Seth Rogen understands why people don’t care about the Oscars: ‘Why should they?’

I still get excited for the Oscars, although I’ll fully admit that most Oscar ceremonies for the past 10-15 years have been a pretty steady decline in glamour and fun. The Academy Awards still have prestige and gatekeeping and fancy people in fancy frocks, but it’s just so different than it was thirty years ago, even twenty years ago. All that being said, I don’t have a philosophical problem with the Oscars. Sure, it’s Hollywood patting itself on the back. Okay, we know that going into it. But Seth Rogen can’t really reconcile it. He doesn’t understand why anyone would care about the Oscars.

Seth Rogen doesn’t get why Hollywood wants everyone to love the Oscars.

“I don’t get why movie people care so much if other people care what awards we give ourselves,” Rogen told Insider during an interview with Paul Rudd about their Super Bowl commercial for Lay’s potato chips. “To me, maybe people just don’t care. I don’t care who wins the automobile awards. No other industry expects everyone to care about what awards they shower upon themselves. Maybe people just don’t care. Maybe they did for a while and they stopped caring. And why should they?”

Despite the Academy Awards making major changes to the show to try to make it more appealing to viewers — including not having a host, trying to shorten the show by axing the original song performances, and at one time considering a most popular category — the Oscars have been on a decline in ratings for years.

The Oscars hope to rebound this year by having a host, which will be the first time the show has had one since Jimmy Kimmel took the reigns in 2018. No host has been announced yet. When Insider asked Rogen and Rudd who they think should host, Rogen admitted “that’s a tough one,” but added, “I’m sure there are comedians out there that want to, right?”

[From Insider]

I always have ideas – ideas I give Oscar producers for free – about how to improve the Oscars, and Oscar producers always go in the opposite direction. For one, the show is simply too long. There’s too much padding, too many montage packages, too many long-ass speeches or lectures. If you want people to tune in, don’t make it such a dumbass, long-ass drag. Secondly, they should get someone fun – or even genuinely funny – to host. Like, John Oliver or Steve Martin. Then invite all of the most glamorous people to present, and change up the order of the awards presentations so there’s not this huge lull for two hours.

As for what Rogen says, he’s basically just saying that he understands why people are tuning out. I understand it too, although I think they’re tuning out for different reasons. A lot of people DO want to see what movies get awards and which actors win. They just don’t want to sit through a nearly four-hour slog to find out. People will truly just Google it in the morning.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

87 Responses to “Seth Rogen understands why people don’t care about the Oscars: ‘Why should they?’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Becks1 says:

    I care about the Oscars less and less each year. I think part of that is because of the shortened award season (not so much an issue this year or even last year) – but there was a time….and by that I mean 2020…when the Oscars were on my birthday, which is February 8. That’s SUPER early considering they used to be the end of March! they kept creeping up more and more and then it just seemed like BAM all the awards shows were crammed into one month and it was just too much.

    Also, just too many awards shows that are televised these days. I feel like it used to be the Globes, the Spirit awards on TBS or something, and then the Oscars, Grammys, Emmys, tonys. Now there are SO MANY and in January/February it feels like there is a different awards show every week. that takes some of the fun out of the Oscars, especially out of the red carpet, because…..well, look, there’s Cate Blanchett, I’ve already seen her on 5 red carpets this month, yay, more Cate Blanchett, I guess. (and she’s one of my faves for a red carpet lol.)

    Third, there were too many movies that were released at the very end of the awards period – so a lot of December 25 releases or something – and then weren’t available to see streaming or anywhere besides a theater by the super early Oscar show. So I was seeing fewer and fewer of the nominated movies, so the show was less interesting. I think streaming is turning that around somewhat though.

    And all that’s before we get to the actual show! Which is too long (wayyyy too many commercial breaks, I know they need to make their $$ but good lord, I would rather a larger chunk of awards show with a larger chunk of commercials then “here’s an award, commercial break! another award, break!”) not funny at all, wayyyyy too self-important, etc. It’s just lost a lot of the fun and glamor it used to have and I’m not sure what they can do to bring that back.

    • Noli says:

      Happy birthday Becks! Hope you had a great one 🎈

    • Case says:

      Happy belated birthday, Becks!

