I watch awards shows every year. It’s my job, but honestly, I would watch this sh-t even if it wasn’t my job. I watch awards shows like other people watch football games or basketball games. I would follow the ups and downs of Oscar season even if I wasn’t being paid. I like watching the race, and I like seeing how everything plays out. And even though there were a lot of questions and a lot of races which were seemingly “in the air” going into Oscar night, let me tell you: this year’s Oscar season kind of sucked. The two most “consensus” films were both not-great. Three Billboards was problematic as f–k (I saw one reviewer call it “lazy” and now I can’t get that out of my head) and The Shape of Water was just La La Land But Fishy. No one, I thought, was really crazy-excited about these two films. And when it came down to the line, the Oscars telecast lost millions of viewers over the course of the year because of it.
It was an Oscar do-over last night for host Jimmy Kimmel, producers Mike De Luca and Jennifer Todd and Best Picture presenters Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway. Following last year’s Envelopegate, which led to Beatty and Dunaway inadvertently announcing a wrong Best Picture winner, the quartet’s second go-around went without a hitch.
But the good news did not carry over to ratings for the 90th Academy Awards, which (correctly) crowned The Shape of Water as Best Picture. Last night’s ceremony, which aired live from 8 PM – 11:54 PM EST, averaged 26.5 million viewers (Live+same day) . That was down -19% from last year’s 32.9 million viewers, a nine-year low. That, despite the fast that The Shape of Water was the the highest-grossing Best Picture winner in five years.
The drop is big — the Oscars had never fallen below 32 million viewers and 21 metered markets household rating before, forcing pundits to scratch their heads. One explanation — the Oscars rubber stamped winners who already had swept the awards shows that preceded it, making for one of the most predictable Academy Awards ceremony in years. Some pointed to the length of the show, which again flirted with the 4-hour mark, others to the ubiquitous montages, the overall modest box-office performance of the movies nominated for best picture and the injection of politics/social issues into the speeches. However, most if not all of these factors were also present the last couple of years when the numbers were higher. And the Oscars’ strongest competition, AMC’s The Walking Dead, was actually a more potent ratings performer in years past.
Here are the final viewership totals for the Academy Awards so far this century, what won Best Picture that year and who hosted:
2018 26.5 million, The Shape of Water (Jimmy Kimmel)
2017 32.9 million, Moonlight (Jimmy Kimmel)
2016 34.4 million, Spotlight (Chris Rock)
2015 37.3 million, Birdman (Neil Patrick Harris)
2014 43.7 million, 12 Years a Slave (Ellen DeGeneres)
2013 40.3 million, Argo (Seth MacFarlane)
2012 39.3 million, The Artist (Billy Crystal)
2011 37.9 million, The King’s Speech (Anne Hathaway/James Franco)
2010 41.3 million, The Hurt Locker (Steve Martin/Alec Baldwin)
2009 36.3 million, Slumdog Millionaire (Hugh Jackman)
2008 32.0 million, No Country For Old Men (Jon Stewart)
2007 40. 2 million, The Departed (Ellen DeGeneres)
2006 38.9 million, Crash (Jon Stewart)
2005 42.1 million, Million Dollar Baby (Chris Rock)
2004 43.5 million, The Lord Of The Rings: The Return of the King (Billy Crystal)
2003 33.0 million, Chicago (Steve Martin)
2002 41.8 million, A Beautiful Mind (Whoopi Goldberg)
2001 42.9 million, Gladiator (Steve Martin)
I actually remember a decade ago, when the 2008 telecast’s numbers fell off a cliff. There was a lot of hand-wringing then too, and Jon Stewart got some of the blame as host. I didn’t really think it was Stewart’s fault, nor do I think it was Jimmy Kimmel’s fault this year, although Kimmel might have been yet another factor in how “meh” this year’s Oscars felt. The past year was a dark time for Hollywood as the conversations were about rape and assault and harassment – and yet the ratings for this year’s Golden Globes were solid-to-okay, and that was the first big awards show following the #MeToo scandals. My take is that this is mostly about the Oscar races and the films being awarded, and the actual anticipation and strong feelings for particular films. If people had come into the Oscars Sunday evening feeling like Call Me By Your Name or Get Out were bigger contenders, I bet the ratings would have been better.
Also, consider this: this year’s Oscars had perhaps the saddest and most f–ked up red carpet preshows EVER, in the history of red carpet shows. I feel like there are a lot of people like me who tune in to the preshows just to see what people are wearing (and it really is that simple) and now Ryan Seacrest and Michael Strahan are just f–king up red carpet interviews completely. This year marked the worst “lead in” to the Oscars in my life and it’s possible that affected viewership too.
Oh yeah and they kept giving Oscars to alleged abusers and predators too.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Maybe people are just getting sick of this insanely self-congratulatory industry.
+1
And it’s outdated and out-of-touch, representative of the majority of its members: old, male and white.
And the Oscars takes itself WAY too seriously. Cringe.
Gotta love everyone who is like ‘but it’s about movies, therefore it must be made bigger, better, faster’… Dear America, other countries have movie industries and award shows, as well. Some of them transcend into your culture, some don’t. However, Hollywood and Academy Awards absolutely go overboard with everything because THEY WANT TO not because it is necessary. As pointed out other countries celebrate movies, too, yet don’t push the image of being the most enlightened, most creative, most amazing shiny industry in the universe.
I don’t watch t.v. anymore and certainly not the Oscars. It’s lost it’s magic and pushing their own agenda turns me cold. The gowns are online which is why I used to watch it. It’s a long, drawn out boring show and nobody cares anymore. I watched Netflix on my tablet instead, a funny and entertaining show called “Age Gap Love.” No commercials blasting, just great entertainment.
@Sabrine
I am not sure what you mean about agenda. No snark but I was wondering. I prefer Netflix or other streaming services too.
The Oscars never represent the best movies.
They should expand the foreign film categories and maybe rework the awards. The format is old.
@magnoliarose, I also found the “pushing their own agenda turns me cold” statement politically obvious, and I agree that ignoring foreign categories hurts the show.
Folks no longer watch tv in the same way. I “watched” the show on Twitter and Celebitchy & Jezebel.
Bingo
Also, Steve Martin is a treasure.
So much THIS!
Literally every single industry in the world hands out awards. Even Walmart has freaking employee of the month. That’s a dumb argument.
I could be wrong about this, but other industries don’t telecast their awards and expect everyone else who is not in their industry to care.
Hollywood is more self-congratulatory than other industries when giving out and picking out awards though. I don’t think t a Walmart employee is going to give the speech George Clooney gave that one year when he went on and on about Hollywood being at the forefront of things. Even if a Wal Mart employee did, we’re not expected to tune in and get excited about it.
People working for Walmart may be slightly less privileged.
@Chaine
…and maybe the day the public stops caring about sseeing and reading about movie stars, tv stars, music stars you’ll have a point – but until then, it’s a specious argument to concede her point that other industries ALSO ‘self congratulate’ but then bizarrely imply…but waaaah….only H’wood televises it.
Uh…duh…maybe because they’re in the business of television and film and the performing arts and at least 30 million plus tune in to watch? Just a hunch.
Also @perplexed, context matters and I believe Clooney made that speech the year he won because the industry was getting beat up by the usual rightwing awful suspects- who had encoyraged the Iraq invasion, and brought about a recession. They were one of the more vocal industries to rail against the invasion of Iraq and the crimes and misdemeanors of BushCo and he was tired of the propaganda arm of the right wing (Fox news) going in on Hollywood to try and tamp down their influence against the war, and all the other conservative attacks on society be it fracking, drilling, poverty, or staging 3 simultaneous wars in the wrong countries after 9/11. Clooney was right in that much like now, H’wood (or individuals operating within that industry) are usually the ones to speak up first and loudest against social injustices. That’s undeniable.
People working in other industries don’t attract the same interest as actors and singers do though. Love ’em or hate ’em, we give entertainers a lot of attention. It wouldn’t make sense to make giving out awards to Walmart employees a televised event.
But do employee of the month award winners and their Walmart coworkers dress up in dresses that cost thousands of dollars and wear millions of dollars of jewelry while accepting the award? No. Hollywood goes overboard with all of these awards and needing to show the world how much they need to be praised and admired
Hollywood telecasts its awards because it helps build the artists brands and more imoprtantly it sells tickets to films that would otherwise never be made because film makers wouldnt recoup their money.
And before someone suggests that perhaps those movies shouldnt get made consider the fact that without award buzz that culminates with the Oscar evening, most of those nominees wouldnt get made. That buzz sells tickets and allows for financiers to invest in the next none mainstream project. From Moonlight right down to Call Me By Your Name. The industry would consist of a flood of broad comedies, romcoms and big budget action. Actors like Gabby Sidibe and V Davis wouldnt even be a blip on our radar without the award buzz they got early on that convinced some casting agent that they could have commercial appeal in mainstream TV or even just leading roles.
As an aside, you are all right that their industry does not cure cancer. But who can argue with the role of entertainment in turning the social culture? The screen trojan horsed everything from interracial relationships to gay marriage into normalcy. It mainstreamed women in the workplace, prepared us for a non white President and freaked out climate change fence sitters.. Theres A LOT they need to fix within but Hollywood is the Western Worlds single most powerful agent of change. We just have to guide that change in the right direction with what we support with our dollars. So they arent curing cancer of the body but I would say rooting out societal cancers is a pretty important role.
Walmart and Hollywood.
The comparison is too a far a stretch to even compare them. ???
@LetItGo: IIRC George Clooney made that speech off-the-cuff because the host, Jon Stewart, had made a snarky comment about Hollywood being “out of touch” a few minutes before. It was an emotional (angry) reaction, not a prepared statement. Granted, it was impolite of Stewart as the host to have made that remark. But George, in his privileged glory, famous at the time mostly for ER and Oceans 11 but wanting desperately to be taken seriously as a director, came off as petty and defensive. I thought less of him after that and didn’t watch the Oscars again for years. Team “Oscars are overly self-congratulatory” here.
“Also @perplexed, context matters and I believe Clooney made that speech the year he won because the industry was getting beat up by the usual rightwing awful suspects…”
Here’s the speech. The end of the speech was not good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqDbG9h-f7c
The entire question of “why” they have awards shows is silly. Award shows are entertaining commercials for the products they are celebrating. If people didn’t WANT watch them receive awards, they wouldn’t air them! Look how many people took the time to analyze and comment on what everyone was wearing. The “demand” for these award shows has been written all over blogs for the last 48 hours.
@Perplexed, I watched that clip. Wow, I forgot how handsome George was. He was definitely movie-star handsome. Yeah, the speech got a little cringe-worthy. And Nicole Kidman, presenting the award, looked so beautiful. She’s definitely wearing a wig these days, when you see the same hairstyle here and realize the difference in her hair now.
Even by these numbers 26 million people watched the Oscars, still a ton of people. The reason they became this extravagant deal and not like all the local award shows that infiltrate most industries is people watch which makes money. Up until recently the audience seemed to eat up the opulent red carpet, the crazy and amazing dresses, and seeing the celebrities in a “normal” environment. Maybe with social media and reality tv this isn’t such a big deal any more. I think it has more to do with the movies nominated though. I usually see a lot of the movies, but this year I think I hit two of the nominated. Why didn’t Star Wars or Wonder Woman get a nod. It would make it a bit more interesting and was the intention with the 10 nominees. I think they are going too artsy. It’s like Weinstein is still kind of there. Which is also another reason the ratings were down. I’ll make another bet that Black Panther and some of the actors get nominated next year and the ratings will be up.
The Oscars have always been boring. We just now have a forum to complain about it..
Good movies are interesting; the awards shows for presenting trophies to them are not. I think the hosts are also in a difficult spot. They have to appeal to a mass audience and as a result probably don’t end up pleasing anybody.
A bit maybe? But if that’s so it’s more the result of oversaturation I’d say. By the time the Oscars roll around we’ve had 4-5 major red carpets and a million online journalists giving their predictions and takes for MONTHS. By about January 15 I could not care less…and the Oscars are in March??
