Comments on: 5 Ways To Make Next Year’s Oscar Show Better

By: Daniel Delago

Daniel Delago — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

Make opening the envelope more dramatic. Back in the day, cameras would zoom in and lock onto all the nominees faces as the winner's name was read. It was priceless to see the losers' reactions. As gracious as they try to come off, let's face it, acting is one of the most ego-driven professions in the world. Nobody wants to go home empty-handed without the Oscar.

By: Mongoosecmr

Mongoosecmr — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

I wouldn't want to cut the memorial segment, but it does need to be better done. TCM's video, while a bit sappy, is a lot more moving and wide ranging. There is clear effort and care put in, while the Oscar one felt like it was cut in a day, and seemed to mostly include those who passed in the last three months instead of the whole year. If they cut out a skit/song and put some effort into it I don't see any reason why you would argue it being removed

By: helen

helen — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

I think the Oscars have become more interesting since they added more movies to the list of best picture nominees.If they cut down to five,it will always be down to the obvious choices,and the ones with the best campaign(and that kind of stuff already makes the Oscars pointless).
This way this year more people heard abour Her or Philomena,than they normally would.

By: Lorem

Lorem — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

Not sure how long ago, but there was a time when for best screenplay and adapted screenplay they would show you a scene on the page and then show that scene from the film. That was my favorite part. They need to bring that back.
I also think that they need to spend some more time on the "smaller" awards. We obviously don't know who the sound mixers or make-up artists are and instead of just hustling through those awards give me a little behind the scenes montage of these people at work. Try to show how important they are to the films they worked on. I'd gladly sacrifice all of the best song performances for a little clip about what goes into getting quality sound or how long it took to sew some crazy costume.

By: MarlinC

MarlinC — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

Cutting the Best Song performances would cut out a huge chunk of time. Let's face it, it's not a terribly exciting category in the first place. And with the exception of a few rare instances, most of the songs nominated every year are pretty lackluster. I know it provides performance content to the Oscars, but I'd rather see that time devoted to behind-the-scenes of the Best Picture nominees or something that focuses on actual movies and filmmaking.

By: Sean

Sean — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

I disagree with all of these suggestions haha.

Cutting the memoriam? Go back to 5 nominees? Well these are never gonna happen lol. No wayyy!

But I do have an idea!
Having Kevin Spacey host next year! (he had some few funny bits & I think he can genuinely do it & it would be a fun & I think somewhat daring choice) lol

By: gurli

gurli — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

disagree oh so very much with the suggestion of cutting the In Memoriam section. It's an important moment. One of my favourites. But yes it should be done tastefully, which it also would have been IF they had just left it at showing the montage. The Bette Midler thing was too much. They should have a Best Soundtrack category – that would be exciting, giving the Music Supervisors some credit! Even though Randall Poster would probably take it all 🙂

By: Christian

Christian — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

Let's see make it shorter? Yes
Better host? Yes
For the technical awards show some BTS footage.
For the short films make them easily accessible. You can't find most of them till way after the ceremony. If want people to care about them make it to where people are actually able to watch them. There's no reason to not release them. No one I making tons of money off of them.

By: Joe

Joe — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

There's only one possible way to make the show any better: B. E. T.

That's right, they should just go ahead on and air the show on Black Entertainment Television. It would be ratings blast. Follow my logic, here, people: global audiences wouldn't know how to process the information and the entire world would tune in to see just what the hell the Acadamy was thinking, putting the most revered of all awards shows on a rickety, nickel-and-dime network that barely passes the broadcast qualifications for public access. The Academy covers the "edgy" quote (and then some), and also helps bring in revenue for a fringe network. It's win-win, people.

By: the sayer of the truth

the sayer of the truth — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

The ONLY way to make the Oscars a better show would be to flush the whole out-moded fiasco smartly down the toilet ! ! !.

By: V.

V. — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

The only thing that really needs to be changed is the voting system. The Hunt, the Great Beauty or the Act of Killing had no chances in winning anything big and yet they are ten, if not hundred, times better than the cliche goldmines like American Hustle or Gravity and incredibly over-the-top sentimental cr*p like Dallas Buyers Club or 12 years… Now obviously films like the Hunt or Love will never win best picture, but my point is this: would it not be beneficial to the ratings of the Oscars (round the globe that is) to include lesser known European directors in the mix? Attitudes would immediately change towards the Oscars if people like Vinterberg were to be nominated instead of Russel and Payne (two nominees about ten years past their prime and now getting recognition only because of who they are). As for the best picture it is easy to understand why the Hunt or the Act of Killing can't and I'd say even shouldn't win, yet giving a real go to films like the Great Beauty would actually change the way we see the ceremony, that nowadays awards two kinds of films: political correctness manifestos or incredibly middle of the road pictures with recognizable faces. Naturally films like 12 years will always be a lot stronger than obscure independent pictures, but wouldn't the inclusion of less crowd pleasing films make it way more interesting (no matter who you root for as long as there is some actual rooting to be had)? Surely if there were any real intrigue to it, people wouldn't mind waiting for three hours and hearing a few mediocre artists? But obviously in order for that to happen the whole system ought to be changed, which is not going to happen, so now I fell dumber than the 60 year old make up artists who decide the worth of art.

By: Ron

Ron — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

I actually love the montages!

By: benutty

benutty — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

3.5 hours is not too long of a show.

The problem isn't the show's length, it is definitely in the presentation of it. I've never understood the relevancy of having a comedic host spend lengthy amounts of time entertaining the audience. Instead, an Oscar ceremony should be classy, grounded in tradition, and have respect for all of the nominees being honored. I'd like to see the scene submissions by all nominated actors, hear excerpts from all the nominated screenplays, and see images for each of the nominated effects categories (especially cinematography).

The goal of The Academy should be to honor their nominees and create a sense of esteem surrounding who they anoint. One of the best things they did was have past winners introduce and congratulate the acting nominees. I also remember fondly when Whoopi came out in costumes from each of those nominees.

Show the audience WHY films were nominated in a tasteful manner and stop this trend of making fun of them.

By: AR

AR — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

The suggestions are not very good. Sorry

By: Marcus

Marcus — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

How about nominating movies viewers at home have actually heard of, and maybe even gone to see?

By: Ferdinand

Ferdinand — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

How about Bette Midler to host 2015 OSCARS? She would be perfect, with her comedic timing, sensational singing voice and buckets of personality, it's a walk in the park for Bette!

By: Joe

Joe — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

Here's the only way it can get better: B.E.T.

No, scratch that. Change it. I meant "Cleavage".

By: Stacey

Stacey — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:05:37 +0000

Here's where the Oscars "miss it". The Grammys have live performances of the year's best performances in music so the audience can listen to the songs which are being honored that night. Same for the Tonys, which feature many live performances of the plays and musicals which are being honored that night. So those two awards shows feel like real celebrations of the year's best work in their industries. But at the Oscars, we barely see more than a few seconds in clips of the nominated films and performances. Show more clips, honor those whose work is being honored that night. Forget the people who annually say to dump the montages, this is an industry about film viewing, have MORE film viewing! Only make the montages interesting and entertaining, and not cut-and-pasted together by 4th graders who seemed bored by the job.