The 88th Oscar telecast had the worst ratings in 7 years: #OscarsSoWhite?

The more that I think about Chris Rock’s performance as host of the Oscars, the more I think that he did not do well. I’m saying that as someone who generally likes/loves Chris Rock. I’m saying that as someone who thinks he’s one of the sharpest comedians and social critics in the world. I’m saying that as someone who really wanted to see him go hard and burn the place down as host. But his opening monologue was confusing and at times offensive. The “joke” with the Asian children was even more awful 24 hours later. Rock just seemed off his game entirely, and the whole Oscar telecast suffered from janky, helter skelter transitions and pacing. All in all, one of the worst Oscar telecasts of the past five years or so. But still, I thought with all of the #OscarsSoWhite drama, people would be tuning in to see what Rock had to say. Not so much! Apparently, this year’s Oscars had the worst ratings in seven years.

Early ratings suggest the Oscars have fallen yet again. Nielsen’s preliminary number have the 88th annual Academy Awards at a 23.1 household rating among major markets and a 37 share, dipping slightly from last year. If the numbers hold up in the afternoon nationals, this will put Sunday’s Oscar telecast at a seven-year-low, at least.

The drop is despite host Chris Rock earning plenty of praise for his performance on Sunday night, and some considerable suspense surrounding the ceremony as the industry wondered how the comic would address the lack of diversity in the acting categories. Last year’s host was Neil Patrick Harris and that telecast had fallen to a six-year low.

Oscar viewership tends to hinge on the popularity of the most-honored movies, and insiders predicted a possible ratings drop given a heavy focus on indie titles like best picture winner Spotlight, along with films such as Room, The Danish Girl, and Brooklyn (though there were some audience favorites in the mix too, like Mad Max: Fury Road, which won six Oscars, and The Revenant, which scored three). The biggest Oscar telecast in the last decade was in 2005, when Million Dollar Baby took the top prize.

[From EW]

It’s one of the quirks of Oscar viewership that some of the most poorly-rated telecasts are often the most climactic or shocking, and the Oscar telecasts with the highest ratings are the ones where one film is dominating all the categories, or everyone knows who will win. I thought people would tune in to see what Mad Max and The Revenant would pick up, but I guess not. Maybe the #OscarsSoWhite drama did do some damage, and people just tuned out because what’s the point in watching the parade of white folks congratulating themselves?

My advice for the Oscar producers: beg Ellen to come back as host (for real), then cut out some of the dead weight from the telecast.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Getty.

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

272 Responses to “The 88th Oscar telecast had the worst ratings in 7 years: #OscarsSoWhite?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. lovemesseg says:

    Also Oscars nominate people who are in quality films and are not white.

    • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

      Luckily it’s usually one in the same.

      • Petee says:

        I am 52 years old and have watched the Oscar’s since I was a child.I didn’t watch it because of The Oscar So White drama.Enough already.From the rating’s a lot of other people felt the same.The Oscars and other award show’s aren’t that good anymore.Everyone walking on eggshells all the time to make everyone happy.It doesn’t work in real life and it isn’t working in entertainment.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:


        Clearly your concerns are about being able to enjoy the people walking in pretty dresses and making the same speeches over and over. I’m sorry for your loss.

        Others are tired of bullshit happening repeatedly and people not being given work or recognition merely because of the color of their skin. Protests work, it just usually makes things not fun for people content with the status quo.

    • Chelsey says:

      Let me guess, Petee- you are white?

      • Petee says:

        No Chelsey.I knew someone would throw that out.My Dad was a full blooded Native American and my mother is made up of a lot of cultures so your guess was wrong.

      • isabelle says:

        I’m mixed race and think its stupid & a head scratcher. Of course Hollywood is racist. Its also sexist, ageists, discriminates against average looking & unattractive people, fat people. It has a lot of ‘isms but as a mixed race person laughing that that racism was an issue because Jada Smith really probably got angry because her husband wasn’t nominated for a film that didn’t deserve nominations. It was an average film at best. It insults me and my black family that when race is made into a talking point over a shi*y film or social media rants. Things like the Oscars. It actually in the end makes people more apathetic and makes us look like we are fighting a social media war versus actually protesting racism. It comes off as vanity, fluff and a Rich mans protest. Not once did I take “Oscars so White” seriously.

      • Just saying says:

        Seems to me that the oscars have become more of a ‘we demand that black people get as many oscars as white people’ instead of ‘this person was the best actor’

        Since when is any award given out based on the color of a persons skin?

        Do you see any other race making a fuss?

        This whole thing is ridiculous. Im a human being, you’re a human being, when the hell is everyone going to realize that and get over the bs! Worse things are happening to black people than not winning oscars. does anyone think that by black people winning more oscars then all other problems will be magically solved?

    • WTW says:

      @lovemesseg I don’t care who was hosting; I was boycotting because I’m tired of #OscarsSoWhite. I made a conscious decision not to watch and so did many other people of color. Why is the fact that there was a boycott against the Oscars being overlooked? Al Sharpton led an actual march before the ceremony and many POC on Twitter were having the #NotYourMule discussion during the show.

      • Sabrine says:

        I couldn’t be bothered because I am tired of these celebrities winning an award and then pushing their cause when they have control of the microphone. The music is playing and they’re still trying to get their point across. I thought this was supposed to be an awards show for the entertainment industry, not celebrities holding their victims captive from their bully pulpit. All this has put a pall over the evening. It’s not fun anymore.

      • Mare says:

        And many people not “of color” didn’t watch because we thought it would turn into racist remarks from both whites and blacks.

    • Bettyrose says:

      Lovemesseg, Are you saying there were no quality films featuring non-white actors in 2015? Or that there were, but they simply didn’t carry the social relevance of such hard-hitting dramas as Mad Max and The Martian?

      • Mimi says:

        Ha! For the win! I can’t understand why Mad Max was nominated. Matt Damon was funny in The Martian, but still. A lot of people seem to be upset that Straight Outta Compton wasn’t nominated, but personally, I didn’t feel that it deserved any noms. At least not for acting. It was an interesting movie that I enjoyed quite a bit. I do agree that it does sometimes seem that African American actors aren’t always given the opportunity to shine in award worthy roles. I remember in 2002, Denzel Washington and Halle Berry both won best actor/actress awards. On that same night, Sidney Poitier also received a Lifetime Achievement Award (?) that same night.

  2. Talie says:

    I tuned out after I kept getting hit with a barrage of political statements. After the monologue, it was fine, but my God, everyone had to say something IMPORTANT. I thought it was supposed to be entertaining. It wasn’t. #OscarsSoBoring

    • Greta from Munich says:

      Exactly! I didn’t feel entertained this time. I felt patronized. So I switched off the TV and went to bed.

    • Kerry says:

      Oh hush up.

    • kcarp says:

      The fact most of the statements are made by hypocrites. I am sorry Leonardo DiCaprio lecturing about climate change when he flies around in a private jet? The Sony hacks revealed he took a private jet from NY to LA 6 times in 6 weeks.

      The Oscars are somewhat like politics, the American public is sick and tired of hypocrites and the elite trying to dictate how everyday people live their lives.

      • Nicolette says:


      • Lizzie McGuire says:

        People were praising Leo’s stand on climate change but he travels in private jets, yachts, SUV’s, etc. Good for you for winning an Oscar, man but don’t be a hypocrite.

      • sherry says:

        Yes!!! Perfectly stated!

      • Hellohello says:

        Does Leo take private jets when contractually bound to film appearances across the world? Yes he does. Has he spent literally millions more on environmental awareness with producers credits on many films people probably haven’t heard about, meeting with Taiji activists in Japan, tiger welfare units in Russia, UN backed environmental projects, committed to a more sustainable diet….you bet. Find me another celebrity like that.

      • Jess says:

        Meh,Leo’s activism is that of an armchair activist,he’s not making any personal sacrifices.
        Back in the day you had people like Vanessa Redgrave and Marlon Brando who lived what they preached.

      • Robin says:

        Leo can fly commercial to all of those gigs to which he is contractually bound. He’s a total hypocrite.

      • isabelle says:

        Don’t forget about those yachts he parades around the 18 years on.

      • Fee says:

        Agree with Jess. Vanessa Redgrave gave a beautiful speech against Zios, which is who runs Hollywood. Brando was sick of the treatment of Native Americans, maybe Oscars so white was not so interesting because it was white vs black when how many other ethnic groups we were not included. That Jada was pissed that Will didn’t get a nom.Martin Scorsese didn’t get his Oscar till Departed. For me, u get 20million a picture, don’t cry racism.Real people, get discriminated every day based on dozens of aspects, affects their income n lively hood, where are the Smiths for that? Is Jada never going to go to an Oscar again? Eh maybe it was more of them being Scientologists

      • Beth says:

        Not to mention the whole Lady Gaga/Joe Biden thing. All I could think about during that was “Roman Polanski and Woody Allen.”

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        Don’t forget R. – “Do What You Want To My Body” – Kelly.

      • Portugal the Stan says:

        Wow. Y’all really do miss the point. Flying on a private jet for work is far different than the message he is trying to support. Leo is a star with influence and he is using his celebrity to promote a cause. He has clearly shown, for DECADES, his commitment to the environment and I applaud him for that.

    • perplexed says:

      I don’t mind political statements. In the past, there have been not as many political statements, and the show was still boring. When is the Oscar telecast ever actually interesting? Maybe people have caught on that the show will never live up to expectations, and are tuning out. And there’s Netflix….and Youtube to see the interesting bits the next day.

      • Luxe says:

        Exactly. As a kid I was entranced by the Oscars and was glued to the screen, even for the technical awards. Now I know they’re a joke, and I can see all the fashion or standout moments the next day online.

      • mom2two says:

        Exactly. I can get my Oscars fix online in 5 minutes when it’s over or the next day to see who won and who wore what. I don’t need to watch the show for that.

    • Josefina says:

      I agree. These are movies. Entertainment industry. It’s not that serious.

      • Jess says:

        Do you not realize that more than half of movies nominated at the Oscars dealt with some sort of political or cultural issue happening today in our society? Are you really that naive to think the oscars are not going to have any sort of dialogue about these issues?

        Why is this so bothersome to some people? Not everyone has seen every single movie nominated at the oscars and if someone goes up to win an award, they have the right to make a political message if it is relevant to their film. and honestly, literally no one gives a single care (or even remembers) who they thank during their speech. I’d rather hear something interesting like the short documentary winner’s speech where she mentioned that a law was changed in Pakistan over honor killings (after her documentary was released).

        so please Josephina, tell me again how “it’s not that serious”.

      • Josefina says:

        I inform myself and discuss those subjects in the proper forums. If people wanna make the Oscars political that’s fine – but it’s my right to not take them seriously, and to roll my eyes at them, because I’m not tuning in to listen to that.

        The Oscars are a ceremony where rich 1% go around parading gowns worth a person’s yearly salary, to later enter a theatre were flashy performances will be done and inside jokes will be told and all asses will be kissed. That does’t sound like a serious scenario to me at all.

        So please, Jess, further ellaborate on why I’m supposed to support this patform as a serious forum for political discussion because I’m not sure I get it.

      • Jess says:

        “I inform myself and discuss those subjects in the proper forums. ”

        Oh, you’re one of those people. I guess no one is allowed to make any sort of political or cultural point unless its in the correct “forum” according to Josephina over here.

        Your original comment stated that “These are movies. Entertainment industry. It’s not that serious.” yet the subjects many of these movies cover deal with ACTUAL ISSUES. Are you really going to tell me that films like The Danish Girl and Spotlight are not serious? Tell that to transgender community and sexual assault survivors. I guess their stories are just for “enterainment” and “it’s not that serious”

        I love how people like you turn their noses up at films and act super dismissive as if they are above it all.

        “If people wanna make the Oscars political that’s fine – but it’s my right to not take them seriously, and to roll my eyes at them,”

        Yeah, I guess when that short documentary winner won and talked about how honor killings laws were introduced in Pakistan, we should just all collectively roll our eyes and laugh at her since movies are just strictly entertainment and have no real cultural or political value right. How dare she make any short of statement especially since her film brought about ACTUAL CHANGE.

        “to later enter a theatre were flashy performances will be done and inside jokes will be told and all asses will be kissed.”

