This is precisely why the Academy Awards telecast sucks. Because the Academy Of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences doesn’t seek out the best people, just its closest pals. So AMPAS president Sid Ganis made his selection of Dreamgirls team Larry Mark and Bill Condon to produce the 81st Oscars over a long and cozy Polo Lounge lunch that “turned into a mini-think tank” about how to fix the show. Don’t get me wrong: I think the duo are a fine producing-directing team. But not only did Ganis fail to search far and wide for something different, he merely reached across the table for the same old same old. Then again, Sid always acts like he’s entered in some dopey contest to be crowned one of Hollywood’s ultimate insiders — when it was necessary for him to pick outsiders who can say no to the usual AMPAS bullshit. (Some serious and facetious suggestions: Mark Burnett, Simon Fuller, Sean “P. Diddy” Combs, the MTV Movie Awards people, James Carville, Roger Ailes, Magical Elves Productions, the Chinese government.) 
Look, I know full well that Larry privately feels the same way most people do about the Oscars: you watch this borefest and you want to hang yourself. But last February’s was the worst-rated kudoscast since Nielsen started tracking them in 1974. And, afterwards, several Hollywood power players vowed to radically change this year’s show. (One mogul even seriously recommended that the “smaller movies” be relegated to the IFC Spirit Awards from now on.) The Oscars need major reconstruction before February 22nd, not just cosmetic surgery. I wish Larry and Bill well — and they should know that I’m more than happy to lend them my balls.
AMPAS Cronyism Chose Oscar Producers
24 Comments
What's Hot on Deadline
-
1
'Ben-Hur's Weekend Apocalypse: Is There Redemption For Faith-Based Epics At The B.O.? - Saturday Update
- 2
Duffer Brothers Tease 'Stranger Things' Season 2: "Justice For Barb"
- 3
Olympics Ratings Hit New Rio Low For NBC, 'Superstore' Gets Big Bounce
- 4
Lou Pearlman Dies: Disgraced Boy Band Impresario Behind NSYNC & Backstreet Boys Was 62
- 5
Fall Premiere Dates For New & Returning Series: 2016 Edition
- 6
'Pawn Stars' Regular Austin 'Chumlee' Russell Will Plead Guilty To Drug Charge, Avoid Jail Time - Update
- 2
-
1
It’s may be way too early to call, but I will watch simply for the return of Mickey Rourke to Hollywood legitimacy.
Disagree. Two gay guys will make it more entertaining than the borefests that Gil Cates or Laura Ziskin have given us. They just understand the Oscars better.
I don’t think it is right for Nikki to give harsh judgement for the selection of Bill Condon and Larry Mark. I don’t even think they had a chance to produce an Oscar Ceremony and I think they should be allowed a benefit of a doubt.
Now I don’t think the Independents will be uninvited but independent movies aren’t the problem. The main problem was the super short prep time for last year’s ceremony due to the end of the writers strike coming just two weeks before the ceremony was to take place.
As for the judgement, lets wait until after the ceremony begins to judge the Oscar’s. This year’s slate of movies does look promising and when push comes to shove, people will tune in to see Harry Potter get crowned while Heath Ledger gets his supporting actor award. As for the host, the producers might have different ideas which will not include Whoopi, Billy, or even Jon Stewart. They could choose David Letterman for all I care and ratings will still be higher then the 2008 ceremony.
Note: this is coming from a reader that loves Nikki’s Oscar coverage.
Sadder than the awards show itself is the fact that it is September already and there are very few Oscar-worthy films that have been released.
“The Visitor” and “Frozen River” have great lead performances, but I’m not sure they are Best Picture contenders. “The Dark Knight” and “WALL-E” are both very popular and critical hits, but almost feel over-praised at this point. I’d actually rank HBO’s “Recount” and “John Adams” higher than any theatrical release so far.
I hope I see some great movies in the next few months, or the next Academy Awards will be a rather hollow exercise indeed.
THE OSCARS BLOW…..
THE EMMY’S BLOW…..