    • Merricat says:


    • Becks1 says:

      Haha thanks friends! I just brought that up to point out how early the Oscars creeped. February 8! from the end of March to the first week of February! that’s ridiculous.

    • Tiffany:) says:

      I do think the films that were only in theaters made it so viewers can’t really get excited about them…but this year I’d say the majority are available to stream. I’ve been watching potential nominees for a few weeks now, and there’s so many available I haven’t been able to watch all of them yet.

      Off the top of my head, I know that West Side Story, House of Gucci, Licorice Pizza, and Drive My Car aren’t available to stream, but 20 or so other films are.

  2. Nikki says:

    Agree w/ Kaiser 100%. The Oscars are too damn long, and I don’t want to sit through cheesy production numbers. Just show me big stars in glamorous outfits, and don’t educate me with long videos about someone getting a lifetime award for foreign cartoon cinematography.

    • Harper says:

      The twenty minutes devoted to the lifetime achievement award to some Hollywood has-been should be axed. Imagine putting a twenty minute snoozefest in the middle of one of these Hollywood movies … they would never do it. They have that awards luncheon every year where they can fawn over the recipient. Every year the Oscars wonder how to gain more viewers but they have this very obvious deadweight in the middle of their show that they don’t address.

      • Isabella says:

        Agree. They could give the lifetime achievement award at a luncheon. Then show us glamorous highlights during the Oscar ceremony. A five minute recap would be fine.

    • LadyMTL says:

      They are always too long; even when they’d try to make an effort to speed things up it’d still end up too long lol.

      I used to watch mostly because of the fashion, but nowadays I can just check Twitter the night of, and then come here the next day for the fashion posts. Voila, I’ve saved myself four hours of tedium.

    • Lainey bug says:


    • Eurydice says:

      I’m kind of a nerd and I love “behind the scenes” movies – so, I’d totally watch a show based on the technical awards and how the movies are made.

      • Juju says:

        I think a huge impact has to be that many people have cut the cord and/or don’t watch network shows anymore. I think viewership in general has gone down for most network shows.

        But I also think many of the reasons mentioned in these comments contribute. Too long, movies aren’t out long enough for most viewers to have an opinion on who wins, diversity issues that took way too long to be addressed. I feel like they are trying to win Millennial and Gen Z viewers by using Baby Boomer ideas. It’s not going to work. People want glamour and stars, and it’s got to move quickly.

      • Eurydice says:

        @Juju – Do the Millennials want glamour and stars? So many of the most popular movies are tech-heavy and Millennials can get all the star contact they want on social media. Plus, they’re either about making individual choice or following a social media influencer – none of that spells Oscar. I think the Oscars are dead – like mastodon in the tar pits dead.

    • Teddy says:

      I wish I still cared but as K. said, the show is one big tl;dr. So much time wasted watching presenters walk toward a microphone to give those tiresome lectures, as if viewers don’t know what sound or costumes or cinematography are. It’s a show about movies presented in variety show format. Dull and kind of cringey.

    • superashes says:

      Same. I think they need to break it into two broadcasts, one for the acting awards and best picture and best director, and one for the technical aspects of filming and other categories, and just have the technical show first and the acting show second. Then you could better gear the production to what you are doing each night, to make it more interesting in terms of the entertainment choices.

  3. Normades says:

    Yea they need to start with a producer who can think outside the box and choose a host that people will be intrigued to see.

    Since Gaga got snubbed how about Gaga hosting? I think she’d be great.

    Or how about Gaga AND Bradley Cooper, even better!

  4. Jen says:

    I think a lot of is the way the movie industry has changed, too- the big hits are Marvel movies, like it or not, and the Academy Awards don’t really recognize them. There haven’t been blockbuster movies that clean up at awards shows in a while, right? Are people going to watch a three hour awards show to see a film they’ve never seen win Best Picture?

    • Silver Charm says:

      They nominated Black Panther and it had a decent shot at winning. Ratings didn’t improve. Marvel won’t save the Oscars.

      • Jen says:

        I don’t mean Marvel exactly, I mean there aren’t movies like “Titanic” anymore that are just huge pop culture moments and awards show winners. The majority of films nominated for the past several years have been much smaller. I actually liked it, but who’s watching three hours of awards to see “Nomadland” win best picture.

