Peter Gabriel won’t play Oscars after nominated songs become medley

Peter Gabriel
One of the main things I enjoy during the Oscar ceremony is seeing the performances of the nominated songs. It’s a nice break from the constant back-patting and overlong presentation of awards, and adds a kind of safe, predictable entertainment value to the show. These are evocative top notch songs from films, some familiar and others new, and they’re spread throughout the show so you can relax and enjoy a performance while you’re waiting for the few awards anyone cares about that usually don’t come until the end of the night.

The producers want to cut the Oscars to a more watchable but still too long three hours, so they’re cutting one of the few things that people care about. They’re reducing the nominated song performances to a medley despite the fact that there are only three songs nominated this year! Each song will get just 65 seconds, according to Peter Gabriel. Gabriel has graciously declined an offer to perform a little over a minute of his nominated song from Wall-E, “Down to Earth,” saying it’s not enough to do the song justice and that the songwriters are being shafted with the change in format:

I’m told the producers have slotted 90 seconds in the medley for each song sung by its original performer. But Gabriel said in his letter that he was only being offered 65 seconds for his song. “I don’t feel that is sufficient time to do the song justice, and I have decided to withdraw from performing,” Gabriel informed AMPAS. “I fully respect and look forward to the producers’ right to revamp the show. Even though song writers are small players in the filmmmaking process, they are just as committed and work just as hard as the rest of the team, and I regret that this new version of the ceremony is being created in part at their expense.” I’m told that the medley is the brainchild of the producers in their attempt to get the Oscar show’s running time down to 3 hours — which, frankly, would be a miracle given that it usually runs more than 4 hours. No word yet on whom the producers will choose to sing in place of Gabriel….

Peter Gabriel’s letter to the Academy:
“I was delighted when ‘Down to Earth’ was nominated for an Oscar. I was also pleased to have been asked to perform the song in the Oscar ceremony. However, in recent discussions with the Producers, it became clear that despite there being only three nominees, only 60-65 seconds was being offered, and that was also in a medley of the three songs. I don’t feel that is sufficient time to do the song justice, and have decided to withdraw from performing.

I fully respect and look forward to the Producers’ right to revamp the show. Even though song writers are small players in the film making process, they are just as committed and work just as hard as the rest of the team and I regret that this new version of the ceremony is being created, in part, at their expense.”

I still very much look forward to attending the ceremony.”

[From Nikki Finch’s Deadline Hollywood via WeSmirch]

Last year the Oscars included many high production value clip montages, and these were interesting to watch, but they weren’t all worthwhile and they certainly didn’t please everyone like a well performed song can. The only way the Oscars can ensure that they remain relevant and don’t lose viewers is to cut out all of the secondary awards and stick them in another ceremony. It doesn’t seem fair to all the underappreciated people who work behind the scenes like the costume designers, makeup artists, and set designers, but if they want to keep people interested the show has to clock in at less than two hours, not three, and be entertaining.

They’re going about it wrong by smashing the three songs together into some kind of weird medley. This is a ridiculous executive decision that just shows how out of touch the Academy is. They’re cutting less than 15 minutes of the best no-brainer entertainment they can get for the show. Good for Gabriel for refusing to take part and doing it in a measured, thoughtful way.

Peter Gabriel is shown on 11/20/08 at a “Focus for Change: WITNESS” Benefit. Credit: PRPhotos

Peter Gabriel

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

18 Responses to “Peter Gabriel won’t play Oscars after nominated songs become medley”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Persistent Cat says:

    I usually hate the songs because they are often Randy Newman, Phil Collins or Elton John Disney treacle.

    I bet if Springsteen was nominated, they’d let him play. And why the hell is he not nominated? Bastards.

  2. Obvious says:

    What would Springsteen be nominated for Cat??

    And i just lost all interest in the awards show. I watch the Grammys and this usually. But I’m not even going to bother this time. Once again hollywod has proved how out of touch they are with the viewership.

    I say cut all the lame “Skits” that the presenters do. And if you have Ryan Seacrest, cut him out all together-that saves like two hours right there.

  3. jay says:

    Interesting. And as stupid a mistake as having Beyonce “sing” ALL five songs a few years ago. THAT was a travesty. If they aren’t going to include some decent level of respect towards the songs/songwriters/performers I can certainly respect Gabriel exiting, stage left.

