That was the best Academy Awards show I've seen in 30 years. Anyone agree?

[BigBearJohn]

It was class, style, funny, and personal.

I sure loved it. Ordinarily I'm bored but I wasn't this time.

[Janice325]

1. I totally agree.

Thanks for the positive comments.

[Chovexani]

2. LOLOLOL

Not in a million years.

Not with the multitude of shitty musical numbers, stupid pointless montages, and everything that sucks about modern Oscar shows times 5 billion. Trotting out Zac Efron and similar hacks because this is hosted by the Mouse. The absolute tackiness of this year's dead people montage, with Queen Latifah's off key caterwauling not doing anything to drown out the disrespectful applause contest.

I love Hugh Jackman but he couldn't even save this shit. Fire all the writers. All of them.

Starting with Bruce Vilanch.

[Missy Vixen]

62. You're kidding, aren't you?

I thought Queen Latifah's song was beautiful. Then again, I asked that song be played at our wedding for my parents, who I lost before I was married.

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy it.

[Still Sensible]

3. I would have to agree

and perhaps the classiest thing they did was have five past winners individually recognize each major acting nominee. I suspect that may be something they will do from now on, just because to go backward and not do it would be disappointing. You could tell the nominees really appreciated that touch.

[Chovexani]

10. As nice as that was

All it did was pad the show out even further.

[MarjorieG]

22. Agreed. Elevated and warmed up everything. And love Hugh. Musical numbers much better.

[JackBeck]

4. Absolutely. From beginning to end.

We kept remarking how stylish and relevant the show was, as compared to past years.

After tonight, someone either is getting a raise or is the new Hollywood Golden Child.

[vaberella]

5. I'm not a fan of AA, so I saw like 5 minutes was tired of watching over payed

actors congratulate each other on over charged films and decided to read some articles and scan the thread.

[begin_within]

6. It seemed to move along quickly, never dragged.

[grammysandie]

7. I watched it but

it was kind of weird to discover that I've only seen one of the films up for awards this year: Wall-E.

That's life with a four-year-old, I guess.

[TommyO]

66. At least Wall-E was a very good film to see

if you could see only one.

[sandnsea]

8. I thought it was pretentious and grandiose

And Hugh Jackman didn't even get my attention. Queen Latifah sang beautifully though. And Sean Penn was pure class, as always.

I hope they figure out something different next year.

[Chovexani]

14. Every time they try to "re-tool" the show

They just make it more unbearable. This year was especially egregious. That god awful medley with Beyonce--fucking hell, Beyonce? GO AWAY--was just this side of Rob Lowe dancing with Snow White in terms of embarrassing shit I never want to see again.

Tonight felt like an SNL parody of an Oscars show rather than an actual Oscars show.

[samdogmom]

27. You don't seem to enjoy this show much! Why do you waste your life watching it?

I'm very curious. Are you part of the industry? If you are, then I understand. But otherwise, it doesn't make sense!

[samdogmom]

28. Dupe. Sorry!

[DeepBlueC]

42. I loved that medley

Which surprised me as I really don't like musicals, but that number was good.

[kaiden]

67. I loved that musical medley! I even applauded!

And I was all alone in my basement.

[merh]

48. I couldn't put my finger on it - then I read your post

It was like an SNL parody of the Oscars show.

I think that is why I enjoyed the Tina Fey/Steve Martin bit the best.

[Two Americas]

56. lol

"...embarrassing shit I never want to see again..."

Thanks for the chuckle. I gave up on the show 20 years ago.

[Javaman]

80. I know it jumped the shark when huge actor yelled, "the musical is back" and was

met by tepid applause, but more so, the quick cut to Haily Berry rolling her eyes, was the nail in the coffin.

