The Oscars: Not exactly an enchanted evening
I guess reinventing the Oscars is harder than it looks.
The academy gave the gig this year to producers Larry Mark and Bill Condon, two classy industry veterans who've been involved with all sorts of admirable films over the years. But after watching this year's Hugh Jackman-hosted awards, which were undermined by a pair of lackluster Jackman musical numbers, nearly three hours of earnestly dull, emotion-free acceptance speeches (of course excepting Kate Winslet, who's apparently been overflowing with emotion for the entire awards season) and hardly any surprises, I'm beginning to believe that saving the Oscars is a job for Iron Man or Hancock, a kick-ass superhero with the kind of unassailable powers that would allow them to radically overhaul what has become the year's stodgiest awardsfest.
From Jackman's strangely self-conscious low-rent opening musical number to Ben Stiller's very inside-the-Beltway spoof of Joaquin Phoenix's recent appearance on David Letterman's late-night show, the awards had a tone problem--they tried to be something for everyone, coming off like a movie script that had its edginess and guts airbrushed out by too many studio notes. It was hard to find any focused narrative for the awards, which were busy veering wildly from making fun of serious movies (mocking "The Reader," for example) to being entirely too reverential about the past, treating a banal montage of supporting actress "thank you" speeches as if they were lost outtakes from "Citizen Kane."
It's hard to blame the producers for some of the problems. It certainly wasn't their fault that "Slumdog Millionaire" swept the evening, robbing the proceedings of any real suspense--you know you've got a drama deficit when the biggest upset of the night came in the foreign language film category. New ideas were attempted but not always executed with success. It was a treat to see Queen Latifah crooning and Sophia Loren paying tribute to Meryl Streep. My 10-year-old son was especially impressed that all his favorite movies were represented in a nicely edited action film montage, although it reminded us only of how cloistered the Oscars have become, since virtually none of the films in the montage were nominated for any major awards (and the visual effects Oscar went to "Benjamin Button," the one non-action film in the bunch.
It also wasn't the producer's fault that the much antipated Judd Apatow comedy sketch, which featured his "Pineapple Express" costars, was so hit and miss that the best line in the whole bit came from Polish cinematographer Janus Kaminski, who waved his Oscars and, with perfect timing, apologized by saying, "They made me do it, Mr. Spielberg, [work is] really slow in town."
But you'd have to say that Jackman was a bust. The idea of having a song and dance man instead of a traditional comedian seemed like a step in the right direction. But Jackman never radiated any real heat. His shortcomings were especially obvious when Will Smith, someone with real star power, showed up to give out a bunch of technical awards. You wanted Will to stick around--he had real presence. Jackman disappeared for so many big chunks of the evening that I found myself shouting at the TV: "Who kidnapped Hugh Jackman?" (Of course, I also found myself shouting: "What does Philip Seymour Hoffman have on his head?)
I find it hard to quibble with anything "Slumdog" director Danny Boyle might have to say after making last year's most wonderful movie, but when he announced on stage that the show felt "bloody wonderful in the room," those of us at home, on the couch, begged to differ. After all, the Kodak Theatre crowd gave six standing ovations during the course of the evening, including one for Jackman just for showing up, but back at home, we were mostly sitting on our hands. Even Jerry Lewis, who was expected to bring some loose-cannon fireworks to the evening, was surprisingly restrained, giving a very pro-forma acceptance speech for his Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award. And where was Jack Nicholson--at a Lakers game?
Jackman was supposed to earn his stripes with a knock-'em dead musical extravaganza created by Baz Luhrmann. But the much-vaunted, Busby Berkeley-style number felt like most of the rest of the show--awkward, listless and underwhelming, the opposite of what Luhrmann brought to his great Oscar-nominated film, "Moulin Rouge." It hardly felt like a surprise to see Jackman trading licks with Beyonce, who (memo to the academy) has been wildly overexposed lately, showing up everywhere, including at the inaugural ball.