      • Dutch says:

        You are spot on Jen. Up until 1977 or 1978 the majority of Oscar nominated films were in the Top 10 of that year’s box office. So people at home had at least seen some or most of the movies nominated, had their favorites and therefore had a rooting interest in who won. But once the Age of the Summer Blockbuster hit in full stride in the late 70s an 80s, the divide between a hit movie and an Oscar movie grew wider and wider. There was the occasional Titanic and Return of the King, but by and large people don’t have a rooting interest once the ceremony rolls around.

      • deering24 says:

        Black Panther got royally shafted that year–and by Green Book, for fuck’s sake. 😛 That was ongoing proof Hollywood is increasingly out-of-touch when it comes to Oscar choices. BP was a blockbuster with resonance and meaning; Green Book was the same old “races come together” pablum. All the Academy could see was that BP was a “comic book” megahit. And, ironically, IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT forty years ago covered GB’s territory with way more sharpness, insight, and smarts.

    • Case says:

      I agree, Jen. There just aren’t a lot of movies being made anymore that feel like EVERYONE is talking about to begin with, and especially that the Oscars deem worthy. Titanic is a great example.

      • Silver Charm says:

        Marvel. All of you are describing Marvel. The billion dollar pop culture behemoth everyone talks about. Marvel. And Marvel won’t save the Oscars. This has already been tested.

    • LWT says:

      This is exactly right.

      People tuned in when they had some small personal investiture in the films. When it was common for the average person to see 1-2 movies a month and they were all familiar with the Best Picture contenders.

      Now, the entire theatrical market has changed. 9/10 movies in a theater are marvel. And while they are popular, they are not groundbreaking in terms of script, or acting, or anything other than special effects.

      If you haven’t even heard of the best picture nominees, let alone see them, why would you watch?

      The academy should stop broadcasting the awards for a while. A few years, at least. Let the attendees really let loose and then leak some juicy stories to Vanity Fair and people in the week after. Do that for a few years and maybe people will be interested in watching again.

    • lucy2 says:

      I agree – the mid-level movie that many would go see barely exists anymore, everything is a huge franchise, or a little indie that few know about. It’s definitely changed the awards game for sure. That plus dwindling network/live tv viewing, and having all of it available in a 10 minute recap vs a 4 hour dragging show with commercials, of course it’s declined.

      I used to love award season and really cared who won. Now I rarely watch, I just look at the fashion, the highlight clips, and the winners list the next morning.

  5. Scorpion says:

    I cannot believe I am agreeing with Seth Rogen but I don’t care about any form of Award Shows. I would rather watch paint dry.

    • BethAnne says:

      I have been saying this for years! I barely care about awards in my own industry and those are people I actually know and projects I actually care about.

  6. Cat says:

    A lot of young people do not have cable or a tv antenna. I am in my late 20s and have never had or wanted cable tv since leaving my parent’s house. If I had cable I would watch the oscars. I am sure this is a reason for the decline.

    • mia girl says:

      As someone who works in the TV industry, this is the largest driver of ratings decline for most broadcast events, including the Oscars.

      Add to what others have mentioned that there has been a lack of a blockbuster type films to rally more viewers.

      Had Spiderman No Way Home been part of best picture noms this year, I do think it would have made many younger genz & millennials who have never watched the Oscars actually seek out ways to watch.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        I am growing increasingly tired of what Hollywood is putting out these days. They rely on old movies that were a hit or they continue to push out the same story with 37 sequels. It’s insulting to the audiences that they refuse to take chances on producing good material. They only care about their bottom line. TC will be 87 and still making sequels to his MI, which ii refuse to watch any TC movies.

        Furthermore, the judges need to start awarding more movies that carry large numbers of POC, women and AAIP as well! You can’t regurgitate the same white people year after year. There have been so many fabulous actors that don’t fit their mold of worthy contenders and it’s foolish for them not to enter the 21st century.

    • MF says:

      100% this. I have a film degree and actually make a point to watch all or most of the Best Picture nominees every year. I’m the perfect target audience for the Oscars.