[vanderBeth]

9. I thought the show itself was great and I

actually made it though the whole thing (*gasp* that never happens for anything like that- award shows, big sporting events, etc.). I wasn't so sure about Hugh Jackman as the host, but I was dead wrong. He was great. I like the musicals they did. Also, doing the thing where they mixed the nominations with winners of the past was brilliant.

Some categories like Best Actor, Best Picture, and Best Director I thought had many good nominations but as I was disappointed in a couple of the categories' nominees.

Edit: I also thought Queen Latifah was great, Judd Apatow's piece was funny, and I agree that it didn't drag.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

35. Agree! And I'm shocked

I turned it on expecting to see some pretty dresses, but ended up watching the whole thing.

I had no idea Hugh Jackman was that good! That opening number was cleverly conceived and beautifully executed. I always expect opening numbers to be the worst part of the show, but, boy! This one had me watching and smiling.

And the Joaquin Phoenix gig by Ben Stiller was hilarious.

I'm just glad Heath Ledger won. Just for his little girl. Silly, maybe, but I thought he was a spectacularly gifted actor.

The whole show was a big surprise. I think it's the best I've ever seen.

Sophia Loren, though, scared me. She looks embalmed.

[vanderBeth]

41. We agree some more!

I forgot the Joaquin Phoenix thing. So funny!

Sophia Loren, good actress, but thought she looked terrible. Thought the same thing when I saw her.

[marlakay]

11. I liked it too i told my husband last year as much as i like jon

they need someone who can sing and dance to lead it.

[vanderBeth]

17. Didn't care for Jon at all last year.

Ah, but not everybody can be Billy Crystal when it comes to hosting the Oscars.

[Jeep789]

12. Never been able to watch more than a few minutes before

Always found it such a bore. I managed to watch the entire thing this time. Much better format for me.

[adadem]

13. Agree -- the best in

a long time

[peacetalksforall]

15. Absolutely agree. Classy, this year. That Aussie was terrific - so respectful. I felt there

was more heart - throughout.

[ColbertWatcher]

16. I liked how other acting winners introduced this year's nominees. n/t

[BigBearJohn]

21. Yes! I particularly enjoyed that. I LOVED it when Robert De Niro gave tribute to Sean Penn.

Touched my heart.

[ColbertWatcher]

101. I know they were all written in advance and regurgitated out of a TelePrompTer, but ...

... Shirley MacLaine's sounded spontaneous and sincere!

[Parker CA]

18. Yep. If they keep this style for the years to come, they've got a serious winner.

Great on so many levels, but I especially enjoyed the format for the acting awards by tying in previous actors who really seemed happy to be introducing their respective actors.

Also, unless I missed something, not a single recipient was cut off by music while making their speech. I always think that's such bad class to do to someone after they've just won an Oscar.

[2Design]

19. yes it was great - lively and not so much talking and the musical numbers

made it terrific - loved the seasoned actors and actresses presentations and introductions

[librechik]

20. I was just going to post the same thing

they really made each award seem relevant by the setting--and I adored the way they got five former winners to introduce the nominees in the acting categories--so sentimental!

[BigBearJohn]

23. By having the previous winners talk about the art of the nominee, it gave those nominees recognition

So, even if they didn't win, they still got their abilities acknowledged strongly.
I LOVED IT.

[Touchdown]

32. Blech! Actors!

The most exhalted category, and the least responsible for making a great film.

Producer? Director? Director of Photography? Set design? Music score? Special Effects? Editing? Writing?

NAAAAW! It's all about the aaaaactoooors!:puke:

Every year I die a little at how shallow film fandom really is.

[BigBearJohn]

33. Oh really? I've yet to see a movie with Anthony Hopkins that I didn't love.

[Touchdown]

37. Exactly my Point. Who directed (without google or imdb)...

Silence of the Lambs?
Who was the composer for The Lion in Winter's score?
Who did the cinematography for The World's Fastest Indian?

I know 2 of them. How about you?