Pretty soon the Oscars will have ratings even with the Golden Globes. Which is the first sign of the Apocalypse. 😉
Lol @mia4s
I didn’t see your comment until after I posted mine. It appears we’re in agreement 😉
I think they did get pushed back a little because of the Olympics, but overall I agree. Award show fatigue is real.
Great minds think alike @SMCOLLINS!
The Olympics were maybe a factor but last year they were on February 26. Still really late when the “Oscar season” seems to start with the Venice Film Festival…in late August!!
Just fatigue with self-congratulations does not explain it for me. Golden Globe ratings went back up in 2017 after a 2016 drop, and their decline this year was more modest than this Oscar plunge. If people were done with awards shows they’d be done with awards shows. This feels more complicated.
I think people just don’t care about Hollywood anymore. Celebrities are self-important and I think it can be off putting. I don’t want to waste 4 hours watching it. I would rather a quick recap and look at the dresses online. My husband actually said during the telecast that he would agree to watch ANYTHING on tv but the Oscars.
Well, it’s off-putting because here they are, the mostly liberal community, who is supposed to be so progressive, so philanthropic, all for human rights, on and on, and what have they been exposed to be? An industry that looks the other way as far as how women are treated in the movie industry regarding sexual-harassment, rape, bullying. An industry that is inherently racist as far as the opportunities given to people of color whether behind or in front of the camera. Movies where the majority are made by white males for white males. It goes on and on.
They can’t be so sanctimonious these days, can they, after being called out for several years regarding Oscars So White and the Harvey Weinstein revelations that brought an avalanche of sordid stories regarding the abuse female actresses endure.
Liberal Hollywood doesn’t have a leg to stand on these days.
No offence, but you’re on a gossip website. How exactly do you square that with not caring about Hollywood?
Hollywood and the entertainment industry is built on images. Images are created to be seen. I don’t get why anyone would complain about how celebrities are self-important when their entire product is their image. It’s really ironic to point out that you only care about the fashion, because even by just looking up the gowns, you’re contributing eyeballs to the entertainment industry, which is exactly the whole point. That’s how they make their money.
Oh please and the conservative side has a leg to stand on. Trump comes out and says it, and yet he’s elected, and never punished. At least Hollywood is trying to do something. Religious leaders say Trump gets a do over. Really who is more sanctimonious. You know if Hollywood never makes another piece of entertainment, I will be sad, but I’ll survive. If Trump and his conservative co-horts have their way we are in a lot more trouble than anything Hollywood could ever do. Save your sanctimonious talk for where it really counts, as they are only making movies not world wide policy.
Entertainment provides a break from life and is a diversion that humans have always looked for and we pay them a lot to do it. I don’t have a problem with how much they make or how much athletes make because they generate a lot of money for a lot of other people.
I just want it to be more inclusive.
“How exactly do you square that with not caring about Hollywood?”
I think you can be into the gossip, but not actually care about Hollywood in terms of putting it on a pedestal.
Celebrities aren’t really seen as special anymore, so I think peeking in on their lives now is probably akin to peeking in on a stranger or friend’s Instagram. We’re now poking around on anyone on social media, even. if they’re not “fascinating” or “compelling” in the way maybe Tom Cruise (before we knew he was kind of crazy) used to be. I don’t necessarily care about some of the people I work with, but I’ll snoop around on their Instagram to supply my inner gossip urge when I’m bored and want to distract myself. I think the same attitude can be seen in how we approach Hollywood nowadays. We want to peek in on the gossip, but I don’t necessarily think that means we believe the people in that industry are special.
There are a few actors who are so extraordinarily good-looking and compelling you want to stare at them in anything, but those are pretty rare to find, I think. To be honest, I think maybe some of them are dead (i.e Paul Newman) or close to building their own nursing home in Idaho (i.e Robert Redford).
In some cases, I also think gossip trumps whether you actually find them “special” as a performer. There are some figures who are compelling as tabloid archetypes, but I don’t necessarily want to watch movies with them in it. Kristen Stewart was an interesting case study to observe during the Mini-Cooper scandal with her director, but do I actually have the patience to sit through a movie with her in it? No.
@perplexed, I don’t think caring about Hollywood necessarily means putting it on a pedestal. I also think it’s inaccurate to state that there was a point in time when Hollywood was ever put on a pedestal. It was seen as glamorous, sure, and yes our cultural definitions of glamour have changed enormously from when the movie industry first started. But the industry has always been seen as shady and murky from the very beginning. It’s really weird that people are stating how they’re turned off by the disjointed messaging when that’s how Hollywood has always been–shady af.
If celebrities aren’t seen as special anymore, then why care about them in any capacity? I’m a gossip hound as much as anyone else, but when I don’t care about someone in my personal life, I don’t follow them or stalk their social media accounts. You can’t compare people who are not seeking a public image to people whose living depends on it–the two things aren’t the same. My friends don’t post things on their Instagram or Twitter with the intention of crafting a media personality that they can leverage for sponsorships and advertorials. They don’t make their money or their living from the number of people who like their Facebook status. I think it’s very naive to assume that the function of entertainment gossip is just plain old curiosity about other people’s lives when this is an industry worth millions and millions of dollars.
Celebrity is a vital component of the entertainment industry as it is right now. You can build a whole career on being a celebrity while simultaneously not being a compelling performer, because like I said, the industry runs on images. It doesn’t have to be good quality images. It just has to be the type of stuff that gets you seen. There are people who center their work as a performer over their work in maintaining a media presence, that is true. There are also people who do both. There are people who only do one and not the other. But the last two are absolutely making money from our attention, as innocuous as we may think it is. There are whole fields of study dedicated to understanding exactly what consumers look at, for how long, and how they respond to those things, regardless of the response being positive or negative, because of how much money there is to be made from understanding this type of thing. So yeah. My friends aren’t exactly installing scripts on their Twitter or Instagram accounts to track which images I spend most of my time looking at and clicking like and commenting on so that they can maximize their profits by posting more pictures of their cat. Jennifer Garner probably is. And that’s the difference.
“You can’t compare people who are not seeking a public image to people whose living depends on it–the two things aren’t the same.”
I don’t disagree with your general points on celebrity. Your points are valid.
But at the same time I do think regular people are now seeking a public image of some kind. Not massive world-wide fame, but there is a self-promotional aspect to what they’re doing and I don’t think they necessarily mind what additional attention that come from it. Some of us even hate being on social media, but do it because it’s become a necessity for getting jobs.
I suppose what I mean to say is that instead of us as regular people coming up to the level of celebrity through our social media accounts, I think celebrities are coming down to our level. Or maybe they’re being forced to by how technology is changing, I’m not sure. I do believe regular non-famous people do a certain level of self-promotion on Instagram and Twitter. Facebook is a different entity but on Twitter and Instagram regular people who are not that famous aim to follow you even if they don’t know you in order to gain followers. They check their metrics too. A lot of stars nowadays are also DIY stars. Justin Bieber is huge now, but he did gain his following on Youtube before he got signed. Not everyone aims to be Justin Bieber, but I do think there is a certain PR tone set by Instagram accounts that both regular people and celebrities are trying to follow. There’s no way I think all regular people are on that platform simply to talk to themselves and a few friends. There’s something they want to gain from it. The ones who don’t aspire to gain anything usually only have one post up.
That celebrities now have that same lack of mystique makes them seem too…..much like everybody else. Whether it’s a celebrity or a regular person everybody seems to have this need to be seen and heard. There are younger people now posting content photos of themselves in revealing clothes and pretending (?) to be models of some kind. Then there’s ….Emily R, who IS a model, and doing the same thing. Everyone is too much alike now. Regular people are using filters, photoshop, and look better in their photos than they do in person so I definitely think they also want us to try and pay attention in the same a celebrity covets our attention.
Personally for me I do also know gossip about celebrities I don’t care about. Do I really care about Kristen Stewart? Honestly, I don’t get why she’s famous. Do I think she can act? No. Do I think she’s compelling? No. Would I actually pay to see her in a movie? After watching that movie where she won the French Oscar, oh heck no. But I read about the MiniCooper scandal anyway. So, for me personally, I don’t find interest in a celebrity’s private life as opposed to her as an “artist” contradictory.
I also think too much information coming from the internet penetrates the veil of mystique we used to have surrounding celebrities. It’s the media that says these people are special. People assume it’s true. But now that perceived truth is sometimes exposed as a lie.
A,
I come here though I’m not inherently interested in the actual “Hollywood”.
I’m more interested in the comments of everyday people, honestly. It tells me something about an aspect of America.
I think it’s partly there are SO MANY award shows leading up to the Oscars that we pretty much know who’s going to win. No surprises in any of the major categories equals a boring show.
+1
This. I watched the Oscars cause I like to see the show and pomp, hear the jokes and see the celebs and hopefully be there (not it the kitchen) when something crazy happens like last year’s bf announcement debacle. But, unfortunately this year it was no surprise among the winners which seemed a straight line repeat of the GG and Sag awards.
THIS.
There’s just too many awards shows leading up to the Oscars, so by the time it finally rolls around most people are burned out on all the self-congratulations, plus you pretty much know who/what is going to win by then. Kind of takes the fun out of it.
You are so right alix.
I know I am. Starting with the pre-Oscar hosts who think they are the stars and get in the way of their interviews to the drivel from some of the actors.
I totally agree with you! I watched every year and this time around felt just ‘meh. Can’t be bothered with and don’t feel like sparing 4 hours of my life for it’ and went to bed. Didn’t care one bit for this self-congratulatory circus
I agree 100%. It’s not the movies that are the problem, but I am sick and tired of being lectured on HOW to think by a bunch entitled, living in a bubble celebraties. I don’t care what side of the aisle they fall on.
How about ENTERTAIN us! I read where Jennifer Lawrence was going to take a year off to educate the public on politics? What?
That is acting like they are trained monkeys and not people. At any time you can opt out of supporting the industry. It won’t change. Politics have always been a part of Hollywood, and it always will be.
So it is up to you to decide if you want to be part of it.
Olympics viewing was way down too. I think society, as a whole, is changing due to technology. Who has time to sit through the endless speeches or ceremonies. Much more fun reading about it on line, on my own time and filtering what I want to see. And add to it all the controversy in Hollywood, it’s down hill from there.
Yup. Ratings are goong down for almost everything. Entertainment is way too fragmented for Oscars to keep up their high ratings. They should get used to it at this point. The times Oscars would actually pick the best movie of the year is looong gone.
I was going to say the same thing.
Exactly! Agree with that you and @VaVa Kaboom said below.
They are too long and too boring. Everything you need to know will be condensed the next day. And, really, the next day discussion here on Celebitchy is much more entertaining and informative than either the preshow or the show.
They’ve always been long and boring. I just think there are far more entertainment options than when I was a kid and my family would sit down together to watch the Oscars. It will never go back to the way it was.
What Minx said. Theres just more options and better ways to catch up than watch the whole thing.
And related to your point if you look at the hosts and ratings table, theres a steady decline in viewership. EXCEPT for twice. Both times Ellen has hosted there has been a 3 million plus audience jump. No other host has a 3 million jump, not even in the competitive best film years. Shes done it twice. It seems obvious to me that its because she appeals to an audience that doesnt have too many entertainment distractions. The sweet Idaho grannie isnt conflicted between online gaming and catching up on her netflix. She just wants to watch that nice lady Ellen tell some jokes and maybe catch a glimpse of her old matinee idol in the audience. And honestly, organisers need to stick to servicing that audience. Theres no way you are gonna get a 23 year old to watch even a two hour award show when she can just wait for the memes and highlight clips.
Krill, my daughter is 23 and she loves watching the Oscars all the way through! I’m the one who didn’t want to watch the whole thing. I came home toward the end and that was enough for me. I don’t want to hear their boring speeches which I can just read about later if they’re significant.
There are too many award shows, Hollywood has become synonymous with cesspool, people are hurting and dying while the “stars” are wearing couture. There’s no mystery and glamour anymore with everyone accessible and twittering. I think these things lead to viewer malaise.