        Yeah, those oscar performances are all so flashy, especially that lady gaga performance right? Hahaha, when those sexual assault survivors came on stage, I was blinded by the flashiness of it all. LOL that part was a real riot.

        “So please, Jess, further ellaborate on why I’m supposed to support this patform as a serious forum for political discussion because I’m not sure I get it.”

        No one is asking you to support it honey, it’s just hilarious when people like you act all baffled and up in arms when someone makes any sort of political statement at the oscars. Not everyone is as enlightened and smart as you Josefina.

      • Adele Dazeem says:

        You aren’t going to like this comment Jess but I’m going to say it any way. I think you were WAY too harsh on Josefina. She tunes in to the Oscars to be entertained. A lot of people do. It’s her right. It’s also her right to seek out other forums to discuss more important issues. You were incredibly judgemental. In fact, your comment has to be one of the nastiest I’ve read on Celebitchy so congratulations. How on earth do you know if Josefina doesn’t care about the issues you raised in your comment? How do you know if she doesn’t discuss these in her own life or in other forums?

        Just in case Josefina didn’t quite get how judgemental you were being to her, here’s a few examples to remind you:

        “Oh, you’re one of those people”
        “I love how people like you turn their noses up at films and act super dismissive as if they are above it all”.
        “No one is asking you to support it honey, it’s just hilarious when people like you act all baffled and up in arms when someone makes any sort of political statement at the oscars. Not everyone is as enlightened and smart as you Josefina”.

        Well done Jess.

      • Anon says:

        I am utterly confused about the replies of Jess…. Geez relax, it is gossip forum and not Harvard…. And yes I do agree with a lot of people on here. The Oscars should be entertaining. The world is so bad nowadays, seeing that on the news constantly… May be just once in a while I would like to watch TV and not being reminded of that.

      • Jess says:

        @Adele Dazeem

        From all the racist and sexist comments some people have left on this site, you think my comment is the nastiest? lol, k. thanks for giving me a good laugh. God forbid I challenge another poster’s opinion on celeBITCHY.

        “How do you know if she doesn’t discuss these in her own life or in other forums?”

        Yeah, I think you’re confused. Where in my reply did I state she doesn’t discuss these topics? Josephina was arguing that there should only be political discussions in the “correct” forum which is ridiculous since the half the films nominated at the Oscars deal with some sort of political issue. Why is this such a difficult concept to comprehend?

      • Jess says:


        Where did I state the Oscars shouldn’t be entertaining? My main point was that the Oscars have always had some sort of dialogue about current day issues (given the topics these movies cover). Why can’t there be both political discussion and entertainment? & Actors have ALWAYS been political with their speeches. I mean look at when Marlon Brando won for the Godfather.

        Ya’ll are acting as if its so inappropriate and wrong to make some sort of political statement when it’s one of the biggest events of the year. If this was the teen choice awards, then I could see the outrage.

    • Carol says:

      Exactly! I’ve been watching the Oscars since I was a wee child and this was the first year I missed it. I had no real desire to watch it and I love Chris Rock. But this year, the Oscars just seemed like a dud. I think also, the fact that I could see Oscars’ funny bits and key scenes online, there was no urgency to watch it live… for 4 hours. Also, I wouldn’t mind political statements so much if it didn’t accompany such smugness.

  3. lisa2 says:

    I don’t think the controversy affected the Oscars.. This was such a boring year.. All the Awards were easy to predict. Even if there were a couple of surprises.. Secondly there were not that many BIG STARS that people like to see. So many unknown people and so many movies that didn’t make a lot of Boxoffice money outside of MM, Revernant and Star Wars.. People can say that they would prefer to not know a lot about celebrities and only want to focus on the films they do. Well this is what you get. People that the general viewing public is not going to view. there was probably more discussion on line but that doesn’t equal ratings.

    I didn’t see any interesting couples and you could see that the Entertainment shows were trying so hard to make the interviews interesting and they just weren’t on the RC.. It is 2 days later; and there is not much talk outside of the fashion.. and Leo winning..

    I liked Chris and he did a good job.. it was just a Boring year for entertainment.

    • nn says:

      Stars? Big at that? What stars? Brangelina? Maybe if it was 2005 but no one is interested anymore since they got old and lost their looks, sorry but that’s just the truth.
      There are no “stars” left to lure back viewers tbh.

      • Naya says:

        This is true. The age of the “movie stah” is dead. Big names cant even guarantee box office as Brangelina proved last year.

        The age of television is also dead. Nobody wants to sit through 4 hours of glad handing just to see their favorite actor win or lose. Thats what Youtube is for. 3 easy minutes and your life goes on. They need to re-think the entire format.

        Also, of course the race thing played a role for people on either side who felt strongly about it. Those who think that “white people are being discriminated against” didnt tune in because they knew the Academy would spend the whole evening apologising to PoC. Those who think the Academy is insincere and deep down racist didnt want their viewership to be counted as support for the academy.

      • betsyh says:

        nn: celebitchy wouldn’t exist if people weren’t fascinated by movie stars.

      • roses says:

        I think the age of the movie star has diminished but when you have more of them grouped and attending these type of events together it seems to have a better outcome. Look at 2012 it was the last year that their was a big uptick in viewership. Not only did that show consist of diverse films & nominees but you had Lawrence, Bullock, Streep, Brangelina, Bradley Cooper, Bale, Amy Adams, and Will Smith but as I said this is in my opinion. .

      • Gina says:


        Ugh. This is just the usual mean-girling of beautiful superstar movie stars and Oscar winners, Brangelina from the usual homely middle aged suspects who happen to be fans of the 90s tv sitcom lady.

        Really, what else is new in a decade and change? We’are heading into our second decade haters, let’s ditch the angry ragey broken record, eh?

        Fact 1) Brad in his appearance at the Globes last month, presenting with Ryan Gosling set twitter and the internet ablaze for his fineness. So to what are you referring? He looks even better in his Oscar nominated ‘Big Short,’ all bespectacled, long haired and grizzled. Sorry, but no, he’s not a bald no name shrimp marrying for johnny come middle age lately fame on the back of the ol’ tv sit com actress and patron saint of rejects. He’s a superstar iconic movie star and gorgeous specimen just like his wife. Always will be, sorry it hurts.

        Fact 2) This is Angelina at her Unbroken premiere: BAM! Looking stunning as always and not much different than she did a decade before. She’s 40, and contrary to your opinion, that’s not old, and if this is ‘losing your looks,’ I’d suggest a head exam, and a strong prescription to ease all that resentment and bitter.

        Fact 3. To @naya Brad and Angelina didn’t make a blockbuster or wide releaser. So saying they can no longer put butts in seats on the basis of an Indie art house film is strange indeed. I mean, you can pretend they had a big b.o. failure in order to get in your digs – but everyone knows the film was not meant to be that. The truth is 15 theaters and expanding to a little over 100, is a tiny Indie that doesn’t play wide.

        So no, it’s not a film like Maleficent that has made almost 800mil worldwide, nor is it like Brad’s WWZ. It was never supposed to be.

        Using their passion Indie project as a bellwether on their star power when Brad stays producing Oscar nom’d films, and when they both stay making blockbusters, is just blind bitter jealousy.

        Don’t people ever get tired of coming for them? Or have they just settled for a near constant state of rage and resentment, since they now see their tv idol’s life contains no George clooney-esque movie-stah type mate and has devolved into a cheesey desperate lackluster life, and sad career with the no name bald short guy she settled for.

      • nn says:

        Oh dear, I’ve awoken the beast.
        Let me help you: I am not a fan of Jen Aniston so relax your eager fingers, turn off your google alert and take your meds.

      • Jen says:

        Lol…I love this place 🙂 best laugh I’ve had in a while!

      • Gina says:


        Yea I believe you’re no fan of Jen Aniston’s. There’s literally not much to be a fan of – a 90s tv show, hair extensions? Please.

        No, the people that attack Aniston’s movie star ex and his family, are more rejects who identify with her, and see her plight as their own. They don’t necessarily like her bad rom coms, they just dislike the beautiful Oscar winner her ex is with.

        Being bested by a beautiful woman, seeing an iconic love story etc., is what they’re filled with virulence and resentment and bitterness for, rather than being a die hard “fan,” of ‘Rumor Has It,” or her latest drugstore hand lotion commercial. Come on. Girl, I feel you. There’s no there there.

        You’re less her fan, and more her support system against the beautiful people in the world. Am i right?

        That’s why you go around bizarrely attacking two of the most beautiful people in hollywood out of the blue, and denying you’re doing it out of not so hidden resentment.

        Too, too funny.

      • mayamae says:

        Is it an actual fact that all of Jen’s fans are fat homely, middle-aged women? Does that automatically make all of Angie’s fans young, svelte, and beautiful? What about those who like both? It’s so confusing.

      • Naya says:

        Gina, I wish I could take credit for being the first to declare the “movie star” dead but I cant. There is no serious publication with a film section that has not covered this trend over the last five years. And no, they dont write those think pieces because they hate your celebrity, they do so because they read the metrics. Any fool can see that the industry has changed drastically, including Brad and Angelina if they are serious about their industry. By The Sea was simply just more evidence.

        Incidentally your defence of those box office numbers makes zero sense. The film actually under performed in the theatres in which it was released, they had to pull it in some markets. Other indie films that had small initial releases, smaller lead actors and far less publicity sold more tickets than this film. In any case, the point of the “movie star” model was that it didnt matter what you put the star in, you were guaranteed to at least make your money back. Thats no longer possible, again as illustrated by the fact that an indie film was helmed by two of the biggest names in the world and was marketed on their relationship and it still made an insane loss. It can also be illustrated by Wills last futuristic space movie but I cant even remember what it was called.

        Edited to add that I find what you have typed to nn so completely disgusting I am almost speechless. No grown woman should ever think much less type such nonsense.

      • Maroon says:

        @ Gina
        You do realize just how bad By the Sea did at the box office and how it was skewered by critics due to Jolie’s poor directing? They are not big stars anymore. That doesn’t take one a Jen Aniston fan to say this. The industry has changed lot since 2005.
        Also, BTS was originally slated for wide release but got changed to limited after some insiders saw the movie early and saw how terrible it was. It did very, very VERY poorly for an indie!

      • Me says:

        What if we could care less about either?

      • Gina says:


        If you want to have a grown up convo about box office and Indies, and wide releases and arthouse movies and la di dah….fine. My point to you is that these are actors with clout who have passion projects they get to make only because they put butts in seats of blockbusters.

        Their ability to get greenlit does not rise and fall on their last little overwrought art house movie. No, it wasn’t Mr and Mrs Smith part deaux which released in 15 theaters, no matter how much it pleases you to think so. You can join the rest of us in reality, or you can choose not to.

        That said, the reason why I addressed Maya, is because she said something very ugly and unkind and flat out psycho: brangelina was old and had lost their looks, so no one cares to see them.

        Never mind that she’s on a gossip celeb board that features them regularly with all kinds of crazy post counts, nevermind Jolie’s last wide releaser made 700+ million, nevermind she’s currently directing her third feature and Brad broke the internet last month when he appeared on the globes telecast….

        She doesn’t care about evidence to the contrary, she’s just being a nasty meangirl because of her own bias and resentment. That’s what I was responding to.

      • Ennie says:

        .. And other ethicities who were going to be ignored in this competition, also probably overlooked the awards. I watched a bit and there were no oner ethnicities presenting black and white, or comic gigs, not only nominees being almost all “white”. There were non american winners, in the documentary, animation, photography and direction, at least. But i got tired of Chris Rock. He could have presented more variety instead of just (by what I saw) black people in his interviews/ sketches.
        It was a missed opportunity, or maybe he chose to make it one sided.

      • Naya says:

        Gina, both Variety and Hollywood Reporter had think pieces on the death of the passion project last year following BTS. It used to be that a studio backed a vanity project with the expectation that 1) they will make a modest profit or at least have an award winning film and 2) they can tie the star to other in-house projects that will be bound to make mega cash. As that star system began to fade, studios have been more gun shy about those deals. Angie was able to score one because of her personal friendship with the chair of the studio (forgot her name). That was a gamble that came back to bite her (the studio head), with every trade publication reporting that they were hiding the true cost of the film and by extension the actual losses to protect the studio head and Angies brand.