      But I’m a millennial and don’t have cable, which makes it basically impossible to watch it. I don’t even remember the last time I watched live TV. It was probably like a decade ago?

      They need to move into the 21st century and start streaming the ceremony.

    • Claudia says:

      I will add a huge contributor to the list: SOCIAL MEDIA. Not only because you can just catch the people, awards, fashion and aspects of the Oscars you care about on social media later that night and any time thereafter – but also because 30 years ago celebrities were “superstars” who were glamorous and mysterious and didn’t share every detail of their life on Instagram. The Oscars were the big night you could see what they look like “in real life”, who they were dating/sleeping with, and catch a glimpse of their personality. Now it’s like “just another day” because social media gives us direct and ongoing access…

      Personally I also wonder (and hope) if our collective consciousness is evolving past celebrity worship and into a more healthy balance where we can appreciate the art and entertainment without putting people on pedestals. Then again, I am here on Celebitchy :-p

    • Tiffany:) says:

      This is a great point. People don’t gather around the TV anymore. We watch things at random times, and live events really only do well if they are sports.

    • Jennifer says:

      I have a TV antenna (almost everything I watch streams), and live TV 95% of the time won’t come through on a TV antenna now that everything is digital. I don’t want to pay for cable to watch live TV about three times a year and cable is the only way the TV works.

      Also, almost every single movie is an obscure artsy one I wouldn’t voluntarily watch and have no interest in seeing. If you don’t care who wins, why bother?

      Though that said, I did see CODA and Don’t Look Up and Encanto, so I have actually SEEN some movies this year. *faint*

  7. Justplainme says:

    Let me make a full on senior comment. They just don’t have any real movie stars anymore.
    I stopped reading the blind item blogs, which I used to love, a few years ago because they were all about people I am not interested in. I admit that without a great red carpet I’m not going to watch, that is at least half of the fun for me. If we ever get ahead of the pandemic, there are maybe 5-10 people I’d like to see walk the carpet but that’s it.

    • smcollins says:

      I agree about the lack of “real” movie stars. Watching the Oscars used to be a fun bit of escapism into glamorous Hollywood and the people that inhabited it. Over the past 10-15 years, though, the curtain has been pulled back, especially in the wake of the Me Too movement & Harvey Weinstein. Plus, as was pointed out, there are now so many awards shows leading up to the Oscars that most people are basically over it by that point, and in a lot of cases who’s going win is almost guaranteed, which takes all of the fun out it. It’s like now you watch to see if there’ll be any upsets to shake off the seemingly obvious. Social media is a whole other beast that has stripped away the allure & fantasy of Hollywood. And don’t get me started on the crazy running time lol

      • Div says:

        Honestly I was pretty grossed out with the film industry raving about Ben Affleck for doing a Me Too film and going on and on about how “cool” and “personable” he was. Dude dated Gwyneth Paltrow and knew about Harvey. He also groped multiple women, one of them being John Mulaney’s ex wife.

        I’ve always liked movies, but that was one of several things that have kind of turned me off film twitter and caring about awards.

      • Eurydice says:

        Yes, this. Media and social media make celebrities an everyday thing. We know their daily bathing habits and how many toilets they have. Pre-pandemic, we saw them on the red carpet on our screens every morning. There’s nothing “special” about them anymore.

    • Millennial says:

      Agreed. Very few movie stars and very few big tentpole movies everyone has seen. Maybe Dune or Don’t Look Up. 20 years ago, more people had seen the major contenders. I know very few people who’ve seen Belfast or CODA.

    • Case says:

      There really are so few true movie stars anymore. And it’s funny — the actors I gravitate toward now are the ones who maintain privacy when they’re not promoting a film, don’t go overboard on social media, etc. An element of mystery is nice. I want to be happy to see them when they’re out doing interviews because it has been a while, not feel like I just saw them out shopping two days ago.

  8. Eurydice says:

    People don’t want to sit in one place to watch a 4-hour movie, let alone 4 hours of speeches – like CSPAN with evening gowns.

  9. Robyn says:

    I’m with Seth. They’re boring, rarely reflect true merit, and all with obscene wealth on display. No thanks.

  10. Div says:

    To be honest while the Spiderman should have been nominated for an Oscar thing was kind of silly imo…there’s an argument to be made that not only is the ceremony boring asf but many of the films nominated are not popular with the general public.