On a side note, how do they calculate viewership these days? We watch everything like Oscars and Olympics through YouTube tv which has a link to the networks.
I’m a bit of a pop culture fanatic, which is why I’m willing to sit through the ceremony. I think you almost have to be a bit of a fanatic and feel the constant need to be up-to-date to be motivated to watch the show. If I didn’t feel that need to be “up-to-date” (which even I find a bit strange in myself), I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t sit through the.ceremony because it is rather dull. There are more options out there today if you don’t want to watch the show, but even if the options weren’t there, I’d probably just go to bed early and enjoy sleep instead of watching the show since I think the only reason I watch it is because I need to be “in the know.”
Agree with you 100% people have more options now so they don’t have to be focused in one single event. I has nothing to do with winners, presenters or anything. You can even blame the moon but the reality is that people decides how to spend their spare time and the Oscar’s are not that important anymore.
That’s exactly it. When I was a kid, there were three networks. Not that much else to watch.
Now we have hundreds of cable channels and YouTube and Netflix and Hulu etc. Much more competition and also we can instantly read about it any time and also watch clips of the best stuff whenever we want. Why set aside an entire evening for it?
To gauge interest today, you have to wait to see the figures on all the other stuff people use to get info on the event. The instant ratings aren’t that meaningful today.
Different time zones affected the Olympic ratings though. Figure skating which was one of the top favorite in the US to watch was broadcasted around 10pm and the best skaters skates the last which was around 12 midnight. I knew a lot of people missed it out because they had to work early the next day. I know in general the ratings are low but we should point out the time zones too.
You are correct about figure skating and the time zones and also Americans weren’t real contenders in most of the figure skating disciplines. As well there were no NHL players in men’s hockey (which was third tier players plus Russia this year) and the women’s only real competition was Canada and the final USA-Canada got great ratings despite the time.
I am too focused on politics to give a flying f#ck about Hollywood award programs of any sort.
A lot of younger people, under 30, aren’t into this conspicuous consumption that the Oscars epitomizes. My sons, daughter and their friends like movies, but think this is all just absurd. I don’t know one of their many friends who even talked about the Oscars, or thought this display wasn’t a waste. They are more concerned that we have an Orange Lunatic ruining the little chance they had left to have lives as good as our’s.
Also, most young people I know don’t even have televisions, so they wouldn’t count as viewers. Some streamed it though services, others watch highlights on twitter and youtube. They just don’t sit down to watch a bunch of actors in millions of dollats
They probably need to change it too as this says same day viewing, so at least they have some people who time shift. Still, maybe it should be weekly or more too.
I agree with this @Seraphina. People don’t watch TV the way they used to. I know the Oscars have always been long but I think people aren’t accustomed to watching long shows live anymore. They are used to having more control over their TV viewing. I also think the fact there is very little movie star mystique left is an issue too. I hate to say the Orange Clown has a point about ANYTHING but he is right about there being very few real movie stars left.
Ratings are down across the board because the Oscars, and all similar ceremonies, are cheesy and incredibly boring. Fun fact, they’ve ALWAYS been this boring and meaningless.
Unfortunately for Hollywood; Social media and the internet means no one has to actually watch the whole shiz-show to see what people wore or the 15 minutes of actually entertaining content amidst hours of extremely privileged people all patting themselves on the back.
ITA, the Oscars are generally just so boring, and the show is so loooooong. When I was younger I used to try and watch it all but over the past couple of years I just can’t anymore. I live on the east coast and I get up before 6 AM on Monday mornings to get ready for work…I’d much rather get some extra sleep than force myself to sit through 3+ hours of dullness just to see the one or two awards I sort of “care” about.
And like you said, if I want to see the fashion I can just check Twitter or Instagram.
I agree. These awards ceremonies are hard to sit through. Usually I just look at the fashion, who won what, and whether or not there were any interesting moments later on. When it’s the Grammy’s, VMA’s, or AMA’s, I just look at whichever performances I wanted to see on the internet.
It’s not fun anymore. No more surprises and I only saw Dunkirk, Get Out, 3 billboards and I Tonya. The nominees are formulaic – angry woman, body of work oscar, pick the movie w least controversy and it goes on. Why watch when it’s super long and you already know who’s going to win????
While I personally agree, this doesn’t explain why this specific year is down so much over last year. It should be a steady drop but it’s a nosedive. It needs closer scrutiny. Social media hasn’t changed that much in a year.
I’m sure they will have a post mortem, but I would bet they will come up with a lot of what is on here. Lackluster movies that didn’t perform well at the box office, anger at Hollywood in general for the Weinstein et. al., depressing carpet some people still entangled in sexual harassment issues, and honestly Tiffany Haddish seemed to be one of the few excited about being there. It didn’t have its pazazz. That plus the general decline in ratings that has been going on for a decade made for the big drop.
I definitely think you’re on to something re: Weinstein. He’s deeply associated with the Oscars, so much that I personally cringe just thinking about them and I’m sure others do as well.
The right wing idiot machine is in full motion blaring here, there, and everywhere that the low ratings are because Hollywood is anti-Trump. LOL
It has absolutely nothing to do with Conservatism or Trump. This has been the trend for decades. Modern entities like YouTube and sites like this one mean we don’t have to sit through the whole ceremony anymore. It’s just boring and people don’t care enough to actually watch a the show itself.
They’ll latch onto anything to make themselves the victims. Talk about snowflakes.
My reason for skipping it sorta involves politics. After reading that one academy voter who accused “Get Out” of “playing the race card” I made the decision not to watch, figuring: “Why support “The Academy” with views if assholes like this are voting? Pass.”
Well then you played right into the Ult-Right/Trump supporters if one academy voter’s opinion among thousands was the only reason you didn’t watch Oscars.
How does that really play into their hands though? Equalitygadfly didn’t skip it because of Trump or anything his supporters were saying. Lots of people have complained for years that Academy voters often seem out of touch with the rest of the country. Especially in regard to race, hence the Oscar So White controversy.
In my opinion, seeing proof even one voter sees a movie like “Get Out” and only thinks “race-card” is actually a darn good reason to skip the ceremony all together. Though I still think most people are just not invested enough to sit through the whole thing.
Jordan Peele won for Best Screenplay. I watched because I wanted to support the nominees that I personally felt deserved it. Jordan Peele certainly did. Mary J. Blige did, as did many others. How does skipping what is probably the biggest night of their careers helpful to them? If the Oscars don’t matter, why bother using that as a metric for success and excellence, especially for minorities?
I don’t like the Oscars and I think they deserve a great deal of criticism for how they’ve handled a lot of things, in the past and in recent years. But again, I watch out of support for the nominees and films that I loved, even if they are long shots. Boycotts have their place as well, but I also want to hype the change I want to see.
Jordan Peele winning was a highlight. I don’t feel the show was bad, but I just have too much on my mind. I enjoy the Emmys and Tonys more these days.
I think I am too close to the industry and there are so many films that get ignored from other countries, and I want to support women behind the cameras. If there were an award show just for women in the entertainment industry, I would watch it happily.
A network should consider doing it.
@magnoliarose, it’s a crying shame that in spite of everything, the Oscars are still held up as the gold standard of success and excellence. There are so many talented people who spend their whole life working their behinds off, whose work rightfully deserves the recognition and the validation that the Oscars can provide, only to have them not get awarded for all that they’ve done.
I don’t see how we can fix the Oscars as long as it holds that sort of cultural currency in the industry. I see some strains of change on the horizon with the advent of so much quality television. But the Academy established itself as the arbiter of excellence, so much so that people only seek to expand its qualifications for what that excellence is. I’d rather see people expand beyond what the Oscars represents. But at the same time, if that is what we have, I’d also like to do what we can to equalize the playing field as much as possible.
@A
I think the same. I am the same. I want to see high-quality scripts, actors, cinematography, costume, directing and I want to see different perspectives and voices. Films can be powerful, but the representation has been lopsided and offensive for so long that I am fed up. The Oscars just seem behind the times and society. They don’t seem to have a pulse on what we are feeling.
People in my age group grew up in a different world, and it is why Millenials are so overwhelmingly liberal and active. I have a nephew in college who wants to devote his life to public service and justice. He is incredibly passionate about equality. I have a niece who wants to go to film school to make documentaries. At family gatherings, they have viewpoints and insights that we listen to when they speak.
So for them, Jordan Peele’s win was a score for their side and their ideas.
Granted my family is made up of activists, people involved in social justice, civil rights, politics and the arts, so they have been exposed to more than the average teens, but they are ready to see this reflected on the screen. They want social messaging films, artistic films, and, creative, fresh and authentic entertainment.
The Oscars give people substantial career boosts and respect. But it needs to be fair, and it shouldn’t be a slate of good but not incredible films. I want to see films from around the globe and stories from their perspectives. I think short films need more exposure so that young fledgling filmmakers can get into the game.
My father dug out a “film” project I made when I was 14. I used to like to do that, and it was a window into the world from a 14-year-old girl’s perspective. Nothing groundbreaking or inspired. But I am sure some incredibly talented people did the same but were passionate and very creative. I wasn’t. However, they don’t get a chance to get in the game on a higher level because of their race, religion, gender, ethnicity, challenges, lack of wealth and access.
So we end up with the same people over and over, and the cycle continues.
A – I don’t think that watching the Oscars helps minorities. Paying to go see movies in the theaters helps. The Oscars are about The Academy, and The Academy is still making room for racist pricks. So, I’ll skip The Academy’s big night, thankyouverymuch.
THE MOTHERF*CKING MONTAGES! What showrunner thinks “viewers love the long dead person montage so much, let’s add montages to as many categories as possible”. I literally fell asleep when Jimmy Kimmel went on a foray into another movie theater. Literally the worst added 15min ever. I hated it last year, and it was worse this year. I wish Tiffany and Maya had hosted.
The only time I even cracked a smile was when Tiffany and Maya showed up. Kimmel just rubs me the wrong way and for the most part his comedy is lame. He needs to stop with the constant hand gestures too.
Kimmel is just a low rent host IMO. This is the best they can do?
EDIT: I would like Kumail Nanjiani to be added to that hosting combination. Tiffany and Kumail? Kumai, Maya, and Tiffany?
I love seeing the montages. Sports fans love seeing their passing athlete’s careers honored and replays of their greatest moments. Entertainment fans also like to see some of the greats remembered for their contribution to film and entertainment and the joy they gave to audiences throughout the yrs.
I didnt mind the monatges of the acting categories, but they could cut the others out for sure.
The montages are easily the best part of the show for me. lol
I used to care but awards season is totally irrelevant to what I watch now. And I get no joy watching a roomful of 1 percenters gush over themselves.
Same, I stream tv series and that’s where my interest is.
If there wasn’t an award show on every week, maybe more people would be interested. It gets boring seeing the same people getting dressed up to get a trophy
+1
especially if the same actors and films win.
Check out Oldman creeping in from the edge in the group shot, he may have won a statue but clearly no one considers him a winner.
Well if we are playing photo assumption Allison Janney is clearly in love with him. So…
https://mobile.twitter.com/Reuters/status/970572911990988800/photo/4
Well that sucks. Think a smidge less of Janney now – why the face cup?!? Be nice and civil and professional – fine, but dear Lord no need to face cup this woman hating pr!ck.
I hate to break it to you @JKER but Oldman is ADORED by most of Hollywood. I can find you a thousand pictures of Oscar night of him being embraced by various actors. Jessica Chastain once cried on a red carpet she was so excited to meet him. Also his grown children (he actually has 3, from 2 of his marriages) are very close to him and by all accounts adore him. I’m just saying people can project all they want but that’s the reality. Complicated as hell.
@Mia4
I thought about this after the show. Creative people are used to difficult temperaments and volatility.
Once he was nominated it had to come down to his acting only. I didn’t care for the film but others did and voted on that. Actor’s lives are often messy and dramatic so the voters in the Academy have heard a lot worse about people in the industry than Gary’s issues. They know things from the inside the public doesn’t know so he may seem tame to them.