Ha! So then Oscars is all about sexual orientation?
(beat)
Yep
Wow! After Sunday’s debacle involving reality television, I’m surprised at the list of names you’re offering. And I work in reality tv.
The Oscar telecast is only half the problem. I agree with Thomas that Larry Mark and Bill Condon will have a better idea of how to produce an awards show than Laura Ziskin.
There’s one easy solution to a huge increase in ratings this year. Nominate THE DARK KNIGHT for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor, etc… If the Academy nominates movies the general public have seen, they will care enough to watch the Oscars.
Personally, I think the best thing they could do would be to emulate…wait for it…the Emmys. The one thing that organization does right is relegating all of the awards the public doesn’t really care about to a separate ceremony. If the Oscar telecast was solely the writing, directing, music, and acting categories the show would be much faster paced and much more enjoyable.
Gee, Thomas, it’s nice to think that two “gay guys” will make things better, but get real; with these two, it’ll be the same-old-same-old. Then again, Nikki’s suggestion of blow-hard Sean “P. Diddy” Combs had me spitting up coffee, I was laughing so hard. And, really, Nikki, at least credit your balls to the writers of SNL.
“the Academy Of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences doesn’t seek out the best people, just its closest pals.”
Um, isn’t this the biggest problem with Hollywood in general?
Once again, Hollywood blames not itself but the Oscar SHOW for the low ratings. People didn’t watch the damn show because nobody had seen the friggin movies nominated. It’s as simple as that. This awards season, you guys will finally have the chance to nominate a great mainstream movie (THE DARK KNIGHT). I strongly suggest you use that opportunity.
“C.S. Lewis Jr.”, you NAILED it. Well played.
Well, we’ve heard before that the Oscars will be radically different. And a lot of times it gets worse.
If the AMPAAS want ratings, they’ve got to stick with the stars and categories that the average moviegoer understands.
I would say to ditch sound mixing, sound editing, short film (live), short film (animated), makeup, documentary short, documentary feature, costume design and art direction. Bounce the technical ones to the technical awards luncheon, and give the remaining ones out during the commercial breaks so in the theater the action doesn’t stop.
Also have the nominees already on stage so you get rid of the panicked camera work following people through the theater. This way, no one will be tripping on their way to the stage. The winner steps forward and the other folks are whisked away. Have one big production number for all five nominated songs, not five numbers.
And for God’s sake, let the winners give their speeches! The speeches are the only dramatic part of the telecast! Without them, all you have is fluff and no substance. This is why the Golden Globes is a much better show. They let the stars be themselves (sometimes their drunken selves).
This should cut at least one hour out of the proceedings. But I don’t think the Academy will go for it.
Um – Craig Zadan and Neil Meron are the obvious answer to the telecast! They know film (Chicago), they know TV in every format (including a special at The Kodak) and are theatrical and innovative…oh, and gifted and experienced. Look at their creativity for 20+ years. That was the obvious way to correct this problem.
Sid Ganis is a publicist by trade, he ‘gets’ how to put on a good show but remember that the AMPAS is bound by traditions and by-laws, there is a strong brand to protect and so the Oscars will never be the VMAs nor should they be. Bill Condon is a creative genius and I think he and Larry will do a very entertaining show, can’t wait to see it.
Chris
It’s my belief that one problem with the show (and films in general) is the Music Business. There’s no popular music in films anymore. Therefore nothing to perform on the awards show. In the past, even if the show was sucky, you’d at least wait for Prince to perform “When Doves Cry”. Or the best performance ever on the show – Jennifer Holliday doing “The way he makes me feel” from Yentl.
Popular culture is too splintered. No one can tell what’s “good” or complete trash*. This generation (and studio execs) can’t tell the difference between dancing cats on Youtube or a great film.
*Sarah Palin
Way back when, Jerry Lewis hosted the Oscars. He was pilloried, unfairly, for bringing the show 10 minutes under — yes, under — its two-hour allotted broadcast time. One hour and fifty minutes! Why the hell can’t they do that now?