And... You liked Hannibal and Hearts in Atlantis?:rofl:

[BigBearJohn]

45. Yes, I did like Silence of the Lambs, but I didn't see the followups.

[Touchdown]

47. Why did you like it?

The story? The suspense? The character exposition? The tautness of the pace? Jodie Foster?

Or just.... Anthony Hopkins?

Not to rag on him. His performance in SOTL was deserving of an Oscar, but it also won best picture, best director, and best editing. So much of these awards are so actor centric that everyone else's talents that contribute gets overshadowed by the adulation of the actor him/herself.

A car has millions of parts that make it perform, the leather seats are only one aspect of the symphony.

[BigBearJohn]

49. Anthony Hopkins draws me into every character he's created. It's almost hypnotic for me

[Touchdown]

50. So you really didn't like Silence of the Lambs then.

Either that, or you need to see it again. REALLY see the film, and not just Hopkins alone.

EDIT: I edited my previous post, and didn't say "EDIT". Sorry. Just trying to get you into the movies more than you are.:hug:

[BigBearJohn]

52. I must have given you the wrong idea. I have written screenplays.

I most certainly appreciate the importance of every contributor to a movie.
I enjoy a well-directed movie. I have often been sitting in a movie theater
saying, "gee, I wish I wrote that." It's just that I have really bad short
term memory and I can't remember all the names. Actors names, I remeember.

[vanderBeth]

40. I disagree

The categories I like more than other people do are Cinematography, Musical score, and Costume which, besides Director, Best Picture, and any Actor or Screenplay that I have a particular interest that year, are the one I make sure to watch.

They actors are, however, are a huge part of a film. And I don't really think of their awards as being given to them for making a movie great. I think they are more for their personal performance. Many times a movie that has otherwise been not nominated has had an actor nominated or win because they have felt that their performance was great, not necessarily the movie.

[Touchdown]

44. Interesting point.

BUT! I can think of only 2 incidences where a nominated actor and a nominated film part ways.

Denzel Washington was nominated for Training Day, and won. Training Day got no other noms.

Return of the King swept the Oscars in 2004, despite having no noms for any of it's actors.

I take that back... a third. Beauty and The Beast was nominated for best picture, as well as best song, but no actors. This was before the animated feature category was introduced.

Oh and a forth. Slumdog Millionaire.:blush:

Otherwise, it's all for one. So the question is, does an actor' performance make a film great, or does everybody else involved make the actor look brilliant?

[vanderBeth]

53. I'm sure there are many other instances of that happening

even if it's not a win. Like tonight with Anne Hathaway for Rachel Getting Married or Richard Jenkins for The Visitor, with both movies not getting any nods.

To make a great movie, to get the Best Picture, I think is a combination of everything, cinematography, directing, score, etc. (with Slumdog Millionaire winning a slew in the non-acting categories), and also acting (Despite no Oscar nod, Dev Patel was great in Slumdog Millionaire and was nominated for a BAFTA and won a SAG award. (Side-side note: Then again, I thought the Best Actor category was stuffed, along with Best Director and Best Picture. Other years, I could have seen several of them winning in different competitions. Others were okay. Some, like Best Supporting Actress, were actually disappointing this night.)) I think the award really does reflect this, and is the one that everybody in the academy votes for. A film with great acting but looks terrible or had a bad screenplay won't win, or vice-versa.

I think something like Special Effects is judged on it's own merits, not the film's, like the actor's awards. These are voted on only by people who specialized in those fields.

You could argue that the more technical things get marginalized to actor's performances. Maybe because they are less obvious within the movie? Some fans do like it. I said I like good cinematography and costumes, and I LOVE movie scores. Really, I think the only difference is they don't have the build up the acting awards do. They do get recognition tonight, which is something they usually don't get. Not as big as the actor's but a lot more attention they usually get.

Sorry for the ramble...

[Touchdown]

54. I think the argument is the term "Technical"

Almost everybody listed on the closing credits is an artist. They may have technical skills, but so did Michaelangelo with his chizel.