I think it is partially that and simply not caring that much.
So Oldman chokes and beats his wife and gets an Oscar?? THIS is why I dislike Hollywood so much!! They are SUCH hypocrites, all of them: the actors and actresses who all wear black and pretend they care what happens to other women in their field; the producers and directors who all look the other way when there is money to be made; and the agencies who represent them. Hypocrites.
I don’t want to hear any more from anyone who cheered when he got that Oscar. Sanctimonious phonies. And I like Janney, but looking at her cupping this violent prick’s face makes me want to rip my hair out.
So Spacey is gone, lots and lots of other abusers are gone, and this criminal gets an Oscar. And it has bugged me throughout all of this that someone like Pitt, who was a 25 year old dating a 16 year old, that was cool, right? Cause it’s Brad, and he’s hot and we like him. Affleck, oh, he still makes money.
OK, Hollywood Hypocrites.
/rant over
@Trixie
It isn’t about their private lives, and you do realize that Juliette Lewis was a Scientologist and was raised to be an adult instead of a child. They don’t really believe in childhood. They tend to date adults even when they are young. That said it was too long ago to care at this point.
I am sure if someone mined my life they would find things they didn’t like from years ago.
People change and make mistakes. As long as they aren’t violent, abusers, predators, and bigots I can maybe deal with it.
I wasn’t here for Oldman since he hit 3 out of the four deal breakers.
@magnoliarose, it doesnt matter if the girl was a Scientologist or Amish or Whatever….in most states, she wasnt old enough to consent. He could have been arrested and on a sex offender list the rest of his life if a complaint was made.
@Veronica
But no complaint was made. That is my point. SHE doesn’t recall it that way even now. She was 17 BTW, not 16. She was born in 1973, and they started dating in 1990:
“It amazes me that people are still fascinated that we went out for four years. I was a teenager at the time. It’s a lifetime away. I was in my high-school years and it was a wonderful, loving relationship with a fun, smart guy. Then it was over and he went on to become incredibly famous. The far more significant relationship was my marriage to an incredible pro skateboarder (Steve Berra). But no one wants to know about that. All these years on, there’s nothing I can say or divulge about Brad Pitt that would be remotely interesting to any intelligent being.”
She Thanks him for her taste in music and refers to him as a dignified rebel.
She is in her early 40s now and still doesn’t see it the way you do.
I believe HER perspective is much more relevant than anything anyone on the outside can say or judge. She knows her life.
Sex offender doesn’t apply here and is silly. Her upbringing does matter since she grew up in a cult where parents aren’t involved, and they don’t experience a childhood.
I wouldn’t accept it for my daughter, but it wasn’t unusual in the entertainment industry 30 plus years ago. I realize some posters have an ax to grind with him, but it should be based on facts and not trying to make JL a victim when she doesn’t see it that way. She decides not us.
Just so you know, one of Oldman’s sons released a statement re: his mother and her accusations. He cut off all ties with her 7 years ago. She has had decades of drug and alcohol abuse and lost custody of all three of her kids to their dads (1 with David Fincher and 2 with Gary). Her son says that she is lying about the abuse claims.
Statement: https://www.docdroid.net/1jhllUx/gulliver-oldman-statement.pdf
Sadly, no one will read the son’s statement and the lie will be repeated everywhere.
I think this movement calls us to interrogate exactly these types of dismissals of alleged abuse. So here goes;
Her son did cut her off 7 years ago BUT he was 13 at the time. A kid. He doesnt say what specific incident triggered this. It could well be a concerted parental allienation campaign waged by his father. “Mummy is no good. See even the court said so”. It may also be that shes the devil. I just cant tell from the little info given.
He really rides the fact that she was denied custody and asserts this is unusual. Err, this is a common MRA fallacy. Men get less sole custody because they apply for it less. Where they do ask, the stats show they around the same shot of getting it as a woman.
He then says that his father got custody despite the DV charges. This is a little damning for her but then if the charges were never tested then this could easily be one of the thousands of cases where a custody judge wouldnt take a womans word on DV. Theres a tendency to write off DV claims in divorce as just vindictive harping by a “nasty woman”. Her addiction couldnt have helped either. A female addict is especially frowned upon world over.
And finally he dismisses her as just an addict and alcoholic. The thing is though, women with addiction issues are up to 18 times more likely to be victims of DV. Her struggles at the time make me MORE likely to believe her not less. Also, its instructive that she is reiterrating her claims now having been sober fir a few years.
I err on believing the woman before evidence is presented. I have seen nothing that contradicts her claims besides a guy with understandable mummy issues disputing an account of an incident that nobody claimed he was present for. If he wasnt there in that room, how can he speak? And also, its gross that he tags on that he supports MeToo. He evidently doesnt, a key principal of MeToo is not dispute an event you were not present for unless you are providing an alibi fir that exact moment.
I believe her.
Nope. He doesn’t know what went on behind his parents bedroom door. And she may be an addict and an unfit mother, but that doesn’t mean she wasn’t abused by Oldman. I’m not falling into the whole “She’s a mess, therefore she must be lying.” That’s been used for years to discredit women who claimed rape or abuse.
What hurts her claims are that she lost her children to two separate fathers. THAT is unusual. We have no idea how she behaved as an addict, and I am not prepared to deny what the son is saying. That is making a lot of assumptions to even get to that place. There are missing details, and I don’t believe if revealed she would come out particularly sympathetic.
It could be that two unstable addicts got together and only one parent was the better of the problematic marriage. It seems her addictions were very hard for her to overcome and the son may have seen things he is not going to share. It might his experiences that lead him not to want to know her.
I have known enough people with unfit toxic mothers to know it happens and it doesn’t always look as bad as it is from the outside.
I still think Gary is repulsive for other reasons as well as how he treats women but it doesn’t mean she isn’t worse than he is either.
You’re acting like you know the ex better then her son does…
I mean, sure. She may be a terrible mother. Horrible even. Gary Oldman may have been a good father. It doesn’t really tell us much, does it? I have no idea what went on and I never will. I don’t care about Oldman particularly (I used to) just because he’s an ass. I have no idea if he’s hit his wife or not. But it’s safe to say that he used to drink. Let’s not forget that. He may be great now or even years ago but man, when two addicts go at it, you never know.
Who says we assumed the abuse happened in front of the kids? She was the one who claimed the abuse happened in front of the children. It’s not some assumption the public made. That was her claim that the telephone incident happened in front of the kids, and the sons (no longer kids) say that’s not true.
Also why does everyone seem to think was one judge and one case? This was a two year process and two different judges. At the time she made the DV charges she lost custody yes, but had visitation. There’s been no claim Oldman interfered with that visitation. The loss of custody was not about making false DV charges. Those were found to be false when investigated yes but the custody decision was because she overdosed and was discovered by her young daughter, which (not shockingly) traumatized the poor child. That’s in 2001. In 2003 she goes back to court and starts making claims about Oldman drugging one of the kids, being intoxicated etc. That’s evaluated, tests are run on all parties, claims are investigated and subsequently her visitation rights are drastically reduced because she’s found to (among other things) have been making false claims about his treatment of the children. In other words, lying (who is going the parental alienation route?).There’s a lot here.
I make no excuses for his Playboy interview, that was beyond gross. But people bend over backwards to make his ex-wife a victim of the evil legal system and courts. Sorry, but I’m just not seeing it.
Ugh, I never got over him naming his kid “Gulliver.” I wonder if Oldman is even aware that “Gulliver” is the famous literary character’s last name (his first name was Lemuel).
@Krill, thank you! I was about to scream into the abyss after reading how easily we dismiss abuse charges against famous and powerful men.
And you are right – if she drank and was a drug addict, that makes it OK for her husband to choke and beat her? Her son is OK with this? Something is very wrong here. And where did it say that the son said his father never beat his mother? He said that he cut ties with her, but I didn’t see where he denied her claims of abuse. (If I missed this, I apologize.)
I’m inclined to think she was abused. This is very common with drug addicted/alcoholic women. The most vulnerable women, the ones people are least likely to believe, end up being abused in one way or another. The fact she lost her children twice doesn’t change my thoughts on this. We, as a society, are extremely judgmental of flawed mothers. It still doesn’t rationalize her husband laying his hands on her. Women who lie are a rarity while abuse is ubiquitous.
I don’t know about that. Jordan Peele said it was amazing to meet Oldman back stage and sit and talk. He told the press that Oldman has been his favorite actor ever since he first saw him in Bram Stoker’s Dracula.
I saw a photo of Allison Janney being affectionate to Gary Oldman in a group photo.
I don’t think any celebrity has a problem with Gary winning at all. Most people seem to be happy for him purely because of his talent and longevity in the business as a respected actor. That’s the connection all actors and actresses share and appreciate.
No one is getting involved with a domestic allegation unproven from that long ago and where they both were alcoholics and the wife also a drug addict during their marriage.
They might not want to get involved Jayna, and they don’t know for sure what went on, but it looks like they all admire Gary regardless.
*Clapping hands
Thank you for pointing out some basic facts.
That is the thing with this case. It would be easy to dismiss her claims and somewhat valid if someone is going by the rulings in this case. There may have been things about her that we don’t know.
He has an impressive body of work. Sid and Nancy is still a favorite of mine.
I guess this year is more about sexual predators in the industry and no one has claimed that against him.
Still, think he is gross for saying idiot things, but I am not willing to always cast women as pure, innocent victims 100 percent of the time.
Considering the photos of him and Sam Rockwell that night (since we are reading photos now) he and Sam are probably mutually and passionately in love.
It’s the same nominees and presenters every year.
Exactly. It’s boring as F. I don’t need to see Meryl Streep be nominated AGAIN. Boring, boring, boring. Kimmel was so low rent too… couldn’t even make it through his monologue that we watched ton YouTube.
tbh I think Hollywood has just totally lost its sheen.
We’ve all seen its dark and awful underbelly and its not really a fun distraction anymore. I for one couldn’t be bothered to watch this year. To me this kind of thig was always escapism but now it feels like a) a lie and b) a chore.
Also media is SO saturated with Hollywood scandal – award shows have completely lost their novelty. I’d rather look at the dresses online, after the fact.
ITA. No one wants to watch the sausage being made, and now that the industry has been exposed (by its own) to be a misogynistic, abusive, criminal enterprise, why feed that monster?
While I love the fashion, I couldn’t help but wonder as each nominated actress/actor posed: what did she/he have to do to land the role?
Honestly, who wants to look at that cesspool? All I can think is RAPE.
Also, a host is certainly not responsible for low ratings but a host can absolutely elevate things. I want Chris Rock back. Or Steve Martin. And cut it down, nobody has time for hours upon hours of this.
Same, until Hollywood makes GENUINE changes, not this cheap performative whitewashing movement stuff, I don’t want to even visit the town.
I agree. All I could think of when the cameras panned into the audience was, “How many Harvey’s are sitting in those seats right now? How many of you are covering up for someone sitting in that audience? How many of you are complicit?”
Another thing I noticed, when Jimmy Kimmel took a shot at Harvey, I didn’t hear a single person clap. It was like they were all still afraid of him and didn’t want to do anything to upset him.
In the end, it’s an industry event. You’re basically watching a boring awards banquet, only the attendees get to wear amazing clothes and jewels.
It’s really bugging me that the quoted block text says “That was down -19% from last year” That’s a double negative. It was either “down 19% from last year” or it was “-19% from last year”. “Down -19%” means it was up 19%.
Pedantry over. Sorry for the intrusion.
So glad there’s someone else out there getting bugged by things like this!
That is a steep drop. I never thought a time would come that the Oscars would be below 25 million. Ever.😨
What are the odds they are in the teens next year??!😲😆
25 million is actually a whole lot of people to advertisers. Cable shows that are considered very popular often have watchers in the low single millions.
Does the 25 M include those that streamed it online? Apparently ABC streamed the whole ceremony.