        The fact is that the actors in the highest grossing movies of the last few years are barely household names. Chris Pratt scored big two years in a row and I bet his name recognition is under 10. Kids cant even name who plays spiderman or superman, which would have been insane to think a decade ago. Same goes for Star Wars, Star Trek, all the super heroes minus RDJ and Ben who made their names in a different age. When you cant even build star branding on an established franchise, the star system is dead. You could pop Chris Pratt in World War Z and if the CGI is good and the marketing dollars are pumped in, theres no claiming that it wouldnt do the same box office.

      • Katie says:


    • roses says:

      Oops meant 2014 ceremony not 2012

    • Josefina says:

      I think people greatly overestimate the actual impact of these hashtag controversies. I’m pretty sure if you stopped by the street and asked people their stance on #OscarsSoWhite, a big lot of them wouldn’t even know what you’re talking about.

      I think this was a bad year for the Oscars, because it was a weak year for movies in general. Mad Max was the only nominated film I felt had a true impact.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        At this point whether you use the hashtag or not a lot of people knew about the Oscars controversy. If the media discusses it at length it’s going to enter the awareness of the general public. Look how many whites didn’t fully understand Beyonce’s Formation but took it to be an attack on Police because of what they’d heard in the media.

      • Saks says:

        Yes, and especially outside the US. I was watching it with my mom and she was like “what is the host talking about?”, a lot of people didn’t even know about the controversy.

      • Josefina says:

        I never saw #OscarsSoWhite covered anywhere outside of the entertainment section of media outlets. As a non-American, media merely glossed over it while discussing their Oscar predictions.

        Beyonce performed that song at the superbowl, the most watched sports event in the USA. The lyrics in that song are very explicit in it’s black pride. People saw it as an attack on the police because they are stupid and think “I like being black” means “I hate white people”. That’s a completely different situation.

      • Stacey says:

        I think there are a lot of reasons the ratings were low.

        1.) There are few real stars left. Many of the A+ list didn’t bother to show up or only showed up at the after parties. “Will Leo Win?” and “What Will Chris Rock Say?” were their only drawing points. No one cared enough about either, apparently.

        2.) Chris Rock is very polarizing. He has passionate supporters and passionate detractors. A lot of people either didn’t watch because the y were boycotting or because they felt they would be lectured all evening. Two of the highest rated broadcasts the past 10 years have had Ellen DeGeneres as host – someone who is extremely well-liked and won’t get too political.

        3.) There is a glut of televised awards shows. From December-now there have been so many televised awards show honoring the same movies and the same people. It has reached peak saturation point. They need to cut down on the awards show and the guilds. As a result, the Oscars have lost some of their exclusivity.

        4.) Here on the East Coast, the show ended after midnight. It was after 11:30PM when they did director, actor, actress and picture. That is way too late for many East Coasters who had to go to work/school the next morning. The awards show is too damn long. This show was 3 hours and 37 minutes – one of the longest in a while.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:


        My perception was that you were discussing US audiences in which case yes even major news outlets covered the controversy. Now if we’re discussing international audiences I expect they don’t care or have much interest in finding out about the issues of racial equality that were being discussed. To them the cultural understanding is missing.

        With Beyonce I disagree. There were protests and boycotts online before she even performed the song at the Supebowl. Many of the people protesting her (whole police precincts) are not her target audience and as a result had to be told by someone else about the song and her message. Things can reach a cultural zenith to the point even those not fully paying attention become aware (for example is there anyone who doesn’t know about the Kardashians by now?).

    • Chaucer says:

      I agree completely. I also think you’d have to take into account the amount of people who don’t have basic cable anymore as well. I wanted to watch, but we only stream and while I wouldn’t have needed a cable package, I would have had to make the effort to get one of those antennas to hook up.

      Just not worth it imo.

    • nikko says:

      The Oscars was so boring. They really need to look at making some changes. What I don’t know but 3 hours…too long. Chirs was also boring, didn’t like him at all. I’m like losing respect for him now that he won’t claim his 3rd daughter they adopted. He doesn’t want to pay child support for her. Pretending he doesn’t know where she came from and how she got to his house. I used to like him but his behavior regarding this issue shows that he’s a real a**hole.

  4. nn says:

    Eh, are you serious?
    He mocked the black lives movement, made awful jokes about lynching (which everyone laughed at, it was disturbing), rape jokes about black women,sexist jokes about Rihanna and misogynoir aimed at jada. He basically roasted black people like 90% of the time and people are mad at the “asian joke” which was not made at their expense and was clearly about making fun of the out of touch consumers of technology (?). The tamest joke of the night btw.
    Most black people are not happy with Chris at all and are really disappointed and angry at him for making those tasteless jokes about serious issues.

    • Emily C. says:

      He’s good friends with Adam Sandler. So, yeah. Sadly unsurprised that he took this route.

    • Gisy says:

      I thought it was just me. He was awful and say this as a black person who hoped for better. He had an opportunity to talk about the hard-hitting issues in the black community and instead he used it an opportunity to tear down Jada who was one of the reasons most of us even became aware of the #oscarssowhite thing in the first place. So what if Jada was bitter cos he husband wasn’t nominated? Michael Fassbender got a nomination…. don’t tell me nonsense.
      Congrats Chris Rock on throwing away an opportunity to say something and using it instead to laugh with the same white men who don’t care about our struggles at our expense.
      ps: Jada can score an invitation without Will, I doubt how many times you’ve been invited outside of hosting duties

      • perplexed says:


      • nn says:

        Did Jada actually say anything about boycotting? From the video she didn’t say anything about boycotting, some people just took it and ran with it I guess.
        I think most black people would have been happy with him just NOT saying offensive stuff about slavery, lynching, raping…I don’t think most of us wanted him to make fun of white people and others either. You can make people laugh and have a good time without all of that. He just made people feel resentful and angry.
        I just find him so annoying in general though.

      • Marty says:

        @NN- you summed up most of my feelings on it perfectly. Not to mention for him to make the kind of jokes that he did to the type of crowd he did….not good.

    • Betsy says:

      Question: is “misogynoir” a typo or is that a thing?

      • Evie says:

        Misogynoir is misogyny in the black community (the emphasis is on the ‘noir’ part). Unfortunately, there’s a pattern of black men putting down black women in favor of other ethnic woman or by slamming how a black woman lives her life, carries herself, dresses, etc.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        There’s Google Betsy.

      • Betsy says:

        Thanks, Evie. That was a very thoughtful, intelligent response.

    • Missy says:

      Well, here we go again. Yet another nn comment dismissing issues brought up by non-blacks. Yes, the joke about child slave labor is really tame compared to a joke about Jada not being invited to the Oscars.

      • nn says:

        I’m not dismissing it, I just said quite clearly, compared to the lynching jokes and mocking dead black children, rape and on, it was tame. I didn’t say it was good or should have been made but the outrage over that and the silence on the 90% jokes about black people…well it says a lot, doesn’t it? Also check out #notyourmule

    • Elsie Otter says:

      nn, I was agreeing with you until you said “and people are mad at the ‘asian joke’.” Jesus, it’s not a competition of who got roasted the most. And the “asian joke” (why put that in quotes?) was tasteless. As Constance Wu said: To parade little asian kids on stage with no speaking lines merely to be the butt of a racist joke (about slave labor) is reductive and gross.

      Personally, I thought Chris did a terrible job addressing #oscarssowhite. He made fun of black issues, the Ask Her More movement, and nerdy asians and child labor. He was basically an Oscars apologist. It might have been better had he not addressed racism at all.

    • INeedANap says:

      Rock’s flip-flopping on misogyny is so bizarre. Sometimes he champions the cause of black women; see his comments re: Megan Good and Leslie Jones, as well as his film Good Hair. But sometimes he piles on the misogynoir and talk about marriage like it’s worse than prison.

      Idk what’s going on with him, but I hope his daughters have a positive example of male feminism somewhere in their lives.

      • nn says:

        His mockumentary that was “Good hair” was disgusting.
        I feel for his poor daughters.
        Clearly mocking BW in particular is big money business hence why he flip flops.
        Did you know he had a joke about Reese W that he tested on an audience but for some reason he didn’t include it at the oscars and instead went in on Jada and Rihanna…interesting who you can and cannot talk about.

      • amunet ma'at says:

        I would never describe Good Hair as mocking black women. Actually, a lot of natural women I know, including myself, started the journey because of his movie. Sorry I just had to make that point. The discussion of “good hair” in the black community was a serious topic and I’m glad he covered it when he did. He expressly mentioned his daughters for wanting to do so.

    • nikko says:

      I totally agree, he was a disgraced.

  5. GlimmerBunny says:

    I think Chris Rock was okay, just not that funny. The only joke I laguhed out loud to was the Jada/Rihanna one.

    Hug Jackman was the best host ever IMO, they should ask him to come back. I liked Seth McFarland too, even though I know he got terrible reviews. Ellen was okay.

    • LAK says:

      Billy Crystal is the golden standard of hosting the Oscars. He had a 9yr run starting in 1990. He was amazing.

      No one has equalled or bettered him. Before or afterwards.

      That said, when they brought him back for 2012 Oscars, he’d lost his touch, so i guess even he can’t hit his own very high standard anymore.

  6. BendyWindy says:

    I think people didn’t tune in because it’s a four hour long pat on the back for privileged rich people. And people didn’t tune in, not because the Oscars were so white, but because they don’t want to have to confront that #OscarsSoWhite is a problem. Because if “POC were just better actors, they’d get nominated,” so no one understands why this is even a thing. *eyeroll*

    • whatevers says:

      What you said. It’s four hours long, no one cares. We have more real concerns going on right now like the rise of the Trump in the U.S. That said, most people I know passed on watching it.

    • Erinn says:

      I don’t even think it’s all that complex. Less and less people bother with cable. Less and less people give a shit about overhyped award shows. We live in the land of binge watching – people don’t want to tune into something they can just google the results of or follow live feeds of.

      • Market share loss says:

        Just as I see it. Hollywood simply loses its relevance. Series produced by Netfix / HBO or other broadcasters offer much more interesting stories / dialogues / characters, that is what captivates the audience today.

  7. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I think it’s simple. The awards exclude people who deserve to win, the Oscar has become a meaningless old white person popularity contest, the show itself is far too long, scripted and boring, and who cares anymore?

    • Sixer says:

      If you look at all the issues, from #oscarssowhite, through the likes of Harvey buying nominations, to the industry lagging behind the new ways of viewing, and all the other stuff that would take forever to list, they all come back to the same simple conclusion, don’t they? The Emperor has no clothes.

      I do think that is the core problem. Credibility on almost all levels is just blown in the minds of the public.

    • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

      Even knowing that they were desperately trying to inject some color just to make the audience not seem so white I was shocked by how white it still ended up being as the camera panned.

      They only wanted to nominate white talent (save for one gentleman) well they certainly got a nearly perfect all white party. Weird how that didn’t seem to be appealing to the majority of viewers even though Hollywood seems to love whitewashing everhthing.

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      I agree. Plus, don’t more people wait to check out the highlights on YouTube etc. the next day? The whole enterprise seems more creaky, dated and disappointing.

    • Lizzie McGuire says:

      Also everyone had already predicted who was going to win, the only real surprised was Stallone’s snub. Other than that no one wants to watch a 4 hr show, add to that the #OscarsSoWhite controversy, & now can look up the results or watch the clips on YouTube to see the highlights of the event.

      • noway says:

        You are so right, viewing has changed. I am sure some people just went online and watched parts they heard about. There viewing problem is way more complex than not being a diversified award show. It’s that at many parts of it the show is boring, long and slow. They need to make it shorter and more interesting.

      • Adele Dazeem says:

        I turned it off after Stallone’s loss. I simply was not interested in anything else after that. All too predictable.

        Genuine question: has Chris Rock EVER been funny? Because it sounds to be like his talent in that regard is highly questionable.

    • LAK says:

      Where talent is concerned, the Oscars have often got it wrong. i remember as a child watching with my parents, often the conversation about the talent was exactly the same conversation we are still having. it’s very shocking the people or films who’ve either never been nominated or never won despite being the better/best choice that year.

