two old Oscar statues. When I asked about them, the step-uncle said he really didn't want to talk about them. Since the garage of the house was taken over by a machine shop and had a clean room for lens-grinding, I assume the Oscars were awarded for one of the technical categories.

 

[LizzieMaine]

When I was a kid I just assumed they were chocolate covered in foil.

 

[Bushman]

When I was a kid I just assumed they were chocolate covered in foil.

Wait, they're not? What other childhood dreams must you destroy!!!!

 

[SkyTurtle]

The Academy Awards have never done anything to demonstrate legitimized authority in my book. They're people with opinions -- and politics. I worked in advertising for a number of years and there are all kinds of awards circuits with their own "academies" who select winners, ostensibly, for creative merit but more often than not it turns political. I don't think the Oscars are any different.

Maybe I'm just holding a grudge for Jaws losing best picture to One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest in 1975. IMHO Jaws should have taken best picture as well as best director. But, I guess it's aesthetics. And we can argue blue is the best color all day long even after green wins the Oscar.

 

[MikeKardec]

The Academy Awards have never done anything to demonstrate legitimized authority in my book. They're people with opinions -- and politics. I worked in advertising for a number of years and there are all kinds of awards circuits with their own "academies" who select winners, ostensibly, for creative merit but more often than not it turns political. I don't think the Oscars are any different.

It's not. In fact all of Hollywood functions on a currency of internal politics far more than it does dollars. That "money ruins art" or that somehow the film biz is all about the box office trope that has built up around Hollywood is complete bunk. It's all Other People's Money, none of the people spending it care and half the internal politics is about keeping your job/reputation/whatever intact no matter what goes wrong (though something often does) so that YOUR revenue/position is insulated from any Darwinian result. They would be better awards, as in somewhat more accurate in rewarding the best work in Hollywood, if they weren't televised. There's a heavy "observer effect" methinks.

 

[scotrace]

Bogart used to say something like the Oscars were rubbish, and the only real test would be to give everyone the same Shakespearean role and judge from there.