Right on C.S. Lewis Jr., you speak the truth. When I was an agent at one of the big 3, getting someone staffed on a TV show was simple, call YOUR client, the showrunner. When I left that hell hole and went to a 10-15 agent shop, it was nearly impossible to get any showrunners to read the same writer’s work, let alone get them hired.
One of these showrunners would only hire Notre Dame and Northwestern Grads., when the showrunner himself/herself didn’t even go to college. HA, go figure.
The reason why Laurence Mark was chosen to produce the Oscars is the same reason why Laura Ziskin came back for a second time (more disastrous than the first one, if that’s possible): Sid Ganis.
Sid is a long-term beneficiary of the Columbia/Sony studio bankroll – first as a marketing chief before being relegated to a studio deal that’s turned out basically nothing in five years. Ziskin and Mark? Two huge players at Sony/Columbia these days. Ziskin for “Spiderman.” And Mark for the nine pictures he has in development (and the forthcoming release of the Nora Ephron/ Meryl Streep “Julia & Julia”) and a lucrative (like Ziskin) production deal.
For Sid, it’s just a good thing to be able to remind people around the lot how great it is that a Sony/Columbia person is producing the Oscars. And to keep his deal.
It’s really that simple.
At his core Sid is a publicist – and just wants to be loved by everybody all the time.
And no doubt Laurence did all the hustle on the deal with Sid and brought in Bill Condon to give it an air of creativity.
No disrespect to all of the parties but none of them – particularly Sid Ganis – has a clue on how to mount and pull off a three-hour stage production that entertains, charms, thrills, inspires and makes us laugh.
Note all of these verbs here – “entertain,” “charm,” “thrill,” etc. — this is why we take the time to witness the creations of others, to be transported and moved, to giggle and maybe even shed a tear. This is supposed to be the reward for the investment of our valuable time (and money). But none of us have had this experience from watching the Oscars in recent memory, particularly since the other weak link in this Oscar equation – Gil Gates – came on board more than 15 years ago.
And to the reader who feels that the Oscars failed last year because of the writer’s strike: I’d get over your sentimental notion that the production was in some way wronged by events beyond its control. It’s not as if Gil, and his merry band of tired talents that he assembles every year, had ever produced a show where you could sit back and say, “Hey, these guys got it right this year.” Never. C’mon. Be honest. Never. If there had been no strike, let’s be fair and say the show would have been marginally better.
You know what I’m sayin’!
And the whole parlor conversation about ratings is silly. The ratings will go up (as much as they can in this splintered television viewing world) when the show becomes genuinely entertaining. It just hasn’t been in a long, long time.
And has anyone noted the irony that the greatest entertainers of our lifetimes – the filmmaking community – cannot put on a simple television event to entertain us for three hours? Instead they create dreadful stagings that last four hours with 35-second play-ons so actresses – who don’t walk like the movie stars of old, make their dreadful ambles dressed in their dreadful dresses. It’s become a fashion show.
And a bad one at that.
But here’s the real question: does the demise of the Oscars have anything to do with the fact that those who’ve been producing them – Gil Cates and Laura Ziskin – are essentially executives who lack original creativity and have never authored a production on their own with the requisite imagination to pull off something as big as the Oscars. “Spiderman I, II, III?” Sam Raimi was on that one, right? Uh, “Stealth” – that was Laura Ziskin’s other producer credit since leaving the studio executive ranks.
It’s three-plus hours. That ain’t no easy task to keep people entertained. Think of the list of movie directors who have been able to do that in the last 10 years. Think it through. It’s a short, short list.
And Gil Cates – one of the great gentlemen in town, but who just lacks the goods, too: “Oh, God! Book II” and the movie of the week, “Burning Rage.” Those are highlights of his creative career.
And keep your eye on this one point when it comes to show time in February: “Dreamgirls” failed not because of the cast; not because of the spectacle. It failed because of a lack of story-telling discipline. “We can’t cut that scene. Beyonce was amazing in it!”