    And I’m not talking about poorly reviewed films…I’m talking about films with some critical acclaim that managed to do okay in the pandemic era and still were snubbed for films that had worse reviews and made less money. The French Dispatch is one of the few films that actually made money, had great reviews, and was snubbed completely. In the Heights made approximately the same amount of money as West Side Story and had around the same amount of acclaim when you look at Rotten Tomatoes/Metacritic….but it opened on HBOMax the same day in the theaters so it had a major disadvantage compared to West Side Story…and it was completely snubbed.

    And I hate saying “elitism” because it sounds Trump-esque, but there does seem to be a sort of elitism going on in addition to insiders voting for their friends who have worked in the industry forever. Look at Caitriona Balfe…people talked about Gaga’s snub but Balfe’s was more shocking imo as she was in a far better reviewed movie. She hit all of the precursors, including BAFTA, and yet Balfe was snubbed in favor of Judi Dench who had been…nominated nowhere else. Ruth Negga missed out on SAG but she also hit most of the precursors and was snubbed. In fact, Hudson and Thompson being snubbed (and Hudson hit a lot of the big precursors) is another example of how Black actresses are often snubbed in the lead category.

    I don’t know, I enjoy the Oscars but it’s all very silly and backhanded and many of the films nominated aren’t particularly popular with the general public so it’s no wonder people don’t tune in.

    • Twin Falls says:

      I love Judi Dench but her nomination pretty much sums up the issues with the Oscars. Too white, too overall body of work focused, too much inside Hollywood favoritism to attract a diverse audience.

      • Facts says:

        To much inside favoritism’s, Lack of old Hollywood glamour and fake, arrogant, rich people celebrating themselves. Pass.. unless Angelina Jolie shows up!

      • Eve says:


        Same here. If La Jolie shows up as a presenter, I’ll will watch it.

    • TigerMcQueen says:

      Best Picture in the Oscars have almost always been about ‘best’ drama with a rare sprinkling of other genres. And of then the picture that is chosen as ‘best’ is simply the most mundane/average/generic. This has happened throughout the awards’ history. The best picture winner’s list is littered with movies that are simply not memorable, while other movies released the same year are now considered classics. No science fiction movie has ever won best picture, and there are many of those considered not just classic movies, but GREAT movies that are prime examples of the craft. It’s rare for a comedy to be nominated much less win. It’s hard to take the category seriously when huge swaths of work aren’t even considered for nomination because they’re the ‘wrong’ genre.

      The actor nominations are even worse, because they’re often more of a ‘they earned their stripes’ award, and worse, a ‘they’re one of us’ mindset which means only white actors who make certain kinds of movies get nominated.

      I know this and have still somewhat enjoyed the ceremony, because I like looking at the clothes and seeing certain stars. As I’ve aged, I’ve watched less and less, though, because I’m starting to lose interest even in the clothes and the stars.

  11. Bettyrose says:

    I used to *live* for the Oscars. Made sure I’d seen every movie. Attend or throw parties (I once attended a black tie Oscar party. It was an AIDS benefit. The night Titanic won over Goodwill Hunting. Despite that travesty, it’s a treasured memory.)

    And now I couldn’t care less. For one thing, streaming has brought us so much amazing programming from so many countries and in so many formats … too many amazing categories are excluded (despite all of them primarily appearing n the same streaming apps) and there are too many options to crown just one winner. Plus my viewing schedule is already packed with so much British, Korean, and Scandinavian noir I don’t have time for an awards show.

    • Bettyrose says:

      Too late to edit but I wanted to add that I stood outside the red carpet once (the year of the Elia Kazan protests). I was an Oscar *junkie*

    • MF says:

      Yeah, me too. I used to love the Oscars and now I can’t be bothered anymore.

      All the best content is on streaming, including movies that aren’t getting nominated or TV/limited series that aren’t included in the Oscars. My favorite movies of the year (In the Heights and The Harder They Fall) didn’t even register with the Academy.

    • Justplainme says:

      Movies have become so male centric, half the women on the red carpet are models.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        That is so true @ Justplainme!! I usually wake up pissed after they have passed on so many outstanding actors who should have won, but didn’t!!