      In the past, no matter how one dresses it up, the lifetime achievement award was always the academy trying to make up for their oversight. It’s never truly been a lifetime achievement award in the proper sense. It’s a ‘pity we never gave you a gong before so we better give you one before you die’ award. And when you look at that list of winners, it’s clear to see that they should have been awash in nominations or awards or both during their working life.

      • Sixer says:

        LAK – I read a furious blog on the Raindance website the other day, by a Scottish director, saying the independent festivals have no problems featuring diverse talent, including at the intersection of race AND class. So why does the BBC? (You can guess the answer!) And of course, by extension, why do the Oscars? Thought you might be interested – and I’m interested in what you think:

      • Marty says:

        @Sixer- So, so true. Just the other day, Mya Taylor the trans actress that made and starred in Tangerine, won an Independent Spirit award on Saturday for best actresses. It’s mainstream that has yet to catch up.

  8. Who ARE these people? says:

    That “joke” with the children was terrible. A lot of people of Chinese, Korean, Japanese etc. heritage are rightfully angry that they seem to be the last “acceptable” target group standing for bigoted and stereotyped humor. You’d think Chris Rock would know better, but apparently he does not.

    I feel for those children for being put in that position. I hope they turn into social activists.

    And yet the comfy white people I know think Rock really “gave it to them.” Even without listening to his whole monologue. Because he was there. And he is black. So therefore. But gave what? To whom? This was more of a CYA moment for the Hollywood establishment. Let’s see what happens in their product over the next few years.

    • nn says:

      What do you mean gave to whom? To black people that’s whom!
      He roasted black people like pigs at the barbecue and those lynching jokes sure went down well with the audience since that got the biggest laughs and applauds of the night.
      Just because Chris is black does NOT mean WE, that is most of us, black people agreed or liked his hosting.
      Most of us are angry and disappointed. He couldn’t hang up his tap dancing shoes for one night? Ugh.
      I still don’t get the anger over the asian joke. It was clearly not made at their expense it was mocking US the consumers and telling us we are the problem.

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        Please read my comment again more carefully.

        I did not say that Chris Rock “gave it to them” (meaning Hollywood). I said that I have heard from *white* people that I know (white people who did not watch the whole thing and got much of their information second-hand, or only assumed that he did well because he’s black) that he “gave it to them.” Thus I was pointing out that people remain clueless about the problem. I know he could have been so much better and didn’t like most of what he said either. I tuned out after “Rihanna’s panties.” Just gross. I cringed for her.

        As for the joke at the expense of the children, this might help:

        I think they get to decide what works for them, just as black people get to decide if Chris Rock’s monologue served to enlighten the powers that be AND the viewing audience about their grievances about discrimination in the film industry. It’s wrong to depict children who “look” Chinese, Korean, etc ( now the generic “Asian,” which is wrong unto itself) as being proto-typically “good in math” and “good at tech.” Positive stereotypes are still stereotypes, and people with that heritage are getting so tired of being used as the “model minority” when actual discrimination still exists. It also fosters resentment.

      • Missy says:

        I agree with you wholeheartedly, WATP.

        nn, please have a seat. On another Chris Rock thread, you said,”I’m gonna need a drink for everytime someone says “What about the…” And it’s always when it’s about black women that little whataboutsthe comes up, very telling.” You perceived the post to solely be about black issues, and threw a fit when other commenters wanted to include other POC in the conversation.

        Yet here, WATP made a comment about the Asian joke about child labor and stereotypes, and now you come in saying, “What about the black people?” And even try to say the Asian joke (that clearly went over your head) isn’t that bad.

        It’s hypocritical and clueless.

    • Paula says:

      The part with the children was weird. What kind of parent signs off for their kids to be a part of something like that?

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        I felt for the kids – how could they not feel as if people were laughing at them? They were told in front of all those people that something about the way they look is funny. Because that’s where the “joke” began and ended – with their appearance. For all we know those particular kids suck at math.

    • BananaJanna says:

      For a show that was totally political, I did not think the three East Asian children was anti Asian. I took it as a dig at child labor practices in Asia, which are widespread and horrid. I was glad that this was highlighted.. But in the season of a hundred causes, it came out of the blue and fell flat. It was as if Rock wanted show that he cares about other issues besides #Oscarssowhite so he threw that in. Dumb.

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        Dressing up the kids to come out as the Price Waterhouse accountants does not equal child labour in Asia. But maybe the fact that none of us are sure what Chris Rock was trying to say reflects most poorly on his writing, not on our understanding.

    • MichLynn says:

      Come on, don’t lump “the comfy white people” you know in with all white people. Maybe you need to know more white people, we all don’t think “he really gave it to them”.

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        I know that. Just commenting on some things I heard here and there. I know plenty of white people. In fact, I am one myself.

    • Saks says:

      Yes it was awful and tone deaf, and he was terrible in general. Personally I think they adressed the issue in the wrong way, and
      made into a White VS Black thing. Yes I get that during the monologue it was important to keep that point because the snubs were black people, but not once during the ceremony Rock talked about actual diversity or opportunities for other minorities or vulnerable groups.

  9. NewWester says:

    Most of the people I talked to had seen some of the movies and were rather “meh” about the movies. There just did not seem to be that word of mouth of having seen a great movie. This year besides the # OscarsSoWhite dust up,the whole Oscar season seemed to be about Leo DiCaprio finally getting an Oscar and the bear that mauled him in the film. Nothing to really get excited about except maybe seeing Chris Rock in the first ten minutes of the show

  10. als says:

    And people that are outside USA that are not so much in tune with the #OscarsSoWhite did not watch because some of their favorite movies were not included, like Creed and Beasts of No Nation. The conversation was dominated this year by The Revenant and Leonardo DiCaprio (whose performance nobody seems to have liked but still got the Oscar!).

    • dAsh says:

      Lol. This is true. Everyone is talking about the fact that he finally got an Oscar after all these years of losing and not about his acting performance in this Revenant role.

  11. LadyMTL says:

    I watched for about an hour and then got so bored that I went to read in bed. I found Chris Rock to be okay as a host, but a lot of his jokes fell flat for me. I mean, I still cringe when I think of that bit with Stacy Dash, and I still don’t know why he would make jokes about lynchings. I know he was supposed to be “edgy” and maybe even a little shocking, but most of the time I felt he was very ordinary.

    I’m glad that he did call out Hollywood’s basically inherent racism / discrimination, and I was happy to see Mad Max win some awards, but even that wasn’t enough to get me to sit through Snooze-fest 2016.

  12. Tiffany27 says:

    I watched Leo’s win and no other part of the telecast. I just did not care.

    • jc126 says:

      I wanted to watch Leo win, and I like the In Memoriam segment and to see the dresses, and I like seeing Jimmy Kimmel’s post-Oscars show, but I couldn’t stay up for it because of changing shifts at a new job. I watched Chris Rock’s monologue and went to bed at 9 pm. Lame.

    • isabelle says:

      The Leo effect, watching an overrrraated actor having his own 3 hr awards show. Its the reason i didn’t watch it.

  13. Size Does Matter says:

    More like #OscarsTooLong and #RedCarpetRecapIsEnough

  14. Neelyo says:

    It’s a relic like the Miss America pageant, that’s why no one watches.

    Whenever they try to be relevant, it’s cringeworthy, like a twerking granny.

    • oliphant says:

      amazing image 🙂

    • Kitten says:

      Exactly. I haven’t watched the Oscars in like, ten years.
      It’s always been boring as hell but it gets worse every year. Additionally, the idea that they give actors awards as a concession because they didn’t win last year or the year before when they should have won is so f*cking ridiculous.

      • perplexed says:

        Yeah, the show’s always been boring. I watch it every year, and every year at around 9:30 pm I’m like “why am I putting myself through this dullness?”

        The part I find the most interesting (aside from the obvious actor categories) is when the comedian comes out to tell his or her jokes (even if they fall flat — but at least they have more stage presence than the actors reading from the teleprompters). But the rest…omg, dullsville.

      • LAK says:

        i have to say that i was genuinely shocked the year Al Pacino finally won his Oscar. I’d always assumed he was drowning in Oscars. So whilst the film itself was terrible, i didn’t mind the fact that he won the oscar because it was time they gave him one. ditto Randy Newman and Martin Scorsese. Still can’t believe that Ridley Scott doesn’t have one, Not even a BAFTA.

    • Eden75 says:

      I agree. The last time I actually sat through the Oscars was in 1998, seriously. The year of Titanic, Goodwill Hunting, As Good As It Gets, LA Confidential. Yep, that long ago. It’s so freaking boring now. I was re-watching House on Netflix and just checked in online every now and then. Yesterday morning, I googled Leo and his win, rolled my eyes at his speech and shut it off. That’s it.

      They need to figure out a way to either move into this century with them or ditch them on tv and just post the results.

      • swak says:

        I honestly can’t remember the last time I sat through the Oscars. Probably pre-children and that would have been 1980. I find them boring also.

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        My disillusionment came the year Reds (Warren Beatty’s big movie about journalist John Reed and the Russian Revolution) lost to Chariots of Fire. Liked both, but Reds was just a much bigger, more ambitious movie. However: Communism.

  15. The Eternal Side-Eye says:

    I feel badly for him and hope they don’t put the blame on him for this but truthfully I think this telecast had a number of groups come together to boycott for different reasons.

    I and many others were boycotting because of the lack of respect for POC. Having Chris Rock come on stage to deliver a few jokes doesn’t fix that issue and knowing many of the actors had probably been couched by their agents and PR reps to laugh and appear in on the joke just held no appeal.

    On the other hand then you have those who boycotted because they didn’t want anything important or serious to interrupt the four hour circle jerk. Seen more people outraged for Leo not getting an Oscar then POC being repeatedly shut out and not having access to the same opportunities.

    Then to add that sadly many say Chris didn’t really do anything to really skewer the issue and many of his jokes felt flat because, to be frank, he was pitching them to a mainly white audience that had no clue what he was talking about just confirmed for me I made the right decision.

    • Hannah says:

      Same here. All my friends wasn’t gonna watch it because of the whitewashing. Nobody was like oh I have to watch it because rock might say something controversial. It doesn’t work that way. Mainly while people were nervous about what he might say in my opinion. As it turned out there wasn’t much to worry about.

  16. Tig says:

    And this is why Chris Rock was in a no-win situation- a host’s job is to “burn the place to the ground”? In a word, no. Face it, there was no way he was ever going to make everyone happy- esp this year. And the irony of suggesting that the Oscars go back to asking white guys- and maybe Ellen?- to host? And I say that as someone who thinks Hugh J should host all the shows!

  17. LA says:

    #OscarsSoLong and #OscarsSoBoring doesn’t help either

    Unless you are at a viewing party (which I feel like is mostly a thing in Los Angeles), the telecast is just too long and too boring. In the time of Twitter, not many people are going to sit around and watch such a dull, 4 hour mess. I haven’t watched in years.

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      I’m in Canada and they have viewing parties, or at least a few local restaurants put it on to bring people in for food and drinks.

      The show is dated and creaky and out of touch, perhaps like the industry.

      • LA says:

        Lol yep! In fact- I wouldn’t be surprised if Idris didn’t get a nomination because BONN was a Netflix movie, and therefore not “good enough” to be considered. Times are changing faster than the Academy cares to move.

      • noway says:

        I don’t think you even have to go with Beast of No Nation not being “good enough”, just that old academy members don’t understand Netflix or other mediums film distribution. Not necessarily a snotty thing, although you could be right, but more of I don’t get this new fangled thing. Which is a big part of the problem with the show it is old and dated and boring. You want better ratings make it different, and no the thank you scroll didn’t work or help.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        Noway & LA

        This myth really needs to be dispelled. Before BONN a different Netflix series that ONLY appeared on Netflix was nominated and won. It did not even have the theatrical release that BONN had so the excuse that the Academy doesn’t understand Netflix is a false one.

      • Nic919 says:

        Beasts of No Nation was about a young child soldier in Africa. It didn’t get nominated because the Academy as a whole wasn’t interested in the topic. Everyone is going on about Jacob Tremblay in Room, but Abraham Attah had a far more complex role and at least he was recognized by the Spirit Awards.

