2/26/2007

Oscar Results 2006/2007

Posted in Oscars at 1:53 am by Sam

Editor’s Note, 2/27/07: Hear our thoughts on this year’s Oscars in Episode 22 of our podcast.

It’s still too early to have organized thoughts to present here, but I wanted to open this thread for discussion of the Oscar results, if any of you are interested in pursuing that. I’ll probably post a comment here myself later, and of course we’ll cover the Oscar results on this week’s show.

The Oscar Winners

5 Comments »

  1. Stephen (221) said,

    February 26, 2007 at 10:31 am

    Hooray for Scorsese is about all I have to say.

  2. Jeffrey (84) said,

    February 26, 2007 at 12:37 pm

    Although Scorsese does indeed deserve an Oscar for his body of work, I believe that Paul Greengrass’ direction of United 93 was far superior. Annoyed that Pan’s Labyrinth didn’t win Best Foreign Language Film despite winning in 3 other categories.

  3. Sam (405) said,

    February 27, 2007 at 10:38 am

    So now that we’ve recorded the Oscars segment for Episode 22, I want to post here with some thoughts I missed.

    1. Just a curiosity, but four of the five nominees in each of Sound Mixing and Sound Editing were shared between the two categories. The two winners were the nominees that were NOT nominated in the other category. Possibly that suggests that the Academy was being pretty smart about distinguishing between the two types of achievements. The difference is undoubtedly better understood by the Academy than the public at large, but it’s probably a mistake to assume that actors and writers and costume designers and so on understand all of the technical processes.

    2. I did say, in the podcast, that Ellen was one of the better hosts of recent years, but I should note that this is largely because I’ve quite disliked the hosts of recent years. Ellen is a small improvement on Jon Stewart, who seemed to be held back by the format, and a huge improvement on Chris Rock, who is rarely funny or even entertaining. Whoopi Goldberg can be a warm and funny presence in movies, but I don’t like her hosting style at all.

    I still really really like Billy Crystal, though — I know some here don’t — and Steve Martin. But if the awards ceremony taught us anything, it’s that Jerry Seinfeld should be next. He’s comfortable there, he’s funny, and he struck just the right tone.

    3. Clip shows, clip shows, so many clip shows. I loved the writing montage — so many great moments in there, including from great but rarely acknowledged gems like Paris When It Sizzles, and the montage had a sort of progression to it, covering the bases from the idea to the initial rush to the writer’s block to the breakthrough.

    But most of the other montages didn’t quite work, and I didn’t understand the point of most of them. Although I didn’t object to any one single clip show, ultimately I’ve seen all these movies before, or will, or don’t care to, and I’d rather the awards ceremony show me something different.

    4. Like the Dreamgirls song performances. Well, they’re in the movie, of course, but that’s not the same as a live stage performance. Those songs are good. I love the style. But you know what? I’m not sure Beyonce comes off very well when she’s singing a duet with Jennifer Hudson, a real powerhouse. Hudson, by the way, along with Scorsese, gave the acceptance speech with the most personality. Most of them felt pretty dry. But that’s not a complaint or a criticism, just an observation. When you win an Oscar, it’s your moment, and you can do with it as you please. Which is why I continually resent the orchestra cutting people off. Throw out a freaking clip show and let these people talk.

    5. Best shadow play ever. But the format was weird. “Ok, moving on, let’s make a penguin! Make a penguin, guys! Ok great, now cut to a commercial!” I got into the groove eventually, and I think stretching it out in little bits throughout the evening made more sense than devoting a long segment to it. But it was weird to see some of the best stuff corralled into throwaway moments.

    6. Chris Connelly, speaking every once in a while about Oscar betting pools, was about as wrong as…something that’s…really…wrong. The guy had no charisma and, worst of all, nothing to say. What, exactly, was the point of all that? Just think. All that time they spent giving him screen time, they could have been giving Don LaFontaine screen time instead. He was right there. He could have been repeating “In a world…” ad nauseum, and even THAT would have been worth the time.

  4. Ferrick (140) said,

    February 27, 2007 at 1:12 pm

    Whenever they cut to Connelly, it took him FOREVER to say absolutely nothing. Worthless and awkward.

  5. Ferrick (140) said,

    February 27, 2007 at 1:17 pm

    I have to say that I got bored with this broadcast pretty quickly. Ellen was funny and I thought she did well. It took them way too long to get to any “major” categories. Didn’t they used to open with best supporting actor/actress? I want to see Pan’s Labyrinth a lot but opening with a bunch of technical awards is no way to keep people interested. It needs to be a mixture.

    The stuff that was good and funny wasn’t enough to keep me interested. I had tuned out by the end because I knew I could get the results the next day. I did catch some of Scorcese’s speech but by then, they had lost me. I like the speeches and want to know who wins but didn’t care enough to watch it all live.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.