        The only thing that I care about seeing is the fashion and I can do that during the night or watch just the beginning but I despise commercials.

      • bettyrose says:

        I feel like that was always true, it’s just more blatant now that we have so many other/better/artistically stronger options.

  12. JMidwinter says:

    I agree with all the points made on here. The ceremony is too damn long and most people have not seen these films.

    Now if they shortened the awards to say an hour and a half and nominated popular films, would ppl still watch? I don’t think so. The decline of the Oscars coincided with the rise of ppl having internet at home. I remember when Titanic was nominated and ppl watched The Oscars b/c ppl had seen the film but also you had to watch the Award Shows to see who won and who wore what b/c there was no way to go back and watch unless you recorded it. That and photos on magazines would take a few days. Thus the Oscars back then were a big event with watching parties.

    Now, you have multiple ways of re-watching things, you can see photos of the event instantly through various social media platforms as well as see who won either in real time or anytime after at your leisure.

    The reason I think you haven’t seen say a huge decline in sports events as you have hollywood is for the reason Seth mentioned. Hollywood is very niche and unless you like films or fashion there’s truly no incentive to watch. Sports are something most (not all) but many ppl are exposed to growing up either by playing or going to sporting events. Ppl have memories and nostalgia associated with that hence emotional investment.

    Unless your parents/family/spouse work in the entertainment industry or you yourself do the emotional investment is not there.

  13. MissMarirose says:

    I was mostly just in it for the fashion. But, first of all, no one really shows up in something crazy anymore (Bjork’s swan dress, that costumer designer’s AmEx dress, anything by Cher to name a few examples). Second, you can see all the outfits on Twitter or the next day on blogs like Tom & Lorenzo where you can get really good analysis and critiques about them. There’s just no need to sit through the speeches and terrible, time-wasting skits.

    • Bettyrose says:

      The next day? They’re in my feed almost instantly.

      • MissMarirose says:

        Yes, the next day on blogs. Perhaps you misread my statement. “The next day” was not modifying Twitter.

      • bettyrose says:

        Oh, got it. I didn’t mean that negatively. I was just emphasizing the lack of requirement to watch to see the fashions, even if one wants immediate access.

    • MsIam says:

      I was going to make the same comment about watching for the fashion. I at least used to watch the pre-show for the red carpet interviews. But now I just look at the gowns on the internet the next morning. And the majority of the movies are ones I haven’t seen so I just don’t get excited about watching the ceremony anymore.

  14. Case says:

    I’m in my late 20s and I love the Oscars. But I’ve always been VERY into movies and have been watching this since I was little. I make a point to watch as many Oscar nominated movies and performances as I can before the ceremony. But…not everyone is into that.

    I think a big problem is that a lot of mid-budget, accessible-to-all films aren’t being made as frequently as they used to be, and so we frequently get a Best Picture lineup of movies the general public just hasn’t seen. Look at the 2004 lineup: Lost in Translation, Seabiscuit, Lord of the Rings, Master and Commander, Mystic River. Those feel, to me, like movies that a lot of people saw and enjoyed. Now the Academy tends to go for films where not a lot happens, that are very artsy, etc. And some of them are excellent! I loved the 2020 lineup with Marriage Story, Little Women, Jojo Rabbit, etc. But it’s overall just not as accessible to regular moviegoers anymore, and unless you’re a big movie buff, it’s likely you don’t know a third of the nominees. It’s not as fun to watch if people don’t know who to root for. And on top of this, people who are semi-interested can just read what’s going on via Twitter without tuning in to the whole show. It’s not “appointment television” like it used to be.

    • Becks1 says:

      I think you’re right about the mid-budget, accessible to all films, but also there seemed to be a variety of movies. Like Mystic River was very different from Lost In Translation which was very different from Lord of the Rings (was that Return of the King?) Nowadays it seems like all the best picture nominees are quieter, more artsy, deep themes, and quite frankly most seem very depressing.

      The last Best Picture winner I’ve seen was Birdman (and I didn’t like that all that much, Best Picture, really?) and then Argo before that. The farther back I go the more Best Picture winners I’ve seen, but I also used to go to the movies a lot more so that would explain that.