The years with most viewers have movies winning that a LOT of people, normal people, would see. Normally when someone mentions the movies nominated for an Oscar it’s a bunch of boring, blah crap you couldn’t pay me to watch. It’s actually a movie repellant for me.
Exactly. Most of the Oscar movies are only seen by a few people (with the exception of Get Out, Dunkirk, and maybe Lady Bird). I think at least part of it is that people want to be able to root for movies they like and have seen.
I also think most the winners (and many nominees) this year are pretty non-glamorous/not household names. At the end of the day, people want to see the Pitt and Clooney types.
ITA. I don’t generally watch them anyway, but if there is a big name or someone that I particularly like I might watch. Not to be mean, but Frances McDormand is not going to draw me to watch an awards show. She is not a household name, not glamorous, and to my knowledge, has no charisma. And Gary Oldman is a wife beater whose movie was about some political figure’s important wartime decisions. Yeah yeah, I am oversimplifying it but there are lots of us out here in the world that go to movies to escape and be entertained, not given a pseudo-history lesson.
@Chaine It’s not a fact that Oldman beat his wife. There seems to be quite a debate as to whether that’s true or not. But you entitled to your belief.
This. I think that increasingly, there is an assumption that Oscar worthy movies are not popular movies, so the Oscars just doesn’t mean a lot to many people. Gladiator, Saving Private Ryan, Shakespeare in Love.. these are movies that people watched and cared about.
Exactly. I follow awards season closely — obviously, since I’m on a gossip site — but I only saw one Best Picture nominee, Dunkirk. The divide between “Oscar Bait” roles and movies and popular movies gets wider and wider every year. If your movie has hoity toity accents, prosthetics, a Very Serious Tone, or Meryl Streep, it was made to get awards and not commercial success. If your movie has wide appeal, it is obviously Too Pop Culture for any awards.
(Get Out in an exception, but I’m a weenie and can’t handle scary movies.)
I know, GAAAAAH, what’s with the prosthetics! If you want someone that looks like an elderly man with a double chin and big nose, instead of hiring a 50-something and covering him with fake parts and fat padding and bald wigs, just GET A REAL 75-YEAR-OLD GUY. I hate that crap. It’s like they’re giving an Oscar to someone on the basis of hair and makeup.
Agreed.
I use to watch the Oscars every year as a kid and then once I was out on my own, had an Oscar party and made an event out of it, up until 1997 (that was the year Titanic won for reference). After that we decided no more parties and would still watch once in awhile. I think 1999 was the last Oscars I watched until 2005 (Crash) and that was it, I haven’t sat for one since.
The movies are getting more pretentious than they use to be. Sure, best picture didn’t always go to a big hit movie, but often so it did and that was enough to keep ‘regular’ people watching. This year Dunkirk was the biggest box office movie, with over $525 million and Get Out was second with $255 million. I’m going to guess most of us ‘regular’ people saw one or both of those. (Both here, my kid is a history nut and I am a history major, so Dunkirk was a given, Get Out because I heard so much about it.) I don’t live in a huge metropolitan area, so most of the others never got here, so therefore, who cares about the rest of them? (I know lots here have seen the others, this is just a point from a lot of other people who don’t have access to them or don’t give a flying F about them.)
Technology is already giving broadcast a hard time. Just because the Oscars are pretty (although a lot of pretty was missing this year) and supposedly fun, why the hell would I sit through almost 5 hours of crap when I can get everything I wanted to know about them the next day in about an hour, no cheesy crap, no cringy speeches, no hosts that make you want to punch them in the face (not just Kimmel, there have been many)? Hollywood’s big show needs to address this for the Oscars just like it has to for other TV programs and movies. Get with the times or get left behind.
Just to be upfront, this who cares thing is coming from a person who is a HUGE movie fan, like to the point that I have an old time movie star tattooed on me as well as another reference to said star.
No, you’re not wrong. I only saw three of the best picture nominees, two I was interested in by the previews (Get Out and Shape of Water) and one because it was a woman director with great reviews (Lady Bird). I could tell from the previews that none of the others would appeal to me in any way, and I’m not even sure some of them came to theaters near where I live, or if they did, they didn’t stay long.
ETA: Dunkirk did come to theaters near me & was in rotation for quite a while, in fact maybe still is, but I have seen enough war movies already in my life that i just wasn’t interested in another one.
Overexposure. The Award Season is longer than any presidential campaign and that was alread more than tiring.
How many award shows do we seriously need? Also if so many of the same people vote in all of them its not too surprising the same people win.
Realistically the actors are not the most important people on a movie set and they get way too much attention and way too much money already but people watch the Oscars because of them. As much as I hate that writers and costume designers arent given the same adulation no one watches because of them. The show is too long because of that.
Also lots of events are loosing viewers. People are getting more educated on social justice and watching multi millionaires crawling up each others butts is slowly getting out of style.
If the Oscars care about exposure make it a free stream with some ads.
Mostly agree. I don’t typically watch the Oscars anymore, but I think there’s a lot of chaff to be separated before they have to start axing the costume design people 🙂. I’d hate to see those sorts of awards given less attention because I agree they do a lot of work that already gets very little notice.
So I say cut the stuff like going to another theatre to slum with the plebs. Stop with the endless patter between awards, especially the big ones. Cut the show down to 2 hours and maybe people will watch. But I also agree with you that more of us are getting tired of the millionaires celebrating themselves. They’re not fostering world peace ffs.
Technology is really killing these shows. I can see pictures of Gal Gadot in a nice dress anytime I want. I can watch her movies anytime I want. It was different back in the day when we had to go to theatres to see the movies or wait for magazines to publish pictures. Oscars need to stop thinking it’s still the ‘80s or earlier.
I would love to know the numbers during Billy Crystal’s 90s run. He was so entertaining that it was worth tuning in. I still hum his opening numbers and recall jokes he made during the telecast!!
Yes, he was fabulous. It hasn’t been that entertaining in a long time. And agree with those above who say too many award shows, too much self-congratulation among the 1% etc. It’s become tiresome.
Apples and oranges. In Crystal’s time there were no livestreams, no Youtube clips, no Twitter. Comparisons to his era make no sense.
Regardless of the impact of social media, LAK’s point about the difference in the quality of the entertainment holds.
Doesn’t matter. The show has remained the same format since Bob Hope was hosting. Each era has it’s distraction that are more interesting than the oscars telecast.
If you look at the numbers posted above, the (standup) Comedians pull in more numbers than the musical / broadway actors. The talkshow hosts do worst.
My conclusion based on the above numbers is that the standup comedians produce (are produced) a more entertaining show than the other category of hosts.
Billy Crystal is a standup comedian who provided a very entertaining show. I bet if he had a similar ran in now, he would be trending in 5mins flat.
That said, i still want to know what type of numbers he pulled in to prove / disprove my hypothesis.
“Regardless of the impact of social media, LAK’s point about the difference in the quality of the entertainment holds.“
Oh that part I agree with. It was a more innocent era too.
Every era has its distractions? Sorry but which era had distractions that allowed you to watch only the highlights almost instantaneously and follow someone’s live twitter feed on your phone to decide if you wanted to tune in for a few minutes and then do so by streaming on your phone? Which distraction in the 1970s let you do that?
The “distractions” we have now allow someone to selectively see the big moments and know everything about the ceremony without tuning in on TV for a second. Sure we got VCRs in the 1980s…which you had to tune into the channel to tape and required taping all the commercials. It’s now a completely different ball game. Again; apples and oranges.
Huge. In comparison, The Hurt Locker year was a low rated ceremony. The Titanic year was massive. Everyone watched.
I 100% agree. Billy Crystal was gold, and his Oscars were always worth watching…just for him.
Now, for me, watching the Oscars has all the appeal of watching some random company hand out their yearly internal awards. It’s a popularity contest with the winners being who sucks up to management the most. I mean, it always has been, but it feels more transparent now. So, who cares?
I love Billy Crystal. I also remember people saying he was bad and or boring. I thought he was amazing. In my opinion, the Oscars is a really difficult and frankly thankless gig and even if you do a great job, you’re not going to get huge viewership numbers (even in the 90s) and “everybody” will say it was bad even if it wasn’t bad at all. I watched the Oscars because I’m obsessed with good movies (I’m the nerd who watched 80% of the documentary category), and I’m there for the fashion. I don’t , and never have expected it would get huge numbers.
(BTW, for those who remember, Billy’s joke about Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon still makes me smile)
The ratings have dropped significant amounts since Kimmel took over hosting. They have to stop the bleeding. Try bringing Ellen D. or Neil Patrick Harris back. The host is the easiest thing to swap out to see if ratings increase.
I’ve always found the Oscars the least interesting part of the season. It’s just so overblown and up its own arse.
The only awards show I look forward to and actually watch is the BAFTAs: way more interesting, little to no nonsensical, self-indulgent filler and far less self-reverential.
It’s not complicated. The Oscars are too long and too boring. Who in the hell wants to watch Hollywood pat itself on the back for 4 hours? After multiple award shows have already taken place. All of these award shows one after the other are just vanity and narcissism run amok. Or maybe they’re all so far up their own (and each other’s) asses that they simply can’t understand that the world doesn’t stand still over and over again while they walk red carpets and fawn over a statue.
Yeah, the self centered whining tone of “why isn’t everyone watching us” in this article just pissed me off.
Or maybe it’s because despite Me Too movement, sexism in America – the Oscars didn’t nominate enough female directors and instead gave awards to sexual predators.
Hollywood men and women claim to support other women but that’s all talk. There are only a handful of people who are actually helping other women.
Being an “outsider” sure feels great as that showed you had integrity, morals and caring enough to not see horrible stuff and stay quiet.
I would’ve loved to watch the Oscars but i don’t have cable. Neither does anyone even close to my age (24) that I know. I spoke all last week about how excited I was for them. Had to find a bar playing the Oscars to even watch. I think a lot of it has to do w technology and ppl like myself who are considered “cord cutters”
That was my other issue! We don’t have cable. We have an antennae but it doesn’t pick up that channel because the station is too far away. It also goes until almost midnight on the east coast and I have to work the next day, so c’est la vie.
I agree. I think that the Oscars would fare much better w/ views if they dedicated themselves to a really good online stream of events. I remember searching and coming up completely empty, and I don’t live in the US, so I couldn’t watch the streams on any of the US channels either. I can’t remember if the Academy Awards website streams it but I couldn’t find one on there either.
I think the fact that you can’t stream it online anywhere is part of it. I don’t have cable and can’t get any broadcast channels (I’ve tried, my apartment is a complete dead zone). I can’t watch a live event unless I find a stream for it. I actually wanted to watch the Oscars and the Golden Globes but couldn’t. I would pay some small amount of money to get a stream for a particular live event, but the conglomerates that control these things want you to buy cable or watch broadcast, not pay for individual shows on streaming.
I didn’t watch simply because I honestly don’t care about the Oscars anymore. I care about the fashion, so I follow the red carpet on social media and check blogs the day after.
Exactly. Not interested in the red carpet pre show fawning, but I want to see the fashion, so the next day, I read blogs like this.
Exactly. The Oscars show itself is a colossal yawn. All I’m interested in is who wore what.
The Oscars need to find a way to be appointment television for people who are cutting cords and relying on their DVRs.
I think it’s more about the stars that are nominated than the films that are nominated.
The 2014 ceremony had Leonardo DiCaprio, Sandra Bullock, Julia Roberts, Brad Pitt with Angelina Jolie, Cate Blanchett, Matthew Mcconaughey, Jennifer Lawrence, Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, and Bradley Cooper. Of course people tuned in for that.
Hollywood’s inability to produce new movie stars in recent years isn’t helping the situation.
True, not much in the way of sheer star power this year.
I think Harvey Weinstein’s absence has affected everything including the kinds of movies that are released and the campaigns during the season. The Oscars were mainly his movies winning and him hard pressuring for votes for his proteges. All of his grossness aside he had good taste in films, and they always had great casting.
It felt to me like everyone was exhausted from all the changes and trying to figure out the future. I think Black Panther’s success has thrown the paradigm off, Get Out, Wonder Woman, streaming services, Peak TV, metoo, lack of star power, uninspired film choices for the most part and the length of the show. It is time for entertainment to be more inclusive and expand to gain more interest in the offerings.