The film was endless, when it needn’t have been. That – apologies to Laurence Mark and all the other feature film producers out there who do not rule like the producers of Hollywood’s Golden Age – is specifically the fault of the writer- director, Bill Condon.
And why were those guys surprised that they didn’t win any Oscars? Because their film was, yes, a long slog – just like the show they now inherit.
Fundamentally, it’s a fear of offending others. That is why we will end up with yet another unwieldy, cumbersome, fashion show in February.
Sid Ganis doesn’t want to offend his benefactors at Sony/Columbia. Laurence Mark and Bill Condon won’t want to offend Hollywood talent, their friends, and the studios they work for by being ruthless surgeons went it comes to excising all of the fat from the telecast and create a pacing and a tempo that pulls the audience through that three hour window.
I mean, c’mon. Aren’t there any adults in the room here who can do this job; who have the creative chops – not the networking chops (Sorry again, Gil, Sid, Laura and Laurence – but the creative chops to get the job done correctly?
Give it a think. This is as good a forum as any to make your case.
Bonne chance. And definitely Bonne Nuit.
Thanks for your long and chewy OPINIONS, Obama Mama.
I love this. Everybody hates the Oscars, yet everybody would crawl naked across broken glass to get one. Accept it: the Oscars, like the Tonys, are an industrial advert for going out to the movies, except now they’re hype for the DVD release, so they’ve become pretty much like the Emmies, which is all about staying home. Sad, sad, sad. What they have also become is perfunctory, even though, c’mon — like the Indy 500 — the real reason we watch them is to see if anybody flames out. What we need is more emotion, not trendy, cool hipness. To quote Paddy Chayefsky, “The Oscars are all about ‘Ladies and Gentlemen, this is Mrs. Norman Maine’.” The main problem is that the Oscar telecast too often features presenters who have no stage presence handing statuettes to recipients who feel compelled to thank the entire Hollywood Creative Directory. But do you know the saving grace? The TV license fee raised in one day helps fund the Academy’s programs for the other 364 days: the research library, exhibitions, special collections, seminars, restorations, and outreach. If Mark and Condon, who have taste and a sense of history, want to shoulder the passion, tummult, diplomacy and circus, let them. And, boy would I wanna make THAT behind-the-scenes documentary!
Obama Mama is one clueless brat. I don’t mean it in a bad way, but his long winded piece makes me think that he hates the movie industry. For the most part, he just rehashes everything that Nikki wrote yesterday before the McCain saga broke and everyone started posting over there.
First, if Dreamgirls was a sog, then why did the movie last only just over two hours while Titanic is much longer? Plus, get your facts straight about Dreamgirls, the movie won two Oscars including Jennifer Hudson in a supporting actress role plus 41 other awards.
As for the Oscars themselves, If Sid Ganis is there for 15 years, then he must be doing something right. Yes there are reports that the ceremony is too long and the speeches are too short, but the movies are the big attraction when it comes to the ratings (though one could blame the antics of Ellen DeGeneres for the low rated 2007 ceremony as well as Jon Stewart). For the record, Sid did a good job keeping ratings up there. With that there is only one reason for poor ratings in recent years, negative news and this does include the 2008 ceremony though low ratings were also the case because FOX was trying to air a NASCAR race at the same time.
For the record, ratings may have been lower due to poor hosting choices. With that, I suggest that Hollywood not select Ricky Gervais, and I think that is what will happen though I would love to see Robin Williams host.
P.S. I meantioned that another Harry Potter could lead to clean up at the Oscars, but that will not happen since WB didn’t schedule a movie this year.
The number one reason people give as to why they no longer watch the Oscars is the ridiculously long time they drag on for. I mean, three and a half hours?! Cut the show to two hours by eliminating the host altogether (just have Oscar winning presenters come and go), cut the dreadful songs and montages (with the exception of the obit segment) and don’t sit winners thirty miles from the stage so we have to wait a half hour for them to pick up their award. There. Now you’ve got a two hour show and more people would watch.
More dance numbers? More show tune tributes? Who can wait?