    Cut the corny skits, keep the host on tract, POLITELY move the acceptances along, stop showing so DAMNED many commercials, and for gawd’s sake, stay out of the audience.

    There…down to a reasonable time frame…that wasn’t hard.

    Sheesh.

  4. Nikole says:

    Obvious – Springsteen wrote a song for “The Wrestler.”
    I think he wasn’t nominated for an Oscar because the song includes the lyrics “If you’ve ever seen a one-legged dog walking down the street, you’ve seen me.”

    A one-legged dog.

  5. british bitch says:

    I hate Beyonce, but I hate Gabriel more, vain twat.

  6. Trillion says:

    At least Mr. Springsteen got the golden globe for it. I’m curious why he wasn’t nominated. It’s a good song. But as previous poster said, it’s not Disney treacle nor is it an awful rap song that will make the
    Academy feel au courant for picking.

  7. british bitch says:

    And the Oscars are the most boring programme on TV. Us brits hate it.

  8. geronimo says:

    Agree with Jay. If they can’t find the few minutes necessary to showcase the work of the nominated artists – in amidst all the dross they’ll no doubt include – then they don’t deserve the participation of the artists concerned. It’s insulting. Totally screwed up priorities.

  9. Persistent Cat says:

    Remember when they tried to “shake things up” by inviting all the nominees on stage? Then they announce the winner and it’s basically four dejected people walking off the stage. Same broadcast, they had acceptance speaches given from the audience. Can you imagine winning and not getting to go on stage?

    That was either the year Beyonce sang all of them (one song was in french and her pronunciation was so bad, we were laughing and my french sucks) or when tehy had prettier, more famous people sing the songs (I remember one was Antonio Banderas).

  10. Codzilla says:

    british bitch: Believe me, a lot of Americans hate it, too. We usually record it, and then fast forward to the interesting parts. Last year, out of a three hour show, we ended up watching about 20 minutes and skipping through the rest.

    Terrible to cutout the songwriters. Why don’t they shorten the lifetime achievement award presentation? That part usually drags on without mercy.

  11. kate says:

    i think peter’s letter was very classy. good for him for not selling out and doing some schmaltzy-ass crap. i won’t watch it anyway, i hate all those award shows.

  12. Mairead says:

    Not that I’ve watched it in years, but I’d hate to see them removing the technical awards completely. they want to save an hour? Cut out most or all of the ads. Or have them as “sponsors” on a running board on the bottom.

    Don’t even think about having Ryan Seacrest. Minimum sketches, quicker lifetime achievement – have a longer version on the website – and have the songs just that – without big production pieces.

    But seriously – no ads or seriously short ones – one per break only. I know that it’s network dependant, but still..

  13. Mairead says:

    Oh and I forgot… seriously, they’re asking the former Mr. Prog Rock for a performance lasting only 65 seconds. time was you’d be lucky to get away from a Genesis song with only 9 minutes of your life stolen!

  14. daniel says:

    Yeah they should be able to cut it down to two hours. for starters no acceptance speech should be longer than 45 seconds. Also stop showing video clips of everyone’s performance and just pop up the who’s nominated. And above all, who cares about who is “producer of the year’ etc. the only awards we care about are actors, directors, best film, cinematography (FX, etc), and sound track. All the technical stuff and costumes, etc, short films (ugh) need to be cut. Make me the producer of the show I could get it to 90 minutes and still be entertaining…..

  15. Persistent Cat says:

    Ladies ladies, let’s not forget this year’s host. Hugh Jackman. If he does that thing shirtless, I don’t think I’ll notice the awards at all.

  16. Baholicious says:

    I love Gabriel, don’t watch the Oscars or the Grammys. I’d have to give the Mr. Progressive Rock title to Roger Waters though.

  17. vdantev says:

    Like a football or baseball highlights reel, it could be compressed to 15 minutes of watchable good stuff instead of the 3 and a half hour dreadful behemoth its bloated into.

  18. Goddess711 says:

    Who doesn’t love Peter Gabriel? Peter Gabriel’s a legend – a God amongst the normal dweebs he’s forced to hang with at these functions. He stands FOR something, and if this is something he’s standing up for by jeezus I’m right there with him! A “medley” for chrissake, that’s like having cheezewhiz on ritz crackers with boonesfarm to warsh it down with at the afterparties, LOL!!!!