Then I think the format is dated. We see the celebrities all the time on the internet. It isn’t exciting to see them on the red carpet anymore.
There are no new breakout stars in exciting movies much these days.
I also think the mood of the country is serious.
Our culture is shifting and changing, and I believe sometime in the nearish future the Oscars will no longer be televised. Times are different. We know too much about the industry and about how ugly so much of what we trusted is now even beyond the entertainment industry.
Also, even the critics and Academy voters can’t be bothered to watch the movies themselves, and have no problem letting everyone know. The Academy should have expected low viewership based on their comments alone.
Hmm, this all makes a lot of sense Magnolia.
@Lady D-THIS. Very few things in life shock me, but when I heard that most of the Academy voters don’t watch the movies themselves I was like, well then if they don’t care why should the average person? All that means is that the votes that are tabulated for someone to win don’t mean what they should. If that’s how they Academy is run that’s bad.
Agreed ^^.
If they don’t take it seriously then why should anyone else?
This is spot on for me.
This year ceremony had Sandra Bullock among guests, Matthew Mcconaughey, Jennifer Lawrence, Meryl Streep (again). But I feel people are tired of Meryl Streep already and Jennifer Lawrence is not that much loved anymore.
There’s a million award shows before it. There aren’t that many huge movie stars anymore. Hollywood is so tarnished. People are sick of how hypocritical Hollywood is.
I’ll say it.
#OscarSoWhite
Nothing has not and will not change. And I also think people don’t have as short a memory as The Academy will like. What happened with Moonlight was horrible, not cute and should not have been used as comedic promotion.
I find them a lot less boring in the years I make an effort to see the films in the categories that aren’t considered “big.” Some of the best films I have seen in recent years have been in the documentary categories and the shorts categories. The animated shorts are truly pure imagination and creativity at work. The live action shorts never fail to move; incredible stories told in less than half an hour. This year, I brought several cousins with me to see all the shorts. They were texting me during the ceremony that this is the part when they usually tune out or go get a snack but this year, they were interested and had their favorites picked out.
I saw almost every film this year except for a few of the foreign language films, and that’s only because the ones I didn’t see just opened here this weekend. It makes it a lot more interesting.
I feel this narrative is discussed for every award show every year and people fail to admit that most ppl don’t care to watch four hour shows. Let’s be real, I’m 35 and refuse to watch something that long. My younger brother who is 30 and his friends just catch everything the next day. And my very young cousins who are 19 and 20 don’t even realize that the award shows are on! The internet and streaming has changed the game and for many people, there are other options available. They can watch cable, watch Netflix, dvr, etc… There isn’t the need to to be stuck at home and watch a show. Plus let’s be real, it’s too long. People on the east coast have to get up for work the next day and they are still chugging along.
This is the simplest explanation I’m with. I’m 37 and I’m not going to watch a 4 hour show. I won’t even catch the red carpet interviews. Separate red carpet show should be 1 hour to appease the designers and jewellers. Stream it live on YouTube also to get more eyes.
Push more awards to the technical awards ceremony. They want recognition from their peers, not the average movie-goer. They want to be able to put Oscar winner for XX laurel wreaths on the movie poster or the poster for their next movie, or just for more money for next project.
Then, actual show needs to be 1.5 hours max.
Television used to be the only way to see celebs so awards ceremony was special. Now we can see them online in pictures or video (Instagram, YouTube, blogs etc) glam or unglam.
Why do people still get surprised about this? TV ratings decline every year as more forms of entertainment appear. It’s a tendency that won’t stop. Nothing is to blame. It doesn’t help how political the awards tend to be nowadays, or the fact that they’re usually very disconnected with what the mass actually goes to see to the movies.
I feel like the only surprise here is that ratings are still relevant. I cannot remember the last time I sat down to watch a show live. Years ago. Before my Netflix subscription and Roku, for sure.
They’re long and boring, and there are too many other (better) choices. I can live until the morning to see what people wore and who won.
I think the veil has been lifted on Hollywood. We’ve seen behind the curtain and it’s ugly. We now know that well over half the women in that room have been assaulted by quite a few of the men in the room even. Hell, some of the men have been assaulted too. We now get to read our favorite celebs thoughts on social media. What is left? Of course ratings are down. No one cares anymore. There is no more Hollywood glamour. There really never was though. It was all just a facade. I don’t even know why the ratings would be surprising to anyone.
Is it not likely that viewership is down for the same reason football viewership is down? People do not have cable anymore and there are so many options for entertainment now. Young guys are not the only ones playing video games, increasingly that market is eating into tv and movies.
Make Tiffany Haddish host. Problem solved.
This has been an issue for years. The Oscars refuse to honor commercially successful movies unless they have a very specific pedigree, BUT there’s a strong correlation between popular movies being nominated and lots of eyeballs on the screen. It’s why they moved to 10 Best Picture nominees. People are more likely to watch when a movie that they enjoyed is being honored. But look at this year. A bunch of small arty movies, Dunkirk, and Get Out – which was never going to win Best Picture.
This is going to be the trend as long as “Oscar Bait” movies are a genre completely independent of mainstream fare. The days of a massive blockbuster like Titanic or The Return Of The King winning seem long gone, because it’s all comic books and sequels.
Honestly, I just didn’t feel like watching all these ridiculous a-holes pat themselves on the back in stupidly expensive dresses (although I do love love fashion) when there’s so much horrible sh-t going on in the industry and elsewhere.
I don’t think it has to do with the host for bad ratings, but we are distracted now by other things. There is live streaming,Netflix ,Hulu, Amazon prime and a thousand cable channels. That’s only the beginning. There’s also video games, fooling around on your tablet, Spotify, Instagram , texting people, listening to e-books, surfing the Internet and, oh yeah, Twitter.
They’re overthinking things. As far as I can see, there are two reasons:
You want to know probably the BIGGEST reason for the drop off? Cord cutters. I, for one, have NO ACCESS to ABC. Most live TV steaming services don’t offer it in their packages (it’s only available in less than a dozen markets).
And the second? The Oscars now are anti-climactic. By the time of the ceremony, everyone knows who will win, thanks to a slew of other awards that preceded it. Take a good look at the winners. They’re pretty much the very same ones that won at the start of the season.
“You want to know probably the BIGGEST reason for the drop off? Cord cutters. I, for one, have NO ACCESS to ABC. Most live TV steaming services don’t offer it in their packages (it’s only available in less than a dozen markets).”
THIS.
Exactly.
Too frigging long too. Even if it was streamed, I still wouldn’t sit there for 4 hours.
That’s right- I don’t get the broadcast networks myself now since I dumped Comcast cable. I would have to finally install that antenna that I bought a few years ago.
I think Hulu was showing it, unless that was Netflix. But I was more interested in watching old sitcoms and cartoons….
Honestly? its boring and i think most people are aware that Oscars dont represent the best film industry had done in the past year. Films are made all over the world, and Oscars are just another award bought by big studios.
And not much people actually care for dresses models and actresses wore – its not like they actually picked them, bought and paid for them. They were paid or contracted to wear them.
To cut the story short – most regular people simply dont give a shit.
I love the Hollywood awards season and the Oscars are my Superbowl! And yes, I realize they’re self-congratulatory and the best movies often don’t get rewarded, but I also love movies in general and believe that good movies can have an impact. And I love the related gossip (That’s why we’re all here, right? We love gossip about these Hollywood types.)! And Oscar buzz can help movies that people otherwise wouldn’t know much about (like Moonlight). That being said, the fact that Shape of Water and 3 Billboards were the dominant favorites going into tonight, along with problematic AF Gary Oldman, combined with Ryan Seacrest on the red carpet, definitely put a damper on the evening. I watched Lainey’s red carpet show online instead of the creepy Ryan (or the really bad interviewer Michael Strahan) and missed Joan Rivers so much! Plus, I don’t care that this is a long show – so is the Superbowl. And I love a good film montage so I ate all of the montages up!
Oh, and if they nominate Black Panther for Best Picture, Best Costume Design, and Best Production Design (I think that’s a category) next year, which they should, that will definitely help ratings!
That will be interesting because no superhero movie has ever been nominated. I haven’t seen it but it is better than all the others? Just wondering?
Don’t forget adapted screenplay. I was really impressed with the story.
Hate to be so rude to the plebeians that actually work hard and are really passionate about their work but all the normals should get awards on a different non televised night. Just give out the major awards no one has 4 hours to sit there and watch some obscure filmmaker get a technical award.
A few reasons I think why this happened. First, the average person is very tired of being preached at during the awards shows. They come to celebrate art not have a political rally. Second, there were no stars there. Brad, George, Gwen, Jennifer, Tom, Will, Sandra, Matt, Johnny, Leonardo, Julia, etc. Where is everyone?? Third, they are seen as the hypercritics they are. Preaching about going green and flying all over the place, preaching about helping others but living in gated communities with massive wealth, etc As well the Oscars have become more about political commentary and political winning than actual art. It used to be how a movie was made how good the actors were ect. Now it is about that movie should be nominated because it talked about how things are in society. It is just messed up and no one cares anymore.
Cuz the movies were boring and who wants to watch rich peoples egos stroked to the point they actually think they ARE better then everyone else
Probably because we’re mostly tired of watching these Hollywood fools circle jerk each other. There are bigger and better things to worry about versus who gets a statue voted by old people.
What’s wrong with old people? The senior veterans of the industry have every right to weigh in — they’ve earned it. Strictly youth worship culture is not beneficial to much of any one, as we all will be old one day.
Should have written what I meant but didn’t due to fear of mod. *old white men
connecting it to the sexual abuse that runs rampant in Hollywood that I’m positive so many of the older generation engaged and promoted.
For me, it was as simple as not being able to livestream it. I don’t have cable but I have access to a cable account, but ABC was inexplicably not streaming it online in my “area”. My area being one of the most affluent cities in the country, ok ABC.
I am not going to lie. I am in it for the fashion only. My family and friends do not understand why I watch it. None of them do.
Why waste four hours of my evening struggling through a boring TV show when I can come to Celebitchy then next morning for the highlight reel with commentary?
Has anyone considered ratings being down to the Age of Streaming? I only caught the last half hour of the Oscars because I signed up for a free trial on Hulu which was streaming them. I will go back to the regular Hulu streaming service without the Live TV because frankly I don’t need it. Most young people I know don’t have TVs anymore (or only have them hooked up for streaming) so we aren’t watching network TV. Cable/network TV is an expense we don’t really need. Right before I moved out of my last apartment, the cable bill went up tremendously and I was so glad I didn’t have to pay it. My new roommate doesn’t have a TV at all and while I was worried at first, I quickly adapted. I’m paying enough for utilities and rent, I don’t need an extra cable bill on top of it. I use my family’s Netflix account and now it looks I’ll use Hulu’s non-live TV option for streaming. Watching the Oscars is entertaining, but if I can’t watch it, I’ll watch the Youtube recaps. That’s really all I need.
I spent a good amount of time searching for a livestream of the Oscars and came up completely blank. I won’t say that lack of streaming options accounts for everything, but it likely played a huge factor in the downward trend.
It’s sad that the Academy is so reticent towards newer forms of distribution and media. Mudbound was released on Netflix, and I recall the commotion around whether it qualifies for an Oscar or not. It was a wonderful film (a huge improvement on the book) and the fact that it might not have gotten any accolades was disappointing. The Globes and the Emmy’s have only seen good things happen from embracing streaming. Some of the best TV shows are on streaming services. Movies don’t represent the height of entertainment anymore, and I say this as someone who has no hate for superhero films either (they are amazing when done well–Black Panther and Wonder Woman for instance). If they want to pick up the slack here, they have to start by getting with the times, and also promote a degree of accessibility.
Sherri nailed it. Same for the NFL. Like it or not, people are *sick* of politics bleeding over into everything.