  18. kc says:

    I like chris rock but was disappointed in him. I would have him back as the host. I think the key to a good host is a strong background in stand up and/or improv (see nph failure). This being said, while I watched the telecast I wasn’t engaged and I think it all comes down to the movies – I didn’t care about any of them. I thought it was an uninspired year for the most part.

  19. The Original Mia says:

    I’d say it was a combination of OscarSoWhite, the ceremony is long and tedious, no excitement about the movies that were nominated and social media. Who needs to watch when everything pops up on Twitter and FB within minutes of it happening.

    I didn’t watch, but I didn’t like what he said about Jada or Rihanna. Not only did he undermine the true outrage over the snubs, but he made a sexist, misogynistic remark about Rihanna that was so unnecessary.

    • Pixi says:

      I also think it’s because everything is so predictable. My friends and I always fill out our own ballots before the ceremony and see if we can guess who will win, I got 16/24 without reading any pre-Oscar predictions because I wanted to challenge myself this year, but it was still pretty predictable.

  20. Emily C. says:

    It’s not like this is some huge dip. The Oscars have been steadily declining for years. They’re becoming more and more irrelevant. 4 hours of rich out-of-touch people congratulating themselves — and that’s true even (or maybe especially) when they’re supposedly self-flagellating.

  21. Mia4s says:

    The boycotters will try to take some credit. Others will say they tuned out because of the “political preaching”. No one can prove anything.

    The likely reality? That’s not an unusual drop in the age of streaming. Also none of the main nominees were overwhelming blockbusters. What does the drop mean then? Not much.

    • Marny says:

      I agree. I think there are also so many good tv shows now and people are watching fewer movies. Also, I don’t think movie stars carry the same interest they did 10 years ago. I think people are more into reality stars bc they are everywhere all the time. If anything, I think OscarsSoWhite may have helped bc it created a little intrigue.

    • caitlinK says:

      The Oscars have had a steadily declining viewership for at least—probably more–than a decade now, and the Internet/ live streaming probably have more to do with that rapid demise than anything else. In the Internet Age, people have become used to attaining very rapid gratification, and it seems slow and tedious to have to sit through an entire, long winded, self congratulatory, slow paced, often awkward four hour show to find out who will win the biggest awards, when one can just look it all up the next day online, view the parts that were interesting to them personally, and be able to forego the predictable dullness of watching the Oscars live. I would *like* to think there was more to it than that–for instance, that enough people are sick of the relentless whiteness of the award nominees and winners, of the paucity of female writers and directors, of the shamefully few roles for PO– so that there was a boycott of the Oscars of significant numbers that caused viewership to decline, but I doubt that this was the case. I just think that the *slowness* of the show, in the Internet Age esp., puts today’s viewers off, and the Oscars now seems has become a relic of a different time. It’s outdated in so *many* ways–it’s racist and sexist. It’s also absurdly cliquish. You have to know and say the right things to the right people to be nominated; Oscar campaigns have become excruciatingly transparent. It’s a very elitist “popularity” show that doesn’t, in my opinion, reliably measure or reward true talent for a variety of these reasons, and I predict that the Oscars will die off—or be radically altered—due to political and technological “climate change” sometime in the next deacade or so. I certainly hope that they will make vast changes.

    • mom2two says:

      I agree with this. I think also, which has been mentioned in other posts, the predictability of most winners (3 out of 4 of the actor/actresses winners were predictable) and the glut of awards shows prior to the Oscars which makes those winners predictable don’t help.
      They expanded Best Picture to 10 pictures (and they don’t always nominate 10) in hopes to include blockbusters, but blockbusters or not, I don’t think nominating them would increase viewership.

  22. Pixi says:

    Tina and Amy should host

  23. tiny dancer says:

    Ellen was awful the second time she hosted so I don’t know why anyone would want her back and the worst rating is still Jon Stewart back in 2008.
    What the Oscars need is a host that is wholesome yet hilarous…which is clearly lacking amongst our comedians these days where vulgarity and mean spirited jokes rule.
    Here’s the thing, we have enough of that in real life already, most people don’t want to sit through mean, vulgar and offensive “jokes” and contrary to popular belief it does not make us happy to see people uncomfortable and upset.
    We want to laugh and be comfortable and a host that makes the 4 hour long show seem like 30 min.

    • whatevers says:

      Yeah I hated Ellen hosting. She does not need to come back. She’s just out of touch as most of the industry is. Frankly the only one that I can see doing it and having a good time at it is Hugh Jackman.

    • LAK says:

      Which is why Billy Crystal was such a hit in the 90s. There was always a twinkle in his eyes as though he was holding himself back from straying into a blue or mean-sprited joke, but kept it wholesome AND funny.

  24. The Eternal Side-Eye says:

    Also Chris, with the whole entirety of #OscarsSoWhite being a major trending topic and you KNOWING what the situation is personally in Hollywood how the hell could you make an Asian joke??? How could you go after Jada for doing what you were too scared to do? How could you make a comment about Rihanna for what amounts to no reason at all? Where was your head in this game Chris?

    Smh, it’s like he was trying too hard to appeal to the audience and ended up shooting himself in the foot.

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      Yup. If it was impossible to be all things to be all people, there were still ways to acknowledge and work with that. John Oliver’s crew put together a brilliant montage of Hollywood white-casting over the decades. Something like that would have been fascinating fun — with follow-up remarks to bring things up to date. Opportunity lost.

    • K says:

      Or maybe he didn’t agree with or believe Jada, like you said he knows the industry so he knows Smiths maybe he knows more then we do that made him do it.

      And to say Chris Rock doesn’t go hard for diversity or is to scared to talk about it is NOT TRUE, he talks about it more then almost anyone and he doesn’t wait for award season. He could think that caring about the Oscars is stupid when like he said it is about opportunity. You saw a lot of POC take the stance of why care now when you should be caring about the hiring and films that get made. Which Chris called out huge and has for years Google any interview he has had in the last 4 years you’ll see it.

      I was upset with the Oscar nominations there were true and upsetting snubs (not smith) but people are right it’s the end of the line if they don’t fix the hiring and producing then the trend will continue because the movies won’t be there. And personally I want to see movies that reflect my reality, the world I live in- which is diverse. So I want the hiring fixed.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        Yes, this is the same man who frequently gives interviews about how hard black women have it in Hollywood and how he’s had to personally fight for some of them to get some opportunities. Which is why the Jada joke fell so flat.

        I don’t care if he doesn’t like Jada but targeting the one woman who actually had the guts AS a black woman, AS an actress, AS someone who knows this could hurt her career to speak up and attach her name to it was cheap and cowardly. He goes hard for diversity…in magazines and individual interviews, this was the first time he was actually speaking TO those he routinely complains about and he flinched.

        When he’s handling diversity in front of a large crowd ESPECIALLY during such a tense cultural moment? Well then he trots out an Asian child and make jokes about blacks people’s ‘real’ problems (whoo hoo we’re not being constantly lynched anymore!).

        The problem with the idea the public should complain in the beginning is the idea the public even CAN complain. Hollywood casting is done in secret and when it is revealed THEN it’s easy to go online and see people’s complaints. But then the contracts are already signed and we have no way of stopping it. We are responding in the only way we can as consumers. We don’t support the movies. (Gods of Egypt bombed as have several whitewashing films that came out recently) We don’t praise the casting. It has hardly changed anything because because Hollywood is about ignoring facts in favor of uplifting whites.

      • K says:

        One I think he and many people when talking about complaining meant those in the industry. Like I’m sure he is thinking where are you Jada when will won’t hire a woman or black director? I think he is saying we need to speak up more because let’s be real Jada isn’t out there like he is. Many are all the time whether it be about racist accents, casting couches, unequal pay or white washing films many many Hollywood people are talking but never JadA. Please note I’m not faulting Jada it’s her right to speak on something or not. But with that Chris has the right to feel and comment on it too.

        He spoke out, he didn’t drop the issue the entire telecast. I don’t think he was making light of the issues black people have I think he was trying to figure out a way to highlight them and be heard. Did he miss the mark? That is a matter of opinion and I think in some cases yes but he wasn’t mocking them. although the Asian kids was bad because you couldn’t even see what he was going for there and it shot the diversity argument in the foot.

        As for consumers yes we can have a say about casting simply don’t go to movies lacking diversity or that have been whitewashed and instead go to movies that do have diversity and aren’t whitewashed. They will respond to a loss of revenue not a hashtag or low Oscar ratings. But look at Gods of Egypt how much did it make opening weekend? Do people really care- if they did that is what they’d boycot. I know I won’t see it because it doesn’t reflect reality of who Egyptians are.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        Gods of Egypt is the first major flop of the new year. Before that Pan with its whitewash of the Native Americans was also a major flop. Before that even more flops. That is the public’s way (along with the complaints and hashtags) of letting studios know WHY they are not supporting these films and what they want to see. Has that changed anything? No. Because Hollywood ignores facts in favor of uplifting whites. I already know one major TV show that ignored audiences that asked for an Asian lead and a handful more whitewash films in the works so clearly we can do nothing but watch Hollywood canibalize itself till it is forced to change.

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        Hollywood can ignore bad box office receipts for just so long … I agree, they eventually will be forced to change because it’s a business foremost. I do wonder if they connect the poor receipts to their ridiculous and unappealing products.

      • Ennie says:

        not just the hiring, but the stories that are to be told.

  25. Jayna says:

    There’s so many award shows leading up to the Oscars nowadays, and so there’s no surprise element. You kind of know who is going to win, and there’s usually only a few surprises, if that. And it’s overload by the time you see them. You’ve already seen a lot of the same people already giving speeches, picking up awards for the movies at Golden Globes, SAG Awards, BAFTA, Critic’s Choice awards, etc.

    No one I knew really cared who won this year. Leo was a shoe-in. But there weren’t that many great movies or great performances or great movies that were going head to head in a tight race this year.

    • blah says:

      The golden globes need to go, seriously why the need for that fraud award show?? Does anyone take it seriously when even Denzel W told us it can be bought?
      As for the rest, they need to spread them out more and not every awards show needs to be telecast, like SAG for example, there is no host (??) and it’s short and basically a dinner for actors and handing out the statue one after the other. Just send the award to them.
      Oh and the campaigning needs to be stopped. They need to make gift giving,private dinners etc forbidden. Just send the movies and that’s it. No interviews leading up to the awards, no sneaky meetings and sucking up to academy members. All of it needs to be stopped.
      I’m sure there are ways.

      • K says:

        Agreed. I only watch most for the fashion but in terms of actual awards I love SAG, it’s focused on people I know, there aren’t boring skits they hand out the awards and wear amazing gowns all I need. It’s an hour maybe an hour and half.

        Globes should go, everyone knows it’s fixed. Campaigning should go, academy members should be required to see the movies. And just do SAG and Oscars.

      • noway says:

        I agree, but then can we add liquor and food and to one of the other shows as the Globes with the alcohol just seems more fun.

      • LAK says:

        The SAGS are only for actors. The other guilds don’t televise their awards, so the first time you see them on TV is GG and Oscars. The actors have MTV awards, People’s choice awards, SAGS and goodness knows how many more other award ceremonies, all televised, yet you vote to do away with the few ceremonies that showcase other skillsets in the industry in favour of MORE acting awards??!!!

      • K says:

        @LAK if you are talking about strictly getting ratings then yeah because it is who people know and have passion about.

        There is no way pushing all the acting to the back didn’t hurt this years show. While people respect ans understand how much work goes into making a movie you don’t know the custome people it’s hard to get excited. I know who Leo is and I had feelings on his win.

        No opinion on sound editing and it took hours. They could try the SAG approach and lessen the skits and performances and focus on awards more but 4 hours is long to not know who the people are.