I think the focus on actors is that they are the people you see in the films. Everyone else involved is behind the camera, or in an editing room that no one outside Hollywood ever sees, so they might as well not exist. At least that's how I see the movie going and Oscar audience. Who here sits through all the credits until the DTS logo appears? Anyone?:shrug:

Directors come to mind. Tonight was the first time I ever saw Danny Boyle. From a profile, I thought he looked like Rudy Guliani.
Aside from Ron Howard and Mel Gibson, who both used to be actors and the big ones like Spielberg, Scorcese, and Oliver Stone, who knows a director?

[vanderBeth]

55. Maybe for going to the movies, but I still think you're not being fair to the Oscars.

They DO recognize these people. The Academy contains people who have done that work and they DO give awards to them. This is one of the few times they DO get recognition. I think it is more about the general population(whose opinions I don't think will change), not the Oscars.

[Touchdown]

100. I wasn't talking about the oscars.

I was talking about the latter. ;)

I bet 70% of households that watched it said... "Enough with this Art Director and Cinematowatzit! Get on with the Actresses!"

[LanternWaste]

97. I imagine that much like any other large, creative endeavor...

"Does an actor' performance make a film great, or does everybody else involved...?

I imagine that much like any other large, creative endeavor, the talent of one department/person is both absorbed by and transferred to the other departments/people. A symbiotic relationship, if you will.

That was a paraphrase by John Sayles in a book he wrote about the production of the film, Matewan.

[Mudoria]

24. Other than Mickey Rourke not winning best actor I thought it was a great show..

[K8-EEE]

86. The nom was huge for him though --

His career would still have gotten a huge shot in the arm if he hadn't been nommed but the awards season has been very very good for Mickey Rourke!

My hub is an Acad voter & chose Richard Jenkins -- we were both happy to see Sean Penn win though.

[otohara]

91. I Was Glad He Didn't

I can't think of anyone besides Rourke (maybe the new Joaquin Phoenix) who would have been cast for that roll. It was parallel to his own life.

In regards to all the other nominees, someone else could have been cast for their rolls. Penn made a believable gay man, Frank Langella was convincing as Richard Nixon, I did not see The Visitor. Even Brad Pitt could have been replaced with say....Leonardo DiCaprio or some other good looking guy.

[jannyk]

25. Agreed! Watched the whole thing for the first time ever....

...usually zone out until 'best picture' award. I can't believe I actually watched, and enjoyed, the whole thing.

[samdogmom]

26. Did you see the pre-show where they interviewed the set designer and the music director?

That was very interesting. They laid out their vision for the show (very retro and 30's/40's Big Band Era with a twist). When the actual show came on and I saw what they finally came up with...WOW! Their vision came to life! I loved when the Slumdog director complimented the Oscar production in his acceptance speech. He was wowed from the audience. I was wowed from my home. What an achievement! (It looked good live and on TV!)

[BigBearJohn]

31. yes, that was a highlight for me. Some creative genius went into this show.

[Touchdown]

29. Bill Maher was sour grapes. Top Hat was insufferable

... and Kate Winslet was not choking up. She was acting.

Other than that, it could be worse.

If the 5 winners from the past is precedent, then why not the directors as well? Actors can't make movies on their own, you know.

[RufusTFirefly]

30. No way. Loved the individual tributes to nominees, but...

.. Hugh Jackman was as plastic as a daytime game show host.

Even though they broke with longtime tradition, some of the tributes from past winners to nominees were wonderful, genuine, and quite moving, but other than those, except for the remarks by Dustin Black and Sean Penn, I thought the show was exceptionally bland and controlled.

