Last Sunday's Oscars telecast had one of the most illuminating stage designs and technical setups in its history. The combination of giant arching projection screens with live entertainment made for breathtaking moments. Despite what other bloggers and critics may say, (ahem, Roger Ebert), the 83rd Annual Academy Awards was a triumph, even in the lieu of an odd-pairing of hosts.
The trend of award shows, not to mention just about every other major event as of late, is to attract a younger audience to boost ratings and therefore increase ad space prices. Thus, the decision for the Oscars to have two hosts that happen to be Hollywood's ambassadors to young fledgeling talent made sense, right? Wrong. Though the overall hosting wasn't terrible, there was a memorable moment when James Franco dressed in drag and made an oh-too-easy jab at Charlie Sheen, it wasn't at all necessary for their to be two hosts. Anne Hathaway stole the show in the end with her singing, "dancing", and overall knack for comedy. However, the lesson here is: if you are up for an award as prestigious as an Oscar, don't host or present during the award show. Not that James Franco ever had a chance nor should he have been nominated for that matter.
(Courtesy of ABC via The Hollywood Reporter)
But why are major brands and events trying desperately to attract a larger younger demographic? If the economic times have taught us anything it's that the youth especially don't have any disposable income to part ways with considering they can't get well-paying jobs, if any at all. Instead they should focus on their tradition of greatness and prestige, which they have built into their brand for the last several decades. The youth will always need role models and guides to show them how to act and appreciate their accomplishments, not to mention why they are working so hard for the recognition in the first place.
The Oscars have never been about pleasing teenagers, yet everyday there are thousands of them dreaming about going to Hollywood and thousands more moving there for a shot at stardom. If they really cared about attracting the younger demo more, then they should have awarded The Social Network with the Best Picture Oscar over The King's Speech as should have been the case, but that's another post. That way any youth audience they were able to attract would be validated for participating in the telecast and definitely be back next year.
The Oscars should just continue its legacy of providing the filmmaking world with a high quality award show to celebrate the achievements of the past year at the movies. They can't get every demographic and quite frankly they don't need to. The Oscar s a brand worth fighting for and every aspiring filmmaker will agree. They dream about it when they are kids; study for it when they are teens, vie for the roles and risk everything when they are in their twenties; then finally get validated with a nom and/or award by the time they are middle-aged if they are lucky.
So Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences, stick to your guns and don't try to dumb-down for your audience. And while we are on the subject, switch the Best Picture category back to 5 nominations or at the very most 6. Half of the past two years' nominations didn't deserve it, but that's another post.
No comments:
Post a Comment