What the awards sorely lacked--with rare exception--were the wonderful unexpected, unrehearsed moments that make live TV worth watching, one of the rare exceptions being Boyle's Tigger-like pogo bounce after he arrived to accept his director award. It was a joyous burst of spontaneity in an otherwise over-scripted evening that made Hollywood's oldest award show feel even older and more in need of reinvention than ever.
(Photo courtesy Getty Images)
RELATED:
PHOTOS: Best & Worst: Oscars 2009
PHOTOS: Oscar arrivals
STORY: The Oscars show itself was puttin' on the fritz
STORY: 'Slumdog' strikes it rich




Completely, 100% wrong.
Posted by: David R | February 22, 2009 at 10:18 PM
What show were you watching?
Hugh Jackman not only rocked the Oscars, these were the best in years. I loved the multi-actor tributes to best actor/actress/supporting actor/supporting actress. I loved all the musical numbers. I only wish Hugh had been on a bit more.
This is why I used to watch the Oscars. FUN. It's easy to sit back and criticize. But those of us who grew up watching the show know what was missing. And this year, it was back in spades.
Thank you, producers. GREAT show.
Posted by: Lisa in Los Angeles | February 22, 2009 at 10:30 PM
I 100% disagree!! This show was probably one of the best produced, magnificent elegant broadcasts in recent memory. I'm still trying to digest it all, but it was fantastic!
Posted by: Winston | February 22, 2009 at 10:34 PM
Patrick,
You are just wrong, Jackman was the best host in ages, he had talent, charisma and nice comic timing, and he's just want AMPAS needed.
Thank God most people disagree with you.
Posted by: Jonathan | February 22, 2009 at 10:35 PM
Couldn't disagree more. I thought this was the freshest, most entertaining and enjoyable Oscars in decades. The only thing that really didn't work at all was the 'in memoriam' sequence. We couldn't see the people! But the rest was extraordinary.
Posted by: DJ | February 22, 2009 at 10:36 PM
I was unsure about the new host and all but thought it was a WONDERFUL show! Loved the grand ole' musical numbers, enjoyed the montages and the actor presentations by winners of the past was pretty impressive. Great night!
Posted by: JT | February 22, 2009 at 10:38 PM
Sorry, dude. You've missed the boat here. This was one of the best Oscar telecasts ever. What a tribute to film and the lineage of Hollywood. Hugh Jackman rocked. Every other year its been the same blah, blah, blah. This was rich and fresh. What an evening!
Posted by: Ray | February 22, 2009 at 10:40 PM
Are you kidding me ? I think the Academy Awards were very good this year. A lot better and somewhat freshier at times from previous years . And honestly, I think Hugh Jackman did a superb job as host . I was actually kind of anxious or nervous how will he do as he is not basically a comedian like the previous hosts over the years . But he exceeded my expectations and did a very good job . And Thank God Heath Ledger won : ) . Finally : ) . God Bless him and his family.
The only thing that mostly or mainly left a bad taste in my mouth was Sean Penn winning the award for Best Actor . I was like wtf and I still am like that even now . I so wanted Mickey Rourke to win . He deserved it as far as I am concerned. I watched the film here in Pakistan where I am from and I think he was awesome in it . It's a brilliant film . heart breaking and moving . He got robbed : ( . But oh well, he won the Globe and Bafta for it atleast : ) so I guess it is not so bad .
Posted by: Mohi | February 22, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Wow, I totally disagree about Jackman. I didn't know what to think of the musical opener but was totally won-over by the ending. I thought his bits were one of the few signs of life in the program.
Posted by: JonWes | February 22, 2009 at 10:47 PM
This review is a little harsh. There was the usual Oscar weirdness sure (e.g., panning so far out during the memorial piece that you couldn't read the names and roles of those featured). At the beginning I was doubtful about Hugh Jackman, but in the end thought he did well. All in all I enjoyed the presentation.
Posted by: Paul Tokmakian | February 22, 2009 at 10:47 PM