  26. Amber says:

    Well, #Oscars so boring, predictable, with many nominations going to people and films that wouldn’t have a chance to even be there in better years, turning off even movie geeks like me. It’s something you’d only suffer through in any given year if you had specific investments in it. This is going to go down as one of those bad years on Pajiba’s list here I only liked a few “award” films last year (like five, six, I’m not kidding) and THREE of them weren’t nominated for anything or were up for maybe one technical/effects/writing award. Room and Mad Max were really the only movies in my “Loved It” column that were up for SOME major awards and I knew exactly what they were going to win. Vikander may have appeared in five films last year. But Man from U.N.C.L.E. made the most among them. I repeat, U.N.C.L.E. is the biggest hit on Vikander’s CV presently. Most people have probably still never heard of her, paid attention to her, or seen her in anything, (her rise is not like a Jennifer Lawrence rise). And she won for a film that made $11 million in North America. Room grossed $22 million worldwide! People weren’t tuning in to see those wins. Or to see if Steve Jobs (a flop), Spotlight or The Big Short won something. Btw, Mad Max made $143 million domestically. That’s really good for a bonkers, “R” rated film. But that made it the 19th highest grossing movie last year, after it came out in MAY. Know what I mean? I’ve watched in 60 times by now. Because I’ve had the blu ray forever and it’s on HBO already. It’s not riding that specific award show momentum and a winter, Oscar season release. And again, I knew it would only win technical awards. The Revenant’s grossed $170 million domestically, with a 82% on Rotten Tomatoes, a 76 on Metacritic and a B+ CinemaScore. Award voters are the ones who have liked that film the most. (Creed got better reviews and a higher audience score.) And we’re not talking Deadpool numbers either. Or American Sniper, LOTRs, Avatar bank. I mean, The Imitation Game made $91 million in NA. The Martian grossed more than the both The Revenant and Mad Max, and it wasn’t going to win anything. People know that. There’s 9,000 award shows before the Oscars even come around.

    • whatevers says:

      That’s a good point. Most of these movies nominated no one really saw. So there was no excitement for a lot of people.

    • Amber says:

      *Sigh* So many typos. “I watched IT [Mad Max] 60 times by now”. And “The Martian grossed more than both The Revenant and Mad Max”.

      I’m in a Super Tuesday fog right now.

    • noway says:

      This is all true, but nothing new. So I don’t think you can blame the ratings decline on that. Generally speaking Oscar winning or nominated movies are rarely blockbusters. This year you had three movies that were nominated that made serious bank in The Revenant, The Martian and Mad Max. If you saw Stallone’s interview, even he was acknowledging how happy he was to be at the Oscars again as he generally doesn’t make the kind of movies that get nominated. Yes I know that he got nominated for Rocky many moons ago too, but it isn’t the norm. Doesn’t mean that I want only blockbuster to be made either. Some great movies wouldn’t get made. Do think they need to update the show though and make it more friendly to the media savvy viewer who can see or hear all the interesting bits on social media. This is the real problem.

    • LAK says:

      Firstly, many of the films that make bank have a HUGE marketing budget that drives people to the cinema to see them and or allows the cinema owners to show those films because the marketing of theose films means they are more likely to be favoured by the movie going public who will chose to see those films over films that don’t have the marketing budget to entice anyone even if they make it into the cinema.

      That is why the awards are important. They breathe life into films no one would have been aware of. One can argue about specific taste in films, but box office is a poor measure for the quality of a film. Afterall, Michael Bay’s films make bank, every single time, and even you can’t argue that they are any good.

      • SloaneY says:

        This! People are going on like these are the people’s choice awards! This is the Oscars. This is the pinnacle of awards for all facets of the movie industry. And just because you spent more money on it (+the marketing) doesn’t mean it’s any good.

      • Amber says:

        @SloaneY, and spending millions of dollars and months campaigning for your mediocre (The King’s Speech and many more), Oscar bait (The Theory of Everything and many more), wannabe prestige film (The Imitation Game and many more) to win awards doesn’t make it good either. That system’s broken. The Oscars are not a meritocracy by any stretch of the imagination. But they never have been. I don’t know why you guys thought I was arguing that box office gross equals quality, rather than explaining how there was very little conversation about the overwhelming majority of the nominated films and performances this year mainly due to the fact that few people saw them. It was like The Revenant bear, Leo, the dance in Ex Machina and #OscarsSoWhite. Most of the awards were predictable (or you thought they were). So if you weren’t watching to see Leo win, what was there?

    • Amber says:

      @LAK and @Noway – Are ya’ll replying to the wrong person? I’m not simply blaming it on box office. I surely was not going on like the AA should the People’s Choice awards. That’s why I mentioned the reviews and audience scores for The Revenant. I thought I clearly said that as someone who actually watched all these films 1) Most people did not see them, true. 2) But even I didn’t like and didn’t care about most of the films nominated. Mad Max and Room were the only best picture nominees that I loved. Yes, as far as the money made, that’s relative. It’s true they made money. I was just illustrating the asterisks you could put next to each film. I was more arguing with Kaiser, but not really. I was wrong to say that Mad Max was the 19th highest grossing film last year. It was the 21st. There’s bank, and then there’s $300 million bank, there’s $600 million bank, and there’s billion dollar bank nowadays. So I named a blockbuster and mega-blockbuster that have also been in awards discussion in previous years. It can help the ratings and you often have a least one sprinkled in there. I’m sure dip in rating is due to lot a combination of things. The way people watch the ceremony, a boycott may have hurt it, it wasn’t the biggest box office year for the Oscars, a lack of star power, not many realistic win opportunities for bigger stars and bigger films, not many wins for the few stars in the running in the dozen of award shows before the Oscars, (and my biggie) the overall lackluster quality of many of the nominated films, etc.,

      If I had my way Mad Max, Room, and Sicario would’ve won the most awards. I don’t know where the heck you’re getting “Give Michael Bay some shine” from me. But what ya’ll are arguing isn’t even the end of the story either. It’s not as simple as “Big movie, Bad!”, “Indie movie, Good!” Creed was actually a critically acclaimed, audience beloved film. If this was about acclaim and money, Inside Out and The Force Awakens would’ve also been frontrunners. We’re seeing this increasing disparity between films that critics love and even films that audience’s love, versus what movies just rack up awards for inexplicable reasons–Campaigning, campaigning, campaigning, voters automatically buying into the “prestige” packaging of some films (Harvey Weinstein’s genius), the genre bias many voters have, and favoritism or truly treating the Oscars like a big commercial (which is what they are) for big stars and up-and-comers. (We’ve had this discussion before too

  27. Jenni says:

    If ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Suddenly everything is too white. It’s not OK to feel good by making others feel bad.

    • Hannah says:

      Do you actually think the lynching jokes made black people feel good?

      Or the jokes about Asian kids made Asian people feel good?

    • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

      So…let’s do the math on this.

      “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it”

      Previously POC routinely shut out but no one complained and everyone focused on the ‘glamour’ of the awards show so…we should all stop complaining so white people can feel good and not pressured to examine their hiring practices?

    • Marty says:

      There are a lot of people who have that mentality when it comes to diversity. Most of them are racist, but sure, stay stuck in your ignorance.

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      It’s not sudden at all. People have been complaining about racism in Hollywood and other industries for a long, long, long time.

  28. Hannah says:

    Oscars outdated years ago. This year I didn’t want to watch it anyway with all the whitewashing. They made it seem like Chris Rock would make a difference just by being there but from what I heard he stuck it to the oscarssowhite activists more than the white establishment. Old white people can keep the oscars.

  29. Sissy says:

    The Oscars telecast is going the way of the Miss America pageant. Stale, boring, irrelevant.

  30. mia girl says:

    IMO, it’s a combination of many factors:

    -Broadcast TV has been declining in ratings steadily for the past decade.

    -There are more choices than ever for consumers to watch whatever they want, whenever they want.

    -We are all multitasking our viewing with social media. So you can watch something else and through SM still know what Rock might have said or who wins what when it actually happens.

    -Sunday night scheduled programming is really strong (ie Walking Dead)

    -For the past few years there have been so many more award shows prior to the Oscars (people have award burnout)

    -This year’s crop of nominated films and actors were not all that exciting and there was no real drama in who might win


    -There was actually higher tune-in at first, but the telecast was not well produced and this includes switching the order of how they gave out the awards which meant no acting award was given out for a while. People tuned out.

    -Chris Rock was funny, but as a host couldn’t carry viewers through the telecast.

    -This year lacked glamour and high profile movie stars.

    With all that said, 34 million people watched the telecast. That’s still impressive in today’s fragmented media world.

  31. Smara says:

    “most black people are angry with Chris”

    Really? Did I miss a meeting? (I am a WOC).

    Chris wasn’t making *fun* of rape and lynching. He was responding to the often asked question: Why NOW?

    And the joke was a #FirstWorldProblems joke. We (meaning black people) used to have it so very very terrible, running from the clan, raped by slavers etc. that who has *time* to worry about picture stories on a movie screen?

    The laughter was the at the *horror*. It was only funny (I laughed) because it (slavery, rape) was horrible. The deeper the laugh, the more the acknowledgement of the decimation of a People.

    We (black people) can only feel the true need for representation when there is and has been: black supreme court judge, black secretary of state, black president, black host of the oscars, yet little in the way of fictional representation.

    The fiction is not meeting the reality. This discrepancy is seen, has been noted and we (Americans) have come far enough to be able to address it.

    • Decorative Item says:

      Beautifully stated!

    • Kitten says:

      I appreciate the difference of opinion.

      I didn’t see Rock’s monologue but I read the criticisms here and at the risk of swerving out of my lane, I feel bad for him. He was under a lot of pressure and truthfully, his job as a comedian is to be funny. Jokes can have a political undertone, they can be poignant and impactful or lighthearted and silly. I’m not really sure that the Oscars forum was the right place for him to get too deep or too polarizing. It seems like he tried to toe the line a bit…

      Then again, I’m a white chick (who hates the Oscars BTW) so I didn’t have the same level of investment in it that some in the black community may have had. I don’t know..I guess I don’t think the responsibility for Hollywood’s bullsh*t should fall solely on Rock’s shoulders.

      • Magnoliarose says:

        Yes kitten I feel the same. It’s the Oscars and they are what they are: rigged pats on the back for the powerful elites of Hollywood. CR was under enormous pressure and there was no way he was going to please everyone. Not mention the outdated format and award season fatigue.

        I’ve been a lurker and liked your comments and the avi. I have a tuxie medium haired kitten who looks like that. 🙂

  32. TheGrandSophy says:

    Watching the Oscars used to be a highlight when I was growing up (Gen X) because it was entertaining, glamorous and witty. The fashion was generally elegant and something you could aspire to on a smaller scale. It took you out of your life for a little while and brought you back with a smile on your face.

    I fell down the rabbit hole that is Youtube after this year’s Oscars and ended up watching clips from the 70s with a 71 year old Fred Astaire dancing on the Oscars stage, Bob Hope telling jokes in the 80s – now that was truly entertaining.

    And that is the main issue, I think. No one is watching because the entertainers have forgotten how to really entertain.

    What passes for wit today is often crass, mean-spirited or in poor taste. ‘Edgy’ fashion often involving poorly cut garments or inner wear masquerading as outer wear leaves much to be desired. Constant preaching about their pet causes, category fraud, complete disbelief that yet another Adam Sandler movie gets the green light, movies that might be ‘art’ but don’t interest many people not in the industry…#OscarsNoOneCares

    In all the self-seriousness of researching for roles and method acting etc., they have forgotten that the primary purpose of their industry is to entertain. People want to escape their lives just for a few hours today as much as they did during the Golden Age of Hollywood.

    In a nutshell, no one watches because it doesn’t add anything to their lives, they have better things to do and because it is as boring as batsh*t (excuse the vernacular).

    N.B. With all the preaching that goes on about their various causes, I’d like to see the Oscars adopt a version of what my workplace offers…at the end of the year, we can choose to either receive a gourmet Christmas hamper ($$) or donate the value of the hamper to a charity of our choice. I propose that the Oscars offer attendees the choice of receiving the much anticipated gift bag (worth over $200K this year) or donating the value towards one of the many causes they are soooo passionate about. Let’s see how many walk the talk when it affects them directly.

    • oliphant says:

      great post- only came here to comment that when i was younger i used to sit up until 3/4am and watch it on tv (in england) and now i couldn’t even be bothered to watch the short clips of people accepting their awards. As many have said on this post, no-one really watches live tv anymore.

    • MickeyM says:

      I completely agree. Good post!