      I feel as I’m getting older (40 now, don’t anyone forget lol) I have less interest in intense, serious, depressing movies. So if you have a fair number of people like me, who are 40ish and remember when the Oscars were BIG EFFING DEAL, but now just aren’t interested in the nominated movies, and you’re not doing anything to grab the attention of the younger generations… explains the lack of interest.

      • Case says:

        Yup, I totally agree. There used to be so much more variety and now a lot of them feel the same in their serious, reflective nature. I watched Nomadland and while it’s beautifully shot, barely anything happens and it’s hardly an engaging movie. These are not the types of movies the general population will watch for fun. They movies they choose to nominate are often very challenging and not always entertaining. If most people aren’t entertained by the movies nominated, why would they want to watch a ceremony celebrating them?

        I think it’s positive that more Netflix-type movies are being nominated because at least a lot of people watch those. But IDK. There seems to be a gap in films right now generally in terms of movies that a wide variety of people can enjoy.

      • Kyle says:

        How could we forget…

    • AnneL says:

      “The Shape Of Water” winning was a bit of a turning point for me. It’s a well-made film, but “woman falls in love with computer generated aquatic creature” just isn’t an appointment movie for me. It’s pretentious, to me. YMMV.

      I think there are some worthy nominees this year. I really liked “The Power Of The Dog” and “Belfast” and I loved “West Side Story.” I am pulling for Kodi Smitt-McPhee to win Best Supporting Actor, he was so damned good. But I also saw “Spencer” and “The Eyes Of Tammy Faye” and wasn’t blown away by those performances. And you couldn’t pay me to watch the Ricardos movie.

      Becks, I agree about Birdman. I didn’t think it deserved Best Picture. I did love Argo, though.

      • Algernon says:

        The aquatic man in Shape of Water wasn’t computer generated. That was actor Doug Jones in a full body suit, with facial prosthetics/makeup. Whatever anyone thinks of it winning BP, it’s a *travesty* Shape of Water didn’t win best makeup. It wasn’t even nominated in that category! Crazy.

  15. TIFFANY says:

    The last time I was excited about the Oscars was when Parasite won, and rightfully so.

    That was the last time I felt the right one won.

  16. Andie says:

    A lot of the old industries are dying and this is one. Personally to me the heydays of the oscars fell in line with things like shopping at the mall and People Magazine.

    I see the decline primarily beginning with the Internet and social media, but with the current state of things— the pandemic, political unrest, rapid inflation… as Stephen king would say, the world has moved on.

  17. Merricat says:

    I do think that the Oscars ceremony takes itself a little too seriously. It should be sleek and professional, in my opinion, instead of like a high school talent show (only even more self-conscious). Then there’s more time for parties.

  18. Trish says:

    He’s right. And the answer is Hollywood is full of narcissists, of coarse they think the world should care.
    I’m a huge movie buff, used to watch it for the films, the acting and the fashion. Nowadays I haven’t seen half the movies, don’t agree with the noms and the fashion is usually trash. There used to be at least glamour and now that’s gone. I just don’t care anymore. Maybe I’m officially a grown up. I think celebrity worship is a young people thing.

  19. Robert Phillips says:

    Since the Golden Globes is probably dead and gone. Make the Oscars more like that. Have two ceremonies. The techical and hair and outfits one day. People only care about the acting. Put round tables instead of theatre seating. Put all the nominees at the same table. And let the presenter come to the table to announce the nominee’s and then hand it to the winner with all the others right there. That would add drama. And stop introducing the people giving the awards and letting them walk out on stage. Have them set up at the tables. And then just go from one to the other. I know the press wants to talk to the winners immediatly after. But f’em. Let them talk to them after they have had some drinks afterwards. Stop taking everything so serious. I know it used to be that winning an oscar could add millions to a movies profit. But that doesn’t seem to happen anymore.

  20. A says:

    It used to be more fun when people were able to watch most of the movies that wound up nominated.

    That’s not possible now. I know a lot of people think streaming has made movies more accessible for people, but it hasn’t for me. There are 20 different streaming platforms, and they each cost $12. That adds up for a lot of people. I think there are much more people who would prefer to go out to the movies, but can’t (for obvious reasons), and that is a part of it too.