[Lindsey]

39. I watch it every year and I think this was one of the very best ever..

I thought Hugh Jackman was outstanding. I loved the way the past winners (actors and actresses) paid tribute to the current nominees. And I LOVE it that Sean Penn won! I've seen all of the movies with all of the key nominations and while Micky Rourke was excellent, I was still pulling for Sean. His performance was steller. I love that he started off with "you homo loving commies." When he allows himself to relax, he really is quite witty and funny. I saw him on Bill Maher a year or two ago (with Larry Sanders) and he was GREAT! I thin he feel the weight of the world on his shoulders and he takes his duties as a citizen of this country so seriously. I absolutely love this man.....

[Withywindle]

59. I liked Hugh Jackman a lot!

The way the show was set up and written, he didn't dominate the whole thing by himself. Which I think is a weakness in a lot of the recent shows. Billy Crystal and Jon Stewart and Chris Rock, etc. are great, but I don't want to watch anyone being forced-witty for 4 hours straight; it's all about the nominees and the art and the history of movies really, and I LOVED having the historical clips and the groups of past winners. I'd settle for a longer show to have more of that in the future.

[CTyankee]

74. I must say I agree. I had no expectations of Hugh Jackman. I thought he was a preening

phoney in "Australia," a big waste of my money.

However, the guy was terrific last night. A great entertainer.

I have to reconsider now my snarky attitude with regard to Mr. Jackman...

[Elwood P Dowd]

34. They didn't spend enough time on those we've lost since last year's show.

So many great and wonderful people, such as Paul Newman, are no longer with us.

[samdogmom]

36. Ummm...Paul was the featured last act on the tribute...it ended with a quote from him.

Are you totally sure they didn't "honor" him?

What would you have done (under time constraints) to honor Paul in a bigger way? I'm curious.

[Mind_your_head]

38. I didn't care to watch.....your 'masters' have rendered you irrelevant.

[tinrobot]

43. I have to disagree

That whole thing where the Best Actors/Actress winners heap praise on the nominees was the biggest ego-fest I've ever seen.

Yuck.

Just give out the awards and be done with it.

[gauguin57]

58. "Just give out the awards and be done with it"? Forget that! That's not what the Oscars are about.

If you don't like what the Oscars are about ... a big splashy, dressup party, celebrating movies and the people who make them ... with tributes and musical numbers and crystals on the curtains ... then you should not be watching.

"Just read the list of winners in the newspaper and be done with it."

[BigBearJohn]

63. a-men! I agree 100%

[Baikonour]

46. Definitely the best AA I've seen in my lifetime.

I'm still relatively young (mid twenties), but that definitely was the best Oscar show I've seen. It never dragged, Jackman was great (and I thought he was going to be awful), the music was great and I loved the set.

I wasn't too big on the LCD screens everywhere at first, but it grew on me.

I absolutely LOVED the group of 5 past winners presenting the best actor/actress awards. I think they'll be keeping that format for awhile.

The musical performances were great. Jackman has a surprisingly good voice, Beyonce was brilliant as usual and Latifah showed that she still has it in her to belt out a beautiful song. But why the hell did Peter Gabriel have to be a douche and not take part of the medley? The show's not all about you, guy.

All in all though, it was great and I think they'll definitely have their hands full trying to top it next year.

[xenussister]

69. Peter Gabriel wasn't being a douche!

He was protesting on behalf of all the songwriters the decision to truncate the nominated songs into a minute each, and he wasn't doing it for himself either, he was doing it because the other nominees couldn't. Full songs have almost always been performed. This year they had 3 nominees instead of 5. The two songs from Slumdog Millionaire were exciting, vibrant and interesting, and Peter Gabriel is just plain brilliant, even with a fairly straightforward song like the one nominated.

Instead of having those excruciatingly boring and embarrassingly bad (obviously, IMO) song and dance numbers they should have let the actual nominated songs be performed in their entirety. I will never pay to see another movie by Bill Condon.

