Worst OSCARS Ever

And the OSCAR goes to… the fans, for having to endure what can only be summed up as the most boring Oscar telecast ever. Rather than take the honest approach and admit to the world that there simply wasn’t enough time post-WGA strike to put together a proper (translation: entertaining and funny) show, ABC perpetrated a lie. Aside from Jon Stewart’s noble, classy and painfully minimalist attempt to keep the audience awake, the show was essentially a glorified Golden Globes press conference. In fact, the only thing less interesting than last night’s Oscars winning speeches was being force fed clips of previous Academy Award winners we either (a) didn’t care about or (b) didn’t remember. Here’s hoping that sometime in the not-to-distant future ABC will harness LOST’s time-travelling technology and give us five hours of our life back.

For all the latest TV news and reviews

  • Common Sense

    Stewart was typically entertaining, the ideal choice to host this show.

    It’s troubling that three of the four acting winners are complete strangers. Who’s ever heard of them? And the only nominated flick I saw was JUNO. My friend hated “No Country for Old Men” so bad, he can’t stop talking about it.

    I don’t mind the video montages of yesteryear; they’re actually my favorite part. And the 98-year-old guy’s speech was cool. And seeing Keri Russell. But if there’d been anything else decent on another channel, it’s “so long, Oscar! I’ll read about ya tomorrow.”

  • When was the last time the Oscars were entertaining and funny from start to finish. At least with Billy they started with a bang and then went downhill from there. The Oscars need a complete creative shake up. Perhaps present Oscars on back lots or give us more of an insight into the excitement of film making.

  • Ally

    Every single year people say that it was the most boring Oscars telecast but this was a first one in a long time that I watched from start to finish. Loved the musical performances and then Stewarts awesomeness when he brought the oscar winner back out to give her speech. Lovely.

  • Ally,

    I realize every single year people complain about the Oscars, but this year was truly the first year I quite literally was debating turning the TV off early.

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t blame Jon Stewart at all. I just had very little interest in this year’s crop of movies. Outside of JUNO and MICHAEL CLAYTON I didn’t even see any of the Best Pictures.

  • Wow, I’ve been working on a response, but it got way too long. Let me save what I wrote for my own blog. Here, I’ll just use bullet points.

    — I agree that the Oscars were boring, but I don’t think it can totally be blamed on the Writers’ Strike.
    — In fact, thanks to the writers strike, the lack of corny banter was a welcome change.
    — Jon Stewart was fine; not laugh-out-loud funny, but fine considering his short preparation time.
    — The movie choices were weaker and less varied this year, which I think helped contribute to the boredom.
    — The montages are over-done and have been the past few years. The memoreum is the only one that is necessary.
    — I disagree with the guys over at TheMovieBlog.com who insist that the live performance of Best Song nominees are wasted filler. They break up monotony, and that’s the only category whose content you can reproduce live on stage.
    — To improve the relatability of the Oscars, they should do one or more of the following: split Best Picture into Best Drama and Best Comedy (like the GG’s), create a Best Genre Film category (for action/sci-fi/fantasy/horro), or create a viewer’s choice category where people vote online among a dozen or so nominees based more on mainstream acclaim.
    — If they aren’t doing so already, the Academy should use their website to educate people on the categories, the nominees, and the movie-making process so that people can better appreciate things like art direction, sound mixing, etc.

  • actually, here’s my two cents on how I see it.

    it was boring because while the movies i thought were stronger than some previous recent years, they were less populist choices. good for actual “art” overiding popularity. less fun to watch on Oscars cause barely anybody saw any of them (even I didnt see all 5 best pics and i ALWAYS do).

    plus, with all the pre-award lead ups now that gets so much attention. we pretty much knew who would win, with only Tilda Swinton surprising (and Marion Coillard to an extent though I had a guess).

    so I find Oscars are slowly getting the right choices, they just arent the famous or popular choices, which makes the telecast less fun, but the awards more credible.

    Ah the dilema for the producers of the show.

    Next time, just have Amy Adams sing and perform everything!

  • ewanspotter

    I realize I’m in the minority here, but I don’t understand the outpouring of love for “No Country for Old Men.” It was, by far, the stupidest movie I’ve seen in year. It’s a film that’s too busy waxing cracker-barrel philosophy about how in the good ol’ days were simpler (and, you know, evil didn’t exist or something), as it pretends to be a message movie. It sets itself up extremely well and just when the tension is palpable, the third act falls off a cliff.

    It offers a buildup of action and a resolution, but no climax, because that happens off-screen. Seriously? It’s like eating a ham sandwich with no ham. I believe movies should have some kind of viable satisfaction for its pinnacle — call me a traditionalist. But hey, maybe it’s an astounding piece of art and I just don’t understand its deep complexities.

  • Josh Emerson

    Have the Oscars ever been entertaining? I attempted to watch one year and I couldn’t believe how awful it was. I felt like I would rather watch paint dry than watch any more of that awards show.

  • nick

    WOW..i guess i have to put down the pipe because i liked it this year.Good movies won,a great song did as well.Jon Stewart was great as well.Not trying to be showy(is that a word)Just funny…..2 each his/her own i guess.