    Going out to the movies is not an event like it used to be either. And movies in general are not often where the best content is. TV has by far gotten so much better in terms of production quality, acting, storyline, scripts—all of it.

    I still watch the Oscars for it’s own sake. I think it matters in ways people don’t realize for those in the industry. Winning an Oscar or even being nominated gives people a huge leg up. Recognition from ones peers might not matter to the rest of us, but it matters to the people who make movies.

    • The Recluse says:

      There is definitely something to that – the fact that we don’t have access to all of the nominated films the way we all used to. I haven’t seen Belfast or CODA because they didn’t come to our theater. I’m going to have to stream them, which isn’t the same experience as sitting in a movie theater without any distractions.

    • Deering24 says:

      Ugh–don’t get me started on the industry’s assumption that viewers have googobs of money to spend on endless streaming platforms. (Frankly, I find myself resenting the media folks hyping the newest hot streaming things when I can barely afford cable–and I bet I’m not alone. :P) And as far as content goes–there are international TV shows way more interesting and better-written than most of Hollywood’s product. I could be the rest of my life catching up on series like Babylon Berlin or any number of British comedies or crime shows. And once you factor in the Criterion Channel/TCM, well, Hollywood is running a distant fifth or so…

    • Deering24 says:

      Ugh–don’t get me started on the industry’s assumption that viewers have googobs of money to spend on endless streaming platforms. (Frankly, I find myself resenting the media folks hyping the newest hot streaming thing when I can barely afford cable–and I bet I’m not alone. :P) And as far as content goes–there are international TV shows way more interesting and better-written than most of Hollywood’s product. I could be the rest of my life catching up on series like Babylon Berlin or any number of British comedies or crime shows. And once you factor in the Criterion Channel/TCM, well, Hollywood is running a distant fifth or so…

  21. Oria says:

    With the rise of social media and influencers and whatnot, actors and celebrities magic has slowly been in decline.
    The actors job is just not as highly thought of as it used to be. There’s a shift in society where people still like celebrity as a made of construct and escape, but as more and more people can achieve it the allure of making it in the industry is not as special.

    That, and the fact that streaming changed the movie industry.

    So in my perspective The Academy Award is not as thrilling, because there’s no special feeling to it anymore. It’s just a bunch of people blowing smoke up their own and others asses, and thinking their craft is the most important one on the planet.

    We’re just passed it. This planet doesn’t need more Oscar’s being handed out, it needs saving.

  22. Meg says:

    When they get it wrong so often because of politics, who kissed up more, $ etc so they give awards to obviously less deserving films then they’ve made their own award show irrelevant
    Green book winning and bohemian rhapsody winning for editing were two of the recent glaring mistakes that add to decreased view of this awards show.

  23. @poppedbubble says:

    Don’t care about the Oscars. Never have. Never will.

  24. The Recluse says:

    What I always enjoyed about the Oscars were the compilation clips of films in general. Their In Memorium reels tend to be pathetic and not inclusive enough. Turner Classic Movies do great ones every year and the Oscars should hire them to do theirs instead.

  25. lena horne says:

    I think with streaming a lot of movies-you dont leave your house. Just 3 years ago, I went every week to see an Oscar nominated movie. Then Covid…now it doesnt seem a big deal for a movie. When I went to the theater-it seemed more of a big deal to watch the Oscars..I didnt watch last year, but will try this year.

  26. deering24 says:

    I’ve loved movies forever. I worked in the industry for a long time. But mainstream films have gotten gruesomely unoriginal, more same-old-same-old, smaller in terms of depth/subject range, and endlessly re-tready. As well, it seems that movies now are rarely a combination of vision and entertainment. They are either one or the other, which means you wind up with grim Nomadland-type endurance tests (which get most of the Oscar-noms) or action/superhero candy (which, even when those are great like Black Panther, don’t get nearly the Academy cred they should.) Add to that that a lot of the Oscar online commentary is way more entertaining than the show itself, and, well, there ya go. 🙂 The Oscars simply aren’t the only game in town anymore when it comes to a lot of things (celebrity exposure, interesting movie competitions) and it’s suffering because of that.

  27. Sour Pasoa says:

    The top 5 nominated movies are meh