I'm so happy for Milk though, because they were two very important awards, and the best speeches of the night. Of course I was rooting for Gus Van Sant and Milk as Best Picture, but I loved Slumdog Millionaire so I can't begrudge them their wins. It was fun seeing them all up on stage.

[Control-Z]

51. The best one I've ever seen.

It was fast paced and entertaining all the way through. The stage props, (which were excellent) along with the seating, (which seemed different, though I can't say how) made the show more intimate. And the introductions were made in a style like none that I ever remember seeing.

And they announced that they were cutting back this year? Well, it worked. They should do it again.

[gauguin57]

57. I don't know about 30 years, but it's definitely the best I've seen in many years.

My friends and I are Oscar freaks ... we watch together, and obsessively pick apart the show every year. This year everyone in the room agreed: These Oscars were GREAT! I liked the production numbers, I liked the film montages (they picked great film folks to put them together). I LOVED having the previous winners pay tribute to the nominees (I mean, seriously ... anyone who likes movies enough to watch the Oscars has seen clips of every nominee's work a zillion times during this awards season -- Glad to hear them talked about in such an eloquent way, rather than seeing the damned clips for the umpteenth time!). LOVED LOVED LOVED the Pineapple Express skit.

I loved that bunches of 3 awards were given by one presenter or pair of presenters (so they didn't have as many presenters dragging their gowned asses out on stage and struggling through stupid patter). I loved that we didn't have to look at Jack Nicholson react to the host every two minutes all night long ... that kind of stuff just takes up time). Thought the Latifah In Memoriam tribute was great. Loved the way they put together the medley of the three nominated songs.

Loved the political speeches, and the giddy sense of celebration the Slumdoggers brought to that stage. I loved that NO ONE had to be "played off" in the middle of their speeches. Loved most of the speeches!

And the whole thing -- including trailers of 2009 movies! -- was OVER BEFORE MIDNIGHT. That RARELY happens.

GREAT show (and I had been predicting a disaster ... I was SO pleasantly surprised!).

[mwei924]

60. It was better than any recent Oscar ceremony.

Hugh Jackman was pretty funny for a non-comedian.
The Judd Apatow short film was hilarious.
The speeches were nice and short for the most part.
Funniest speech ever = the Mr. Roboto Japanese guy.

[Missy Vixen]

61. I truly enjoyed it

Queen Latifah's singing "I'll Be Seeing You" during the photos of those lost since last year -- it was the best presentation I can remember seeing of that segment, and I've been watching the Oscars my whole life.

Hugh Jackman was marvelous as well.

A really, really enjoyable show.

[Mari333]

64. egoegoegoegoegoegofest

:)

[CTyankee]

75. OMG, egos at the Oscars! I'm totally shocked! How can that be?

:rofl:

[malaise]

65. I agree 100%

It was people centered and not stiff. The Australian host, Hugh Jackman, was great.

We saw community rather than individual in the planning - the way several former winners introduced all the nominees for individual performers. We observed free speech - Dustin Lance Black was touching in standing up for the rights of gays and lesbians; Sean Penn hit the Prop 8 supporters in the gut; Bill Maher's comment on religion was spot on. Beyonce's subtle inclusion of 'At Last' in the songs Medley was perfect and Jerry Lewis' comments on 'his' children were very important.
The happy vibes among the Slum Dog crew enhanced the 'inclusiveness' of the entire show. Let me add that the popularity of Slum Dog Millionaire is a lovely slap in the face of the Bollywood and other Indian elites who continue to ignore the harsh reality of child poverty in India.
To sum up - I saw visible change - a sense of freedom.

add

[dysfunctional press]

68. having not seen almost any of the movies up for any major awards

i had no real interest in watching it at all...besides- sunday is amazing race/hbo night at our house.

[rosesaylavee]

70. I agree except

I loved Billy Crystal doing the opening musical number that one year of all the movies up for Best Picture. But the set, the presentation, the 'show' was much improved overall. Too bad there were NO good songs this year. What a snore the three were that were nominated. Not having seen the movies, only hope there were amazing in situ there because outside their movie scene, they were certainly each umoving bores.

