enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
In Praise of the Acceptance Speeches
by MacAdvisor
I wish the producers would stop their rude and annoying practice of cutting off the acceptance speeches. The whole point of the Oscar is to praise accomplishments in film, to let the world know someone did something worthwhile and noteworthy. Then, when the praise-worthy recipient stands for his/her moment in the sun, it is cut short and he is rushed off stage as if an embarrassment. Some praise: here's your award, get lost, we've a montage to show and Stewart has a few more jokes. The Academy Awards are not a vaudeville act or the host's show. They are an award show. Let us see the people getting the awards.

Moreover, they are often the most rememberable part of the show, the part we talk about and remember for years, from "You like me, right now, you like me!" to one-handed pushups. Those are the moments that make the show. Why can't they just have the presenters walk out, do their bit, announce the winner, and let the winner say their thanks without an orchestra drowning it out. Yes, a few windbags might get boring, but I think a few years of bad press afterwards would put a stop to it and wouldn't be any boring than many of the montages and skits. At least we'd know the responsible party for our boredom. Think how much snappier the show would be without all those interruptions. We don't even need to have the nominated songs performed, just give the awards.

And I like to thank the Academy...
Re: In Praise of the Acceptance Speeches
by thebin
I agree its rude and makes everyone uncomfortable, especially given that the less glamorous the catagory, the fast the winner gets kicked off stage. For the love of god GET RID OF THE SONGS. Why do we have to hear every song performed? Its a night about films, and we don't see every film performed? I would MUCH rather see 5 minute clips of all best picture noms than 5 excruciating song and dance numbers performed.
Re: In Praise of the Acceptance Speeches
by tjcerveza

I must say that I disagree. It seems that the less well known the awardee, the more boring and long winded the speech. Those with something interesting to say, get right to the point and say it. Watching some film sound guy you never heard of, read off a laundry list of names of other sound guys you never heard of, is not exactly entertaining. Sure, if your the Mother of one of these unknown sound guys, you may appreciate the shout out, the rest of us just wince.

And then when there are a gagle of these unkown sound guys making their way to the stage, it could make for a long evening. You can always tell the head honcho in the pack of unknown sound guys. He (or she) talks first, and hogs all the alloted time. I think it is hillarious when the second unknown sound guy finally gets his chance to stick his unknown face in front of the microphone, and Bill Conti drowns him out. I don't find it uncomfortable at all. LOL :0)

Note to Jon Stewart: If you do the show next year, how about a montage of these poor schmucks being blared off the stage. The looks on their faces just say: Whaaa?

P.S. Why was the "Rock" a presenter this year. Hulk Hogan not available?

Re: In Praise of the Acceptance Speeches
by spoonyc

"The Rock" was a presenter for the same reason Steve Carell and Anne Hathaway were presenters: he's starring in the same big-budget summer movie they are (Get Smart), and presenters are largely folks who are putting themselves out there in advance of a movie release (even Harrison Ford was presenting, first and foremost, because he's got the new Indiana Jones movie to sell this summer).

Also, he's a full-time actor now, and doesn't do wrestling anymore. He was even billed last night (on the awards show, and when I saw him on the red carpet) by his given name, Dwayne Johnson, which is also how he's billed in the Get Smart trailer. He seems to have "mellencamped" the wrestling moniker out of his professional name. Anyway, as such (being an actor with no Academy Awards nomination/winning history), his presence is no less warranted than that of Jessica Alba, or Katherine Heigl.

Anyway, I realize I sound extremely defensive about it--and I'm not really a wrestling fan or anything. But I don't see why his early career should make him less worthy of a chance to be part of the Hollywood machine. I mean, nobody disqualifies Tom Hanks for his beginnings in a cross-dressing sitcom, or Mark Wahlberg for "Good Vibrations," or Steve Carell for hosting the America's Funniest Home Videos--Uncensored! special (seriously, YouTube it).

Re: In Praise of the Acceptance Speeches
by tjcerveza
Wow, Get Smart. I loved that show when I was a kid. Carrell will make a perfect Maxwell Smart and I totally buy Hathaway as 99, though she seems a bit young to be the love interest of Carrell. I'm guessing The Roc...I mean Dwayne, is playing the dead-pan robot Hymie. I have two words for you - Type casting.
View as RSS news feed in XML