  33. A says:

    Setting aside even the blockbusters, I didn’t walk out of any of the smaller movies this year with any sort of passion. Spotlight made me angry, loved the Big Short and Room, but unlike past years I didn’t talk about them for weeks and passionately try and get people to go see them like I did with 12 years a slave for example. It’s not that I didn’t think they were great, it’s not that they didn’t make me feel, it’s just that I feel like they missed some “it” factor. I’m glad Spotlight won, but I just don’t care as much as I did in past years. And logically, it was as well done and as well acted as anything else.

  34. Ann says:

    I didn’t watch. Rock’s voice is like nails on chalkboard to me.

  35. K says:

    No one saw the movies and in some cases heard of them, rock could have done that bit on the street on monatana with all white people and gotten the same responses he got in Compton.

    They picked movies people didn’t see, they stopped asking who the actresses are wearing (the most popular part of the awards) and it was insanely long. Add all this with the ability to watch the people you like and care about on Hulu or YouTube the next day. Seriously why tune in?

    Chris Rock had an impossible job, no matter what he did some people would say he was wrong. I don’t know how it’s being received, and I would never be arrogant enough to declare what an entire group or most of a group of people thought. Personally I thought he did good and as much as I like Ellen she couldn’t have done better.

    The issue with the Oscar ratings aren’t the hosts, people don’t tune in or out based on a host if they care about the movies and stars nominated. No one cared this year.

    • dAsh says:

      I agree. It just wasn’t interesting because the majority of people do not know nor have seen the movies nominated. Some people have never even heard of them and it’s been this way for some years now. I feel like the Oscars these days are just there for movie critics – to see if their favorite movies and actors are in, if their predictions are right and not for people anymore – what regular people enjoyed at the movies and who they think did good in acting. I remember seeing the trailer for Brooklyn last summer and was so excited to see it (I love Soarse since Atonement and I like those kinds of movies) and come November or December, I found out that I have to drive an hour just to see it because that’s the only closest artsy-fartsy movie house that was playing it in my state. So I never got to see it and lost interest.

    • Magnoliarose says:

      The movies and its stars this year were boring for a variety of reasons.

  36. Sarah01 says:

    For me Chris was disappointing. He wasn’t as funny as he could have been, like the jokes in ‘everybody hates Chris’ were hilarious. He can be funny. Ricky was hilarious and delivers his jokes well.
    I think the golden globes for me were better.

  37. db says:

    It really sucks that some people feel the need to blame Chris Rock.

  38. Who ARE these people? says:

    Silver linings – it was nice to be well rested on Monday morning for the first time in years!

    • stinky says:

      ‘Silver Linings Playbook’ was a HUGELY overrated film!!!!

      • Who ARE these people? says:

        I think you’re joking, right?

        I wasn’t making a play on that film’s name. I was only using a real cliche. It really was nice to be well rested after decades of being exhausted at work the morning after the Oscars. I didn’t watch it and life went on just fine!

        Suspect this is why ratings keep going down – it simply doesn’t feel as compelling on a mass scale the way it used to.

      • Kate says:

        I agree. It was just too much. I can’t even pinpoint what I didn’t like but there was just something…

  39. H says:

    I didn’t watch, but my FB feed kept saying it was “boring.”

  40. seesittellsit says:

    Nah, terminal boredom. The Oscars have been losing ratings for a long time. If anything, people couldn’t bear the thought of not only watching a bunch of rich pretty people congratulate themselves in absurdly expensive (and often ridiculous) clothes, but also being lectured, too. People don’t watch the Oscars to get lectured – although personally I thought Rock did a great job being funny while addressing the elephant in the room. But let’s face it: the Oscars are absurd. I never make it past “Cinematography” and go to bed and get the rest of the results the next day from the news.

    • K says:

      Sorry I see the line about pretty rich people and no one caring and that doesn’t sit with me. If no one cared about watching rich people’s real housewives wouldn’t do as well as it does, neither would any of the primetime soaps.

      I think if they want the Oscars to be relevant the movies have to be.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        This exactly. I do think with the insistance in whitewashing and picking films mostly based on their perception/refusing to even watch other films they’re ignoring what’s actually catching the interest of the American public (who mostly watches things like this). As a result there really is no desire from audiences to watch which boring film they didn’t see wins.

        It would have been one thing if they did watch Straight Out of Compton and simply didn’t like it, but the fact so many refused to watch it because of their personal feelings shows us the problem. That was a huge hit movie that resonated with so many and they turned their nose up to it.

  41. sanders says:

    Why sit through a LONG and boring awards show when you can get highlights on Twitter, FB, Instagram and any other social media site?

  42. Evie says:

    All politics aside, and believe me I have several opinions about the political element of it, it’s just too long. I hated sitting through award ceremonies in school when I knew I had an award coming, so sitting on my couch in my own home to watch a 4 HOUR CEREMONY is not my cup of tea. It would be different if we didn’t “know” who was going to win. Like, yeah, we don’t know specifics, but by the time the Oscars roll around, there’s been so much chatter and so many other award shows that we all pretty much know which movies/actors are going to walk away with all the awards. Instead of watching the Oscars, I just check online after it’s over, see who won what, and get back to what I was doing. Also, I feel like most of the movies I never even hear of until Oscar night. And I go to the movies all the time.

  43. Sisi says:

    People didn’t care because the best actress, best supporting actress and best supporting actor weren’t filled with mainstream A-list names. Which only leaves best actor, and there wasn’t a race there so why watch for that? The director list also did not have much namerecognition value.
    The majority of the crowd is a fickle bunch that care about watching big names in a contest.

  44. CoKatie says:

    Long time lurker, first time commenting. I love Chris Rock. To me, he is one of the best comedians of his generation, particularly in the way he can bring up uncomfortable topics and magically make me nice my head and roar. This was not his best performance. I was cringing for him at times and just wanted him to wrap it up. I’m no fan of Jada, but that was really unnecessary. Grandma hanging? Yeah, no. He had an opportunity to make a point that HAS to be made, but he belabored it. And isn’t #OscarsSoWhite about the total lack of diversity of all races in Hollywood ? His monologue made it more about the lack of just Black talent. And that was a missed opportunity.

    I agree with another poster earlier (and an editorial in a big city newspaper): The films being nominated are not the films being seen by the masses. I’ll admit to it – I’m lowbrow. I’m there for the big blockbusters rather than the high brow, artsy type films. The members of the Academy don’t tend to agree with me, apparently, in their selection process.

    And finally, was anyone really surprised with the winners? Their campaigning has been going on forevah. It was pretty much a foregone conclusion of who was going to win the major awards. And let’s face it, the bulk of the public prefers a mystery/drama to a documentary. My point being that all suspense and build up was removed this year. The major reason most of us tuned in was to watch Chris do his magic. Everything else seemed predetermined.

    I was long in making the point: This year’s awards received low ratingsere not due to the host (he was actually a draw), not because of people feeling uncomfortable about the controversy; but rather because of the poor selection of nominees by Academy Members and because in the majority of the categories, the winner was a foregone conclusion. Just my .02.

    • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

      I liked your comment and welcome to CB!

      I think there’s a way to honor both Art films and ‘lowbrow’ films but clearly they haven’t found it. The best movies (as in most successful) didn’t have any role in the show and the movies with limited releases were given top spots.

      I’d like to see some of the films eventually, but in the way this whole situation went down it did leave a bad taste in my mouth.

      • K says:

        I think they just have to make more diverse and interesting films. Right now you get explosion action films or Room (which I loved but not a huge distro) they need to get back to making movies that are interesting topics that are elevated aka not Michael Baine (transformer guy).

        They also have to require the academy memebers to watch the movie. How many people said they didn’t watch BONN, because it was a disturbing subject matter? That isn’t ok and shouldn’t happen.

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        Agreed. It’s ridiculous that the purpose of the awards show is defeated by an Academy that refuses to watch certain films merely because of some excuse. If everyone isn’t judged equally then the awards become meaningless.

    • Wentworth Miller says:

      Hi, COKATIE

  45. poppy says:

    less people will watch each year, as has been the trend for a while. too long and most adults realize oscars are bought for the winners. fake and boring.

  46. Jess says:

    Some interesting reactions from the poc community

    Public Enemy member Professor Griff isn’t pleased the Oscars played “Fight the Power” during Sunday’s telecast.

    “The show can’t claim the blackness of Public Enemy’s message,” Griff, 55, told TMZ.

    He adds the Academy used the controversial song to temporarily appease protestors. It was played at the start of the show when Chris Rock walked on stage and during rolling credits at the show’s conclusion.

    When asked why that song was chosen, Oscar music supervisor Byron Phillips told Entertainment Weekly, “[We wanted to] really set the tone for what the night was going to be and do something that was representative of Chris, and who Chris was, and the vibe and tone Chris wanted to set for the evening. There was obviously nothing more perfect than ‘Fight the Power’ for that.”

    This year’s Oscar ceremony drew much criticism after no actors of color were nominated. Jada Pinkett Smith, Will Smith, Spike Lee and others openly boycotted the ceremony.

    Rev. Al Sharpton held his own rally prior to the show. And in lieu of attending, Ryan Cooler and Ava DuVernay appeared at a benefit for Flint, Michigan residents affected by the town’s water crisis.

    • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

      Yeah, Chris was in a tough spot and I feel badly for him but I was also happy to watch and support the livestream about Flint rather than the awards show.

    • stinky says:

      Their statement said “Chris’ three times.
      Im pretty sure that means Chris got to pick the song.
      Is that so hard to imagine? Lord have mercy.

  47. Jean says:

    He’s just sucked, in my opinion. He seemed nervous and passive-aggressive, all jokes were bitter.
    And why people think Creed and Straight outta Compton were snubbed? Both were mediocre.

    • Leah says:

      The danish girl is a pretty mediocre film no? While i thought spotlight was an important story to tell it didn’t blow me away as a piece of cinema. So yeah you are right, movies about black people have to be exceptional pieces of art to be nominated while movies about white people can be just so so.

  48. Sassback says:

    What the hell is everyone talking about, “Lynching” jokes? Like he was belittling the Civil Rights era???
    He basically pointed out that while White America was receiving tiny gold statues for being pretty in pictures, black people were more worried about being killed just for being themselves. How do people not understand satire?? That laughter was 100% nervous because he was using such strong words.
    Are you people nuts, he was NOT making fun of it. His stance was different than Jada’s-the Oscars will go on with or without black people. It’s better to go in and make yourself heard and be at the table than just not show up and cross your arms because white people will not take it the way you want it. Nobody is going bullshit on Kevin Hart for attending.

    • SloaneY says:

      I’m really amazed at the number of people who obviously do not understand satire.

    • amunet ma'at says:

      I understood the joke I still did not like it. A person can understand the humor and still disagree. The first 6mins felt really uncomfortable looking at white ppl laugh at the black lives matters, laugh at the preposterousness of caring about the awards, while the last 5mins of the monologue had lots of jokes that missed the mark. I’m a Chris Rock fan, like since his HBO show, I have been a fan since he was Pookie, and I did not feel this was his best representation or his best humor. He does racial comedy extremely well. He has a talent for it, for pointing out these issues with biting but hilarious satire. and this time it just did not work.

  49. BananaJanna says:

    I’ll never watch the show again. When the noms were announced, I was immediately dismayed. I get #Oscarssowhite. But the messaging on the show was unrelenting. And ABC clearly brought out every black star under contract and pressed them to appear. That was gross too. The monologue and some quips yes. But all those dumb skits around the same topic? The show was hijacked. Winners have often used their pulpit to make a statement–DiCaprio, Inarritu–fine. But the whole show? And Rock gives his comedian friends an opportunity for bad standup throughout the show? Even Louis CK who made a good point introducing Documentary Short went too far to the point he discounted the films, which were all important. The upshot: I felt that the event, which is often the pinnacle of people’s careers, dismissed the movies, the nominees, and offered little respect to the winners by not giving them the time to speak. White guilt made it a circus. A travesty. Oscars are forever over for me.

    • FingerBinger says:

      +1 The lack of diversity shouldn’t have been the entire show. Oscarssowhite should have been in the monologue but not the entire monologue. Chris Rock beat the audience over the head with it.

    • Tourmaline says:

      You said this so perfectly, I agree with every word.