[LWolf]

71. I didn't see it.

I haven't seen one since 1977, the year I moved out of my mom's place. I'm sure she'll tell me more than I wanted to know. ;)

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

72. I haven't enjoyed the Academy Awards as much as I did last night since Billy

Crystal hosted them.

Hugh Jackman was wonderful. I've seen him sing and dance before so I knew he was multi-talented and his personality was absolutely charming (and he ain't half bad to look at either). :)

I liked that they explained what went into film production and how at each stage they handed out the appropriate award. I also became teary when they had previous acting award winners collectively present the nominees.

It was Glorious seeing Sophia Loren. I have adored that woman since I was a little girl.

[Seeking Serenity]

73. I didn't watch. Not a second of it. It would be impossible for me to care less.

The instrument has not been invented that could measure my indifference.

[architect359]

76. I agree.

I've been watching the awards show since I was a kid - and this was, in my opinion, one of the best, if not the best.

[Greybnk48]

77. I loved it too. The time just flew by, for a change!

I loved the way the actors awards were presented, bringing out past winners. That was fun. And how about Sophia Loren! She's amazing!

[DevonRex]

78. Agreed. And I normally HATE medleys and musicals and all that stuff.

And I usually watch about 20 minutes of the show and get bored and/or annoyed and change the channel. This time I watched the whole thing. That's a first for me.

[Malikshah]

79. 100%. This was a great show

I hope they can continue this in the future.

It was a great way to honor individuals and the form at the same time.

[theboss]

81. I could have done without the coven of former winners welcoming the new winner to the club

That felt creepy...and long.

[Individualist]

82. I didn't see or hear George Carlin mentioned in the memorial segment

Maybe I missed it, but if not this was a glaring omission. Otherwise I enjoyed the Oscars.

[WI_DEM]

89. That is funny, but it could be that George Carlin really wasn't a movie actor

despite a few films. I think the Emmies will do something more.

[Individualist]

90. He was in 16 movies,

and he was included in the SAG awards memoriam. A number of others were snubbed as well, including Mel Ferrer, Eartha Kitt, and Ricardo Mantalban.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Carlin#Filmography

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.obituaries/browse_thread/thread/d0cbe2e111af9044

[bikebloke]

83. I usually watch until In Memoriam.

But they seemed to put it on later. So I turned in. But I did find it on YouTube this morning and saved for after work.

It did flow at a faster pace. Did they shorten the commercial breaks? When they come on, I hit mute and pick up a book. I got less reading done than on previous years.

And I liked Ben Stiller's Joachim Phoenix.

[sledgehammer]

84. The power of DVR

I'm not a big fan of the Oscar show itself, though I am always interested in seeing who wins. I just think they always drag the show on so long, have pointless skits, and too few awards. I probably saw 25 minutes of the entire ceremony (Bill Maher, tribute to Jerry Lewis, Sean Penn, and a couple of Slumdog speeches), and forwarded the rest. Thankfully I had some backlog on DVR to catch up on, as well as my personal Sunday night guilty pleasure - The Amazing Race!

I much prefer the Golden Globes. No skits, everything is pretty much to the point, lots of awards (TV, mini-series, and movie, plus drama and comedy/musical categories), more informal, etc.

[K8-EEE]

85. I was there & really enjoyed it!

I was really shocked to see the L.A. Times this morning RIP Hugh Jackman! I thought he was fun and kept the show moving along, that's what a good host does....

The speeches were great especially the actors! I'm not a fan of Slumdog Millionaire so minor annoyance that it kept cleaning up...but I thought the show was staged and paced really nicely, I love the new thing with the five actor presenters! Very fun!