The Oscars are too predictable. I love to see upsets happen at these award shows. Example,
Adrien Brody winning Best Actor over Daniel Day Lewis.
Juliette Binoche winning Best Supporting Actress over Lauren Bacall.
Marisa Tomei winning Best Supporting Actress over Judy Davis.
I am right there with you CB…I watch all of the award shows as well as the pre-shows to see what everyone is wearing. It is like my SuperBowl because I like to keep up with TV shows, movies, actors, etc. just like my husband can tell me who won the world series in 1982. However, I did find myself not actually sitting there watching every single moment because Ryan Seacrest should have been taken off the red carpet, Michael Strahan was horrible, Jimmy Kimmel sucks to me, and the whole bit about taking snacks to the theatre nearby was stupid. Plus, they have an ENTIRE YEAR to get the In Memorium correct to include everyone and they always jack that up. I can overlook celebrities treating this as if they cured cancer, but there are some changes that need to be made.
I have watched most of the movies nominated so that should’ve been enough reason for me to watch the show but I skipped it. They have been giving out the awards for the same winners / movies that it has been predictable and nothing to look forward to. And I know that Lawrence, Robbie, Ronan, Stone are supposed to be the new big stars of HW that are going to attract viewers but they’re all just meh. I didn’t really see any big stars out there. It was a snooze fest.
I have been commenting all over this thread, but just to add IMO Jimmy Kimmel is also a factor. Him being the host, made me less likely to watch. If it is a host that I know will be funny and that I like, like Ellen or NPH, I will tune in to see if it is worth watching.
It seems like, nowadays, studios save all their Oscar contenders to release in December. I know there are still exceptions, but it used to be that quality movies were released more regularly throughout the year, and the Oscar ceremony was broadcast later in March. I used to get out to see, or be able to rent, a fair percentage of the 5 Best Pic nominees before the show. Then I could do things like knowledgeably participate in Oscar voting pools and agree or argue with pre-Oscar film reviews/rankings. The show was just more fun to watch that way. This year we tried to watch a few contenders in the weeks before Sunday, but 5 or 6 of the 9 nominees aren’t even available to rent yet. It takes some dedication to get out to see all 9 nominees in the theater between December and March.
TL;DR: Fewer people are going to tune into a long show giving awards to movies they haven’t seen.
No one watches TV anymore….and live TV at that. They need to stream things like the Oscars live over social media. Make it easily accessible online. Who has cable? I sure don’t.
They were very boring. The issue is that any “newsworthy” moments will be all over twitter and youtube the next day to view…so why go through 4 hours of that sh*t?
Here’s a thought: Stop nominating Meryl Streep for mediocre performances.
I LOVED the Shape of Water. I reallyreally wanted Sally Hawkins to FINALLY get some acknowledgement. The film is GREAT. It had everything, love, comedy, drama, horror, scifi.
I am THRILLED it won Best Oscar. Woot Woot!!
I watched and will always watch. That said, I thought it was a snoozefest. Jimmy wasn’t great, but people would have to tune in to see that he wasn’t at his best, so he shouldn’t be blamed for the lower ratings. Maybe if he hosts again next year, that could be why, but people who are into it will always watch. People less interested will probably only watch the highlights since they are all over the place as soon as they happen.
Don’t forget that some people don’t want to hear that we’re terrible people for being conservative. That’s half the audience and we’re over hearing from people who talk down to us. Funny how that works.
Half?
Yes – I would assume the “half” is the half of the US population that voted in Pres. Trump. Isn’t that how it works? I don’t vote in the US, but the super-liberal bias was grating. They are alienating half their audience with that.
@cd3
You need to learn some real facts about US politics and voters. First off, I don’t know why you don’t already know this FACT, but half the US voters did NOT vote for the Trump dump. Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million votes. Trump won via the corrupted, representational system of the electoral college.
Second, “super-liberal bias” whaaat? You obviously only take in conservative media.
@cd3, Only half the country bothered to vote. Of that half, approximately 50% voted for Trump. It was more like 26% of the population who voted for him, not half.
of votes cast:
65,853,516; 48.5% went to Hillary
62,984,825; 46.4% went to trump
#TruthHurts
That isn’t new. The entertainment industry is full of people who have been maligned by the right, and they aren’t going to pander. Watch or don’t but half the country is not conservative. That is just something conservatives like to claim.
Truly a baffling comment given that the US has a republican in office.
Not really when you consider the percentage of the people that vote and look at demographic trends. Overwhelmingly Millenials do not call themselves conservative, and we make up the largest segment of the population after Baby Boomers. Gen X is largely liberal by a wide margin. Even Baby Boomers aren’t more conservative with a decent spread lean liberal. The only group that leans mostly conservative are the Silent, oldest and their numbers are dwindling quickly due to age.
45 is his own phenomenon separate from the GOP and he ran against a polarizing figure and all the other chaos and interference during the election.
So again it is false.
He won the electoral college barely because of a collection of lower populated states and barely won the larger ones.
More facts against your argument.
No magical movie stars , no glamour. The Oscars were like BRF, people were tuning in to see the magical world. Guess social media killed all that mystery and light.
Twitter Ig or snap , has new generation, of YouTube Netflix tv stars .. I do predict movie theaters will dispears and replaced by virtual theaters .
We are changing even in window shopping to online shopping.
I know dems say they don’t care for Trump supporters and don’t care if we watch their movies and their shows….but maybe they should try to be inclusive to everyone. Oops…wait, only repubs are the ones who aren’t inclusive, right?
You have the country music awards.
LOL
Perfect example of liberal talking down right there.
hahaha. But it’s true.
@cd3 I can’t help they represent the right overwhelmingly. If you think it is low brow, those are YOUR feelings. All you have to do is look at the map of the country during elections, and you can see the where the strongholds are. That is a fact. Without the south, there would be no GOP, and those states are even changing.
We don’t whine about the country music awards. We just don’t watch them, or we don’t care. I don’t feel left out at all. You can have that platform freely and unhindered. Go for it.
You have an inferiority complex and need to take it up with your side. If you don’t like who is drawn to your ideology, then perhaps you should examine that a little closer.
They are inclusive. They’re speaking out for gender and racial equality. What is it about that you don’t understand?
Exactly. What a bunch of babies. Waaaah why can’t I come to the party after spending years insulting and maligning you and your values? Waaah. Nevermind we embrace racism and bigotry. Waaah. But WE want to come! You think you are better than me! Waaah.
Take personal responsibility and refrain from supporting industries dominated by liberals. All entertainment, a large number of sporting events, fashion, academia, art, Google and many many tech companies and I am confident there are others.
Be strong and stand for your values I tell you! Avoid us like the plague.
I watched for the first time in years (my hubby for some odd reason wanted to see it, go figure). And I’m regretting those three plus hours of my life I could have been doing the laundry or housework or anything else. Jimmy Kimmel? So BORING, why is he a thing? #oscarsneveragain
Maybe because Hollywood is way to political and everyone is sick of the all the anger? A lot of people watch movies as a form of escapism. Unpopular opinion here but forcing your view down someone’s throat isn’t the way to make them understand what you are saying. And hollyweird is doing just that!
YES!!
Hollyweird? Gee, I can’t possibly guess your political affiliation.
Don’t be so precious that you can’t hear other people’s views. If you can’t bear it, then you shouldn’t watch it, but they don’t have to change to suit conservatives. No one should.
I’m curious to know which movies you’re watching or what point in time you’re referencing when you allude to Hollywood *not* being political. Sacheen Littlefeather refusing the Oscar on Marlon Brando’s behalf? Clark Gable desegregating the sets of Gone With The Wind? Charlie Chaplin making a movie called “The Great Dictator” about Hitler? Charlton Heston’s involvement with the NRA? The House Un-American Activities Committee blacklisting all those people for supposedly being communist? Ronald Reagan, an actor, becoming president of the USA? Schwarzenegger becoming governor of California? Really, please tell me what you’re watching and who you’re a fan of in Hollywood who isn’t political, who sticks to escapism only. I’d love to know.
And the biggest liberal Hilary supporter of all – Harvey Weinstein!
If Hollywood is some paragon of tolerance and love, sign me up for the other side any day…
@cd3, way to miss my point as a whole. Btw, how is it working out with Trump? Last I checked, he was so desperate for adulation and acceptance from the liberal elite that he was willing to lick anyone’s bootstraps if it meant that he’d be able to weasel his way into Hollywood’s good graces. Too bad he had to settle for being President, huh?
@cd3 And the biggest supporter of 45 are Russian Thugs and White Supremacists. David Duke is your kinda guy. The wife abusers and oh yes Mr. Mall predator from Alabama. You voted in a grotesque Reality TV star and that is the lowest on the entertainment totem pole. Sorry, no award shows for you. And his crew is under federal investigation and some are going to prison.
Be proud. Be very very proud.
Agree, 100%
It’s the #metoo movement and the race card thing. Just like the new Star wars movies including basically every color of the rainbow, it feels forced and not genuine.
As opposed to the old Star wars movies?! Lando Calrissian and Mace Windu would like to have a word with you…
People just aren’t that into watching an awards show anymore? Everything just ends up on the internet anyway. Why would I watch a red carpet show when all the best dresses will be all over the internet the next day. I was excited for Get Out and the Shape of Water and a lot of people I know we’re excited for at least one of those movies. But why would I sit through a four hour broadcast for just a few moments I care about. Any good speeches or funny moments will end up on the internet.
Maybe they need to change how they broadcast? Maybe they need to change what they show? A lot of it is just sitting through some unfunny jokes and self congratulatory back patting. I mean, it’s really a night for those in the industry. And that’s fine, they should have their ceremony and their night, but I don’t see the point in me watching it. I like looking through the nominees and winner’s lists when they come out and checking out some of the fashion. That’s good enough for me and probably good enough for most people.
If Hollywood wants folks to watch the Oscars…they better start nominating some of the HUGE blockbusters that people consistently go and see…I will watch the Oscars, no matter what…however, I’m a cinemaphile…but in the last 20 years…major awards have leaned more and more toward Independent films and that’s not going to cut it…also, with so many options to getting information at the very second it happens, folks are no longer primed to sit in front of the television…FOR HOURS! We did it before because WE HAD TOO!
Box office sales themselves have been trending down. 2017 was the worst in a couple of decades. If people are apathetic about the movies, why would they care about the industry’s awards show? Tastes and habits are changing.
I watched this year but I was bored and I don’t know if I’ll bother next year. I think the biggest problem is that there was no suspense. Virtually every award show had gone the same way. We knew it was Frances, we knew it was Gary, and no one really cared about the Best Picture nominees.
Secondly, the presenters. I didn’t know who half of them were. Either too old or too niche. I’m sick of hearing sanctimonious speeches about Times Up – it’s like Hollywood invented harassment this year. Kumail and Lupita were the only presenters that I found entertaining. If you’re going to present, you need to be A level famous or funny. End of.
Jimmy Kimmel was fine, but skip the “let’s laugh at the ordinary people” stuff please. That’s not what we watch the Oscar for. Also please let’s shift the short films, the documentary, the sound effects and sound editing and some of the other awards to the Technical Ceremony. Focus on the awards that we actually TALK about…acting, directing, screenplays – and that centre on films we’ve had the chance to see. No one understands the difference between sound effects or sound editing, nor can judge if it’s been done well. We CAN relate to costume or make up or cinematography. Let that be the litmus test.
And finally – the songs. Unless you have Bruce Springsteen performing a song you’ve actually heard on the radio – truncate, merge, or cut. Get the whole show down to 2 hours, make it entertaining and relatable.
First of all ratings are kind of skewed to begin with because not everyone has a neilsen box. But regardless I think theres other reasons. Box office is down. People aren’t going to the movie theaters as often anymore. Which is a separate issue on its own (could be cost related. Could be the rise of streaming services etc). Also, the oscars dont usually nominate a lot of mainstream movies (outside of tech). Im sure a heck of a lot more people saw Wonder Woman than Phantom Thread. Also I think the problem is the length of the telecast. People dont want to watch something for 3+ hrs. Especially less so if they’re not familiars with the movies or actors.