    • Maroon says:

      I thought it was a bit offensive by putting some of the TV stars in the front row. Some of the nominees were sitting in the 3rd or 2nd row and I thought that was disgusting. I mean I get they wanted to tackle the diversity issue but what are people like Kevin Hart and Kerry Washington doing sitting in the front row? They aren’t even nominees. Also, it was nothing but making the nominees feel bad about themselves. They can’t control if they get nominated and to make them feel they are only nominated for being white is wrong. Blame the voters, not the winners and nominees.

  50. Pants says:

    I really felt that Chris Rock pulled back on too many punches where he could have really stuck it to TPTB and went too far in places where the tone wasn’t right. The whole part about lynching was too much. And clearly the academy played into too many of the jokes and made it seem, to me, like they didn’t take the controversy very seriously. It just didn’t land right.

  51. nn says:

    Anyway, here’s wonderwall

  52. Josefina says:

    I don’t think people outside of internet forums that revolve around showbiz really care about #OscarsSoWhite because they don’t care about #Oscars. If people were actually familiar with the controversy, it was likely they’d tune in just to see what Chris Rock would say.

    The show is 4 hours long, and the only categories people actually care for are the acting ones and maybe best picture. Why bother watching when you can just google the winners and red carpet looks the morning after?

    This is a Hollywood gossip forum, and even us got bored by the Oscars. Of course the general populace would be even less enthusiastic.

    • J says:


      It’s boring and long, and for the people who do follow it, the winners aren’t even a surprise anymore. for people who don’t, they can get the answer in 2 seconds from the web the next morning instead of sitting there for hours

  53. Nancy says:

    Add me to the list of used to watch award shows. What’s the point. The big winners are always known in advance. It used to just be the Oscars, now four or five of their self-congratulatory award shows are televised. The Oscars are for them, the actors to throw themselves a party. The fact that ratings go down every year, even with this year which was supposed to be so dramatic, is just proof the public is pretty much over it.

  54. me says:

    Yeah there he was talking about how racist Hollywood is towards African Americans and then he pulls out 3 Asian kids and says a racist joke. Ummm ok. I love Chris Rock but the Oscars was not his best work, not even close.

  55. Kate says:

    More like #oscarssoboring or #oscarssoirrelevant

    It’s really hard to get excited about sitting on the couch and watching a bunch of very wealthy people who play pretend for a living pretend to care about issues that real people actually face

  56. me says:

    Ratings would have been down regardless. They have been slowing declining for the past 7 or 8 years.

  57. Saks says:

    I don’t think the boycott had any effect. My guess is that in the age of youtube and Internet streaming most people don’t want to watch a 4 hours long, boring, tedious show when the only categories they care about are presented 30 minutes before it ends, and they can watch the highlights and winners next morning.
    I think the only way to rise up viewership would be to make the show much shorter and stop losing time in nonesense like this years scouts or the unfunny jokes of the presenters.

  58. timlin says:

    I did not watch because I did not want to be lectured by some irrelevant and over-the-hill comedian about how awfully racist and lowly I am just because I am not black. I am over this and it is getting too tedious and way too bitter. Vacuous and superficial award shows like the Oscars is supposed to be fun. I gladly skipped it this year.

    Happy Leo won. My pick for Actress was Rampling, but oh well.

    The dresses were pretty, but you can see HQ images of them all across the net. Who cares to watch some 4 hour show, way over-fragmented by the overzealous advertising breaks, just to see some good fresh European couture? We have the instant internet now.

  59. stinky says:


  60. JenniferJustice says:

    I started to watch the Oscars because I love Chris Rock and I wanted to hear what he had to say, but he wasn’t very funny and he knew it. He kept doing that nervous little laugh and repeating himself like the reson people weren’t laughing was because they didn’t hear him. He made alot of offensive jokes/comments that were over the line. Once I realized that’s ALL he was going to talk about, I changed the channel.

    Yes, there is racism in Hollywood and yes, it needs to be addressed, but not to the point of making blanket statements about white people in general and other cultures. I expected to hear some legitimate and interesting thoughts, not simply putting down all white people. That’s no different than dumba$$ white people making generalized statements about Black people. It only perpetuates cultural bias and I’m not listening to it.

  61. Delta Juliet says:

    I didn’t watch the Oscars because every year I get so annoyed and I figured I would save myself the trouble. I’m tired of watching all of the public fawning and back patting these people get for being extremely well paid entertainers. Enough already.

  62. maggie says:

    Will and Jada have lots of money. Maybe they should start up their own movie company and only hire people of colour. Give those that they feel aren’t being represented a chance. If POC want opportunity they have to make it for themselves because the white guys aren’t going to do it for them. They don’t think from another persons reality?? W&J need to put their money where their mouth is because boycotting the Oscars does very little or nothing. It’s all talk.

    • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

      Will Smith does have a production company. They do hire black talent and give opportunities to POC. They do make black movies. Making movies takes millions if not billions. He can not fill the gap in the entire industry. Clint Eastwood has his own production company and can only to make one film every 5 years or so because it is incredibly expensive for a single individual.

      You should prob know about the topics you choose to volunteer your opinion on.

      • maggie says:


      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        To make more than one film every 5-7 years? Yeah, billions.

      • maggie says:

        Then there needs to be more Will Smiths and Jadas. As someone who is watching your election, I’m assuming you’re from the US, you have bigger problems than the lack of diversity in the entertainment industry.

    • AlmondJoy says:

      Geez Maggie. Did you do any research before writing this comment? As ESE already said, Will and Jada have done that. Still doesn’t change #OscarsSoWhite and the fact that Hollywood is racist.

  63. Skins says:

    People don’t care about Chris Rock

  64. Velvet Elvis says:

    I thought the show was terrible this year. Yes the lack off diversity needed to be addressed but the joke went on way too long and became the only thing. And I totally don’t get Rock picking on Will and Jada. They’re boycott helped bring attention to the racial issues so why he went so hard on them I’m not getting.

  65. Greta says:

    Lack of diversity was the biggest problem but not of racial characteristics. The silence when Stacy Dash spoke was shocking. That was caused by fear, pure fear. Had anyone dared to express support for her viewpoints which the majority despises, they were silenced by fear of losing their livelihoods, fear of ridicule by those who say they want peace, equality, all good things for their fellow man. That silence terrified me, for I stand with her. An individual against a mob who sacrificed her for their own sadistic pleasure. There are plenty of people like me who turned that show off for this reason. We’re not bad people. We simply disagree. Where has our tolerance gone in this country?

    • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

      …or the less dramatic more realistic reason is that the white audience had no clue who Stacey Dash is.

      This is ultimately what many find funny about people like Raven, Stacey, and etc. The ultra-conservative white audiences they try to ingratiate themselves to only use them as a token and their only purpose is to fulfill that limited token role.

      White audiences didn’t know who Stacey Dash was even when Clueless was popular. All of her working credits after Clueless were by black TV shows, production companies, and movies. Heck Kanye West’s 1st major music video (technically 2nd) featured her. The whites she’s constantly begging us not to judge haven’t given her a job since 1995.

      So when you trot out an actress for an award’s show that was controversial for its lack of diversity unsurprisingly they have no clue who this woman is. They have no reference for her and as a result no reaction. The blacks she complains keep bashing her are the only people who know who she is.

  66. Dangles says:

    I guess another reason for the low ratings is that a lot people simply don’t care. Sure there’s a lot of online chatter about the Oscars but I haven’t heard anyone talking about them in the real world.

    Anywho Happy Stupid Tuesday:

  67. Norman Garza says:

    I think the boycott is a small part of it but also the time it takes, three to four hours, blockbuster movies and popular movies usually never win with few exceptions, conservatives are not attracted for the same reason liberals don’t watch NASCAR or Fox News, that is fine, it is elite, only the top lucky actors, not the others that are talented and not certainly not the working actors get awards or even recognition and it is for the most part, it is mostly boring.

  68. Jeanne says:

    I watched it and regret it. They need to majorly trim down the show – no need to have performances of the best song nominees (really, how often are those songs even any good?) – that will cut nearly half an hour. And the start time needs to be moved up. The vast majority of the U.S. is not on Pacific time.

    And the pacing was horrible. They used to do the supporting actor and actress awards straight out of the gate, but this year they did supporting actress as the 3rd award and supporting actor wasn’t for another few hours. There’s always a lull in the middle of the broadcast, but this year, the lull started almost immediately and lasted about 2.5 hours!

    As for Chris Rock, I don’t feel like he did that great of a job. I wanted him to come out swinging, but it was more like he was walking on eggshells.

    The highlight for me, and the reason I didn’t just go to bed after hour 2, was seeing Tom Hardy.

  69. Dirty Martini says:

    I always start watching the Oscars first and foremost to see what the ladies are wearing. (Even if the “Ask THem More” sketch is true…..c’mon, admit it, that’s what we all do……)

    But once I see the opening monologue ….where yes I expect to laugh and be entertained….how much farther I go into the broadcast is driven by how much interest I have in the movies and the potential winners. The reality is I didn’t see very many of these movies this year……..

    So there was no way I wasn’t go to turn it on. I wanted to seethe clothes and I wanted to see how ROck and others handled the #OscarsSoWhite controversy. I fully admit I thought the idea of a boycott was stupid….I wanted to see who showed up and what they said about why…..

    But the reality is after about half of the broadcast, I was bored and turned the channel.

  70. YepIsaidit says:

    Gina/clinique, the golden globes ratings were down this year as well … And your dear leader Brad Pitt as you noted was there. 🤔 A lot of things from the Oscars lit Twitter on fire and still low ratings. Guess the Internet is not a good measure, eh?

  71. Umila says:

    I’m super annoyed by that stupid #. Do I agree that Hollywood is overrun with rich, white people? Sure. But is this hashtag that necessary? It feels like the one millionth time I’ve seen it. If we’re going to demonstrate something using a hashtag, can we get a little variety with that too? I would even take seeing #OscarsSo[insert whatever is synonymous with white]Marshmallow? to liven it up a little. I feel like this controversy could have been handled better, but there’s going to be whiners on either side that make the cause look bad. I don’t give a crap about seeing people in dresses or getting awards for movies. Minorities do need representation…but this whole thing makes me cringe.

  72. Nunya says:

    How about we just don’t care about a bunch of people, regardless of race, winning awards for art. The average American, regardless of race, is more concerned about: working a forty (if they’re lucky), putting food on the table, raising kids, living paycheck to paycheck, and a variety of other requirements that make up the day of blue collar/middle/lower America.

  73. Amanda G says:

    I’m glad the ratings sucked. They shouldn’t profit from the controversy. Unfortunately, I don’t think anything will change long term until there are more writers and producers who provide quality work for black actors, but I’m guessing next years Oscars will be “let’s kiss and make up” with some top awards going to black folks in the biz.

  74. Jane says:

    The Oscars sucked this year. Period.

  75. Dizzybenny says:

    Get rid of half of the category for one thing.
    Just keep;
    -best actor
    -best actress
    -best score
    -best director
    -best movie
    all other categories give them on the Saturday event that’s not televised.
    Show would run an hour, an hour and half.
    It makes for a show that’s tighter and quicker.

  76. India says:

    Without a doubt, the worst Oscars ever. Boring. Incessant yammering about the same old topic of the black situation. Good Gawd it was some kind of awful. Never again.

  77. Anare says:

    The oscars are the only awards show I watch. I go to lots of movies and I wait all year to plop my butt on the couch for hours and watch the oscars. Love the dresses and seeing the stars. I don’t give a crap what color people are or what gender. Don’t care if they are gay or trans or 9 years old or 90 years old. I want to watch a movie that takes me away. I love that feeling when you realize you were so engrossed in a movie that you lost your sense of time and place and just got swept up in the story. And that ability is what should win awards. I don’t care if it’s a director from Mexico or an actress from Sweden or a screenwriter straight outta Compton. Show me the story and stop fussing about what color someone is. Don’t care.

  78. lunchcoma says:

    I think #OscarsSoWhite definitely had an impact. I don’t think it helped that The Revenant is a movie that people respected more than loved, though. It’s not like it’s Titanic.

  79. Sean says:

    OR perhaps everyone was watching the Walking Dead.

  80. EM says:

    The hosting was atrocious and the jokes were a cringefest

  81. kanyekardashian says:

    If Billy Crystal isn’t hosting, why watch it? At least Billy doesn’t work blue and doesn’t offend.