A Better Oscars Telecast

So, the nominations for the 82nd Academy Awards have been announced, and I'm a bit intrigued. Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin are slated to share hosting duties, and the Academy will get to find out that their idea of 10 Best Picture nominations is redundant, anti-elitist, and will have none of the desired effect that the Academy hopes it has (drawing in more casual viewers).

Seriously, how did they come to the conclusion that adding five more films a "casual viewer" is supposed to care about is going to make more "casual viewers" tune in? And, keep in mind, this is after they came to the conclusion that the Oscars telecast is "too long" (a notion that I disagree with, but whatever).

And, with all apologies to Kathryn Bigelow (who is my favorite female director of all time), I am wholly opposing The Hurt Locker's run at Best Picture. I just can't support that film. I don't care if it wins any of the other awards it's been nominated for (Actor in a Leading Role, Cinematography, Directing, Film Editing, Original Score, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Original Screenplay) ... but I'm hoping beyond all hope that it doesn't win Best Picture. It is a dishonest film and unworthy of the honor.

Anyway... on to the issue at hand: the lengthy telecast.

The solution, if the Academy truly is concerned with the television audience, is simple. In fact, it's already in place. You know how all of those other channels air their "red carpet" specials that lead up to the actual Oscars, essentially making everyone watch bad hosts ask stupid questions on E! or TV Guide channel, right before you switch to ABC to watch the actual show?

Well, yeah... that.

As much as I'm loathe to admit it, there are - quite simply - categories of Oscars that the general public simply doesn't care about. As in, really: who the Hell cares? Now, I care, and I like watching all of the categories... I even like catching the sci-tech Oscars. The again, I only watch one awards show per year, and the Oscars is it.

Sorry... back on track.

Oscar categories that the general public simply doesn't care about. Air those on another cable channel leading up to the "Oscar categories that the general public DOES care about." Give us pre-Oscar counter-programming to those banal red carpet shows. Give your viewership OPTIONS. Let's face it, options always help.

If the Academy really does want to control telecast length, this is the way to do it. Move the two documentary awards to this lead-up show on Bravo network. Move the two short film awards over. And move the two sound and one visual effects award (I REALLY hate that notion, but whatever works).

Seriously, that's really the only way it's going to work. Of course, it's a bit un-Politically Correct as far as Hollywood is concerned, but come on. The irony here is that with the additional telecast time inherent to having what is essentially two shows, the Academy would be more inclined to add new awards (such as Best Stunts), and it would become even feasible to have an entire Oscars dedicated to documentary and short film (can you imagine a Best Director or Best Cinematography award JUST for documentaries? That would rock!)

Simply put, though the Academy Awards are designed as self-serving elitist awards (and I seriously don't mean that in a negative fashion), the producers of the Oscar telecast feel the need to tailor to the viewing audience. The problem is... finding a middle ground simply for broadcast purposes is going to be far more difficult than even the imagination factory of Hollywood can handle. Pick a target (either the industry or the public), and fit your show to that. Just do it; then quit complaining about it.

Personally, I like the Oscars show as it's been for the past 20 years, but that's me.

Hollywood Stars and Hollywood Stars

I'm going to fill you in on some things that annoy the hell out of me. It's my blog, you're reading it, so I feel thoroughly entitled to do so.

Annoyance: how the press labels everyone who is famous, and is not an athlete, a "Hollywood star."

Okay, this is simply not the case. While I've always noticed this little purposeful faux pas, it really hit me when Lance Bass came out of the closet. All the trades, all the newspapers, and all the television magazines kept calling Mr. Bass and his "where's Tom Cruise" glory a "Hollywood star."

Let's set the record straight here: Lance Bass is a music star. He sings, he dances, he plays with his Mission: Impossible dolls. A music star does not a Hollywood star make. Hollywood, need I remind everyone, is the haven and heaven of FILM AND TELEVISION. Actors, directors, writers, etc. Not musicians. Yes, there's an Academy Award for "Best Original Song," but so what? Documentarians get Academy Awards, and they're hardly considered "Hollywood" in the public's eye.

I'm not going to harp on this, because I have more to complain about, but I implore the sensationalist press: please quit referring to everyone who happens to be a celebrity as a Hollywood star. Hollywood deserves its place among the lights, so let's leave it with some dignity, shall we?

Annoyance: Mel Gibson's vilification.

Dudes, the guy was drunk. And while several of you adhere to the philosophy that "people say (and do) what they mean" when they're drunk, this is simply not the case. I've seen one of my best friends try to kiss one of the ugliest women I've ever seen while drunk. Do I think for a second that he wanted to do this? No... but I'm sure that Jim Beam and Wild Turkey sure as hell did.

The man admitted a mistake, he's attempting (although not as strongly as he should be, I'll grant you) to make amends.

Oh, and I'm sick of hearing about all the crap of how "he's an actor, he can lie about it." I've worked with actors quite a bit, and anybody who has can tell you that there is a VERY THICK LINE between acting and lying. Actors are not necessarily good liars, despite the cliché, and vice versa. Take me for instance... I can be a great liar, but I can't act worth a damn.

Umm... forget that last thing I said, will you?

Annoyance: articles concerning Hollywood stars referring to said person as "the (insert film title here) star."

I read a lot of trades (this much should be obvious), and I am so sick and tired of reading about a person who everybody knows about being referred to as "the War of the Worlds star" or as "the Mean Girls star." Um... people who subscribe to the trades probably know who all of these people are, so we probably don't need to be reminded of said person's most recent or most popular film. I admit that this last annoyance isnt coming off as clearly as I'd like, but I'm still not in a proper writer's mood yet. To find out what I'm talking about, check out the IMDb's daily news sections and you'll soon be as annoyed as I am.