So many people I know have gotten rid of their cable TV, so it makes sense less people are watching.
Unless it’s on Hulu or Netflix, it’s not getting watched
No offence, but the Oscars were never supposed to be a big ratings draw. And I think the efforts on part of the Academy to make the ceremony such are misplaced. I’m not saying that they can’t be great and televised, but they are fundamentally an awards show, and trying to gimmick it up is never really going to work. Also, a lot of the shticks this year were really cringey. I need Kimmel to just stop with trying to surprise non-celebrities. It’s awkward and kind of annoying, and I doubt any of those people agreed to come on TV beforehand. But they’re not going to stop giving out the Oscars just because people aren’t tuning into the ceremony. That’s not how that works.
That being said, the people who are complaining that the Oscars are more “politicized” these days clearly don’t know much about Oscars history. The Oscars have always been political because art is political. The Oscars are also one of the biggest stages in entertainment, and its always been this way, and the entertainment industry is like everything else–it reflects the politics of its time, and it always has. So of course actors and presenters will make statements about causes they feel are important to them. What sorts of statements the viewers choose to be irritated by reflects their own political inclinations, and there’s nothing particularly wrong with that either. However, what it should do is prompt a degree of self-reflection among people about why they like what they like, and dislike what they dislike, and what conclusions they can draw about themselves from that.
I also don’t get the criticism that it’s too long to watch. I had it on in the background while I went about doing other things with my life. It’s not something you sit and consume from start to finish, but it’s also not something that requires your absolute undivided attention for four hours. The biggest issue for me is the sheer lack of streaming options. The fact that the Academy doesn’t have a live stream up on their website is a travesty. It’s astonishing that they’re still lagging behind on this front, considering even the Olympics has live streaming these days. What gives?
Otherwise, for all its criticism (and there are plenty) the Oscars are still the biggest award in the movie business. And winning one can make a huge difference to someone’s career. So people can choose whether they want to watch or not watch, but clearly they still care deeply about who wins, and what the narratives of the winners are. The views are always going to be secondary to that anyway.
Also, I don’t think people really believe that these movies are the pinnacle of excellent filmmaking anymore. For a very long time, everyone wanted to get into movies, because television was subpar and not good enough and it wasn’t for the really talented people. Now it’s the opposite, and no one is really interested in watching movies when they can binge things in the comfort of their own home. Especially not prestige movies that only screen in selected theatres and don’t get a wide release early enough to watch in time for the Oscars. There’s definitely an accessibility issue at work here that’s also going unaddressed.
My working theories:
1. Outdated Format — 4 hours of commercials interrupted by maybe a dozen awards, of which you might be mildly interested in 2, tops? Nope.
2) Outdated Delivery Mode — they’re not broadcast the way people, in increasing numbers, consume entertainment.
3) Outdated Culture — We saw behind the curtain this year and it was a total sh*t show. Expecting us to swoon over the “glamour” of their craptastic industry is ridiculous, like putting lipstick on a pig. “A night of glamour, movies, and trying to make you forget about all the raping!” How stupid do they think we are?
They should scrap the Best Foreign Language category (a subjective term if ever there was) and nominate the best films of the year in the Best Picture category regardless of their language.
That would broaden the worldwide appeal of the telecast.
As to why the telecast nose dived this year, maybe some people are turned off by how political it has become. But it’s a small price to pay for having these important conversations.
I think another big problem is that people want real movie stars. So a recent star much like old Hollywood Elizabeth Taylor is Angelina. Always dressed. Some drama but carries herself like a star. Private but not private either just gives enough. hope that makes sense. There is an aura of ethereal. That is what people want a chance to move above the ordinary. Sure we know they have make up and stuff but they are fascinating. Then you have someone like Tiffany whose dress on the carpet I loved but then during her act had her shoes in her hands and wore boots. So funny – sure. But movie star quality not so much. I can watch comedy anytime. Same goes for Jennifer Lawerence she just doesn’t have it. She gives to much away and tries to act cool much like Tiffany. Just no. People want more the real Hollywood glamour and gentlemen. It is probably gone for good I think.
I think viewership has little to do with what movies are nominated and more to do with the following:
1. Awards season is long and drawn out and the big shows are all televised.
2. With all the industry and trade papers and social media, there aren’t any surprises anymore. By and large the large categories are a lock or down to two people.
3. Politics. There is a real divide in this country and thanks to Fox News Conservative leaning folks have convinced themselves that Hollywood is fully of pansy liberals who want to destroy America.
4. The hosts aren’t as well known
5. The show is too damn long. This sucker needs to get whittled down to two hours tops. And mix it up, make it fresh.
Also what is up with all the knocks against Shape of Water; that movie may not be everyone’s cup of tea but it’s nothing like La La Land. On that note, number six may be people are getting sick of being beat over the head with what movies they should like and being judged because they don’t like everyone else’s favs….just a thought.
All good points, especially number six. I also felt a lot of people were overreaching with their arguments about why EVERYONE should hate Three Billboards. I guess that’s why awards can be problematic because we can watch the same movie but see something completely different.
I think the men need to step it up. HAHAHAHAHA
A) TOO DAMN LONG! Cut out the best editing, sound, short doc, etc type awards. Most only care about the big ones like song, writing, director, actors, etc.
B) I actually don’t think it matters if the movies are popular or successful. Oscars have always been that way. What is a problem is that there is little surprise or diversity. We all know who is going to win by the time the Oscars air because there are 15 other award shows before it. And we all know it most likely won’t be a POC or a woman.
C) I think people get tired of the political/preachy/hypocritical hollywood climate. The #metoo movement in Hollywood has been disappointing for me since many of them have worked with, defend or are friends with people who have been accused.
D) Who has cable anymore? I haven’t had it for years. I watch clips the next day and save 4 hours and a ton of money. Put it on Netflix and they will get ratings.
I think it’s strictly the particular movies which are headlined that affect viewership and ratings. This year and last year you had a lot of films that were more arty than commercial. Some of them were great movies, but they don’t attract huge audiences. I think it a fair assessment the more people that
have seen a film and have a personal attachment, the more likely those people tune in to the Oscar show. If movie of the year had the equivalent of a Star Wars from years ago in contention, or next year perhaps even Black Panther, you’d get much higher ratings.
BTW, I wouldn’t blame Kimmel in the slightest. I think the guy has done a great job, particularly in a difficult year where subjects that just aren’t very funny had to be dealt with. Blaming him would be like blaming the messenger.
@Caitlin, you really hit the nail on the head with the point about what movies people watch. I did watch the Oscars because I had movies and people I wanted to support. I loved Get Out, I loved Mudbound, I loved Lady Bird. I loved Shape of Water and Coco, and I, Tonya. But I was lucky that I could watch all of these movies. The lack of a wide release for so many of these films, early enough for them to build an actual pop-culture presence that people could connect with, is probably what contributes to the lack of viewership. No one wants to watch an awards ceremony when they don’t know the reason why most of these people are nominated let alone what films they were in.
Making the list of Best Picture nominees longer over the past couple of years may have contributed to this. On one hand it may mean that more people have seen seen atleast some of the nominated films but on the other it means that less people would’ve seen all of them. It’s pretty hard to get fired up about which film you think should win if you haven’t seen them all.
ITA, A. The Christmas slow-platform release of prestigious movies is a major hassle if one doesn’t live in a big city. I know studios/producers are trying to grow an audience for specialty films, but it makes no sense to do a slow rollout during weeks when people have time and money to see a lot of movies. And it comes off as kinda snotty—ha, ha, your town isn’t cool enough for us to launch our cool movie there.
This. I said something similar below. This is 100% correct.
Watching the Oscars is boring. It’s 3-4 hours of boredom with a rare gag here and there.
It got too political and just isn’t fun to watch anymore. That’s why I skipped it this year; a first for me.
Hear, hear. It isn’t fun to watch one big pompous political fest.
It has always been political. I think the problem at the moment is that a lot of conservative people don’t like the political values that are being championed. If the Academy stepped back now and ignored issues such as sexistm and racism that would also be a political decision.
Perhaps it’s a combination of all horrible shit going on in the world today and the sexual predatory foundation Hollywood seems to be founded upon. it all just seems a little fake and gross now.
Hollywood lost its glamour and pleasantness.
When i was a kid the musical numbers seemed way better and there were more of them. What’s up with having all these actors on who can’t sing? (Gael Garcia Bernal..) Bring back Barbra Streisand and Shirley Bassey!
Omg, he was terrible. Sorry GGB, but wtf? Why did they let him sing?
When I was younger my family and I would watch the Oscars. It was the place to see all the STARs you saw on TV in one place. The problem IMO isn’t that they are political. The Oscars have always been political. I think the Show needs to change it’s format. But that sadly you can see the Actors all the time. Social Media and Gossip sites (sorry) have made them just not that big a deal anymore. One there are far too many Award shows. Televised. When the Oscars were big they were the Big Game. Now leading up to them most movies have won tons of awards. too many RC. The show is boring.
I remember reading people here saying they are tired of knowing everything about actors. They don’t want to know about their personal lives. Well this Oscar was an example of what happens when the general public doesn’t know much about the actors. The Oscars need to change to meet the time we are in. I remember an Actor saying that they should have all the Award Shows in ONE week. That would actually be great. Then the last show is OSCAR. Or we need to see less of actors. But that won’t happen. The Gossip industry has given us daily pictures of everyone. Seeing them Oscar night is not a big deal anymore.
The only I care about the Oscars is that TCM does their ’31 days of Oscar’ and its wall to wall with great movies.
They should host the Oscars every 4 years like the Olympics! Now THAT would be amazing.
Speaking of movies nobody watches, seeing Warren Beatty present two years in a row keeps reminding me of 1982: I still can’t believe Chariots of Fire beat Reds. Chariots of Fire was very good, but Reds was epic.
It’s a combination of factors (as many have stated):
* No broadly popular nominees that everyone has seen and everyone has an opinion about, like “Titanic” or “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.” (Maybe “Get Out” falls into that category this year.) Lower-grossing nominees means lower ratings, period.
* The Oscars aren’t special anymore and have not been special for years. We have three-dozen award shows and four-to-six months of speculation and red carpets for the opening of an envelope. But the Academy Awards never change.
* More and more people with each passing month are abandoning appointment television. Even the Super Bowl ratings dropped. They just don’t watch TV the same way anymore.
* Hollywood’s been in the headlines all year for terrible reasons. Not as many people aren’t in the mood to watch celebrities congratulate each other.
There isn’t much AMPAS can do about having nominees that aren’t box office hits. They CAN move the show up a couple of months. They CAN revamp the format. They make $75 million a year from ABC, a significant chunk of their operating revenue. It benefits everyone, the studios and unions alike, to keep the show healthy. If we can broker peace deals between warring nations, we can get unions and the Academy to agree to change up the format and at least TRY new things, including the red carpet parade.
Everyone stopped watching after Leonardo DiCaprio won. Quite simply, the fun was gone. Hee hee.
Watch every year from the red carpet to closing credits to ogle at how the other half live. ( I know, more fabulous in my head than in real life, but I’m ok with the fantasy). They need to dump Kimmel, nice enough guyjust boring AF and hire a more entertaining MC or pair of MCs.
People who love the Oscars are people who love the industry and niche films. When was the last time a regular person saw most of the Oscar movies? I’m in the industry and saw most, but only because I got screeners. If I had to go out and pay for all those movies, forget it.
If popular movies like those from Marvel* had a chance to win something other than technical awards, there’d be a whole lot more people watching.
*the day this happens is the day I stop watching the Oscars.
I think they need to include some other categories as well to include some more of the well-loved, more popular movies out there. I’ve started to really enjoy going to the movies the past 2 years, and try to see all of the movies nominated for best picture. This year I saw all but one. And when I see many of the movies nominated, I love watching the Oscars. And I do love that the Oscars support these Indie films or films that are just different than the blockbusters. But the GP doesn’t want to watch an awards ceremony on a bunch of movies they never seen.