[gauguin57]

88. You were there, as in you were IN ATTENDANCE? DETAILS, PLEASE! Give us some dirt!

Or some non-dirt ... anything! If you were there, throw me a little crumb (the day after the Oscars should be declared a national holiday from work, in my opinion ... that's how into them I am) ... so, please ... tell us anything you know.

[K8-EEE]

92. Well, I woohoooed Bill Maher from the balcony cheap seats

Which was about my entire interaction with famous people, LOL, are you kidding we were in the cheap seats and just gawking at everybody in the lobby....

They like the non-famosos to get there EARLY (like, 3:30) so as not to clutter up the red carpet with our normal hydes while the stars walk in, still it is something to walk down that red carpet and see that wall of photogs etc!

So then when you get inside they have a jazz combo playing in there, they were playing Coltrane when we walked in which was cool! We walked in with that High School musical girl what is her name? Vanessa Hudgens?

In order to lure people in early they have open bar and little Wolfgang Puck hors d'oervres....which are yummy! They had goat cheese quiches, tuna tartar, little pastrami sandwich type canapes and various "crustini" type canapes whatever you call them, they were good!

So the fun part is they have TV's in the lobbies by the bar so you get to watch the red carpet interviews and then they walk right in! But it's not like you go up and talk to anybody....natch we ran into other non-famosos to chat with, once you go to the upstairs bar you are pretty much segregated by an invisible velvet rope, if you have the balcony seats once you go up they don't let you down until aftert he show!

[gauguin57]

96. Thanks for your post!

I'm going through awards-season withdrawal for another year ... sigh ... so every tidbit will help keep me warm until NEXT January.

[gauguin57]

87. This morning, I went back to my tape of the show ... I love the show even more this morning!

I cannot stop cracking up at the Pineapple Express clip. OMG! James Franco is a RIOT!

And for all of you who stopped in to say, "I couldn't possibly care less" ... well, the Oscars were not being presented for YOU. They were presented for those of us who love movies AND everything that swirls around them.

[RiverStone]

98. I see both sides

I would not say "I could care less" - though I did not watch the AA. I do enjoy great movies! Yet when so many people are suffering both here and in other parts of world, the glitz and extravagance of the Hollywood elite just seems pretty insignificant.

That being said, I look forward to renting Slumdog!

Glad you had fun. :)

[Wetzelbill]

93. I was underwhelmed

But I was so tired I fell asleep. I wasn't overly excited about any of the films this year, seemed to be s weak year for that. The show itself was pretty good, I thought Jackman did well. Danny Boyle looked so happy all night that made me glad. Some impassioned speeches, especially from the Milk winners. And the Heath Ledger win was a big moment. I usually get excited for the films though and I haven't seen many of them this year, and the ones I've seen were so-so. I also think The Dark Knight got the shaft because it's deemed a comic book action flick, and maybe even Iron Man was overlooked.

All in all it was a good show, I'm not one for all the medleys etc, but it certainly had some moving moments and deserving winners.

[WillieW]

94. I didn't watch the glamorization of the Hollywood elite.

[CrispyQ]

95. I like that it's not the same old thing every year.

So yeah, some years I'm not going to like it as well & this was one of those years! x(

1. I would rather have seen clips of the actors in their part, than listen to what some previous winner of the category thought of the performance.

2. While I didn't mind Queen Latifa singing during the tribute to those who have passed, I was pissed when they widened the shot to include her. I couldn't see or read who was being featured & we have a huge TV.

3. The musical crap was used to freshen my drink & treat plate.

I'm not a huge AA fan - it's rare I've seen any of the movies. I think comedians make the best hosts. I recall liking the year that David Letterman was host. Having Beevis & Butthead & Stupid Pet Tricks was a nice touch! I would love to see Bill Maher host it! That would make a good SNL skit, since we know it will never happen!

[Scout]

99. i liked it all right, as awards shows go n/t

[cynatnite]

102. It was good, but I thought Hugh Jackson's musical number kinda sucked. n/t