Billy Crystal hosting the 2012 Oscars?

It's not easy to bring in the younger crowd while you're doing everything in your power to also make sure the host is non-offensive to the stars in attendance (hi, Ricky Gervais!).  It's not like Billy is doing anything else, and I'd much rather another Billy Crystal or Steve Martin hosted event than something like last year's painful experiment.

Conan O'Brien, folks.    It's his turn.

"Oh, you like that one, Jack?"

(Ape Nicholson oog-oogs)

I'll be good with Billy, Steve, Conan, Neil or Ellen.

Someone new is always fun to watch for the surprise of how good they do, or the trainwreck.

Hell, Jon Stewart should get another go. He did a great job the two outings he had. Solo Steve Martin killed it, though him teamed with Alec Baldwin felt...odd. Like it was an extended plug for that Meryl Streep movie they were both in.

I agree, though, that it's CoCo's time. They were stupid not to get him this year, when his appeal (especially with the younger crowd) was at its most potent.

Conan will not pull in shit.  He's not nearly as popular as people seem to think he is, and the Oscar ratings depend more upon what's nominated than who's hosting.

Stephen Fry. He's been killing it at the BAFTAs for years.

There's a lot of backlash towards Conan from the older crowd after the Leno thing and the ensuing media coverage, particularly through the schadenfreude of his TBS show not going over too well. I honestly think there's a certain demographic that are now turned off by his presence. Nothing would make me happier than to be wrong. Also, to have gold bullions.

I vote for Woody Allen, though I understand he really doesn't give a shit about the Oscars. Barring that, Sam Rockwell and Robert Downey Jr. doing a two-fer.

Or just set the whole thing on fire and have Tyler Perry host. As Madea.

Steve Coogan should host. 

But as Michael Caine.

They'll never win younger viewers over as long as they continue to feature stuff like Best Costume for Corolianus, Best Cinematography for Meek's Cutoff or Best Actress for Tilda Swinton in We Need To Talk About Kevin. For my little sister, these are Boring talky movies where nothing ever happens and everyone is unattractive, presented by old farts as embarrassing as uncles and grandpas.

The sole reason of existence of this annual award show is praising people who are responsible for making movies. I doubt teenagers give a fuck about how movies are getting made, so why EVER bothering appealing to that demographic?

(I'd love to see Billy back. I'd also love to see Craig Ferguson, Steve Carrell, Jim Carrey or Neil Patrick Harris. And please, no more duos.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Myers 

They'll never win younger viewers over as long as they continue to feature stuff like Best Costume for Corolianus, Best Cinematography for Meek's Cutoff or Best Actress for Tilda Swinton in We Need To Talk About Kevin. For my little sister, these are Boring talky movies where nothing ever happens and everyone is unattractive, presented by old farts as embarrassing as uncles and grandpas.

The sole reason of existence of this annual award show is praising people who are responsible for making movies. I doubt teenagers give a fuck about how movies are getting made, so why EVER bothering appealing to that demographic?

I think this is kinda defeatist, isn't it? I mean, why even bother televising it?

Let's face it, the Oscars are broadcast for one purpose, and that's promotion. The studios want to get the word out about their movies, and an award is a good way to do that. And so I think we should have some stake in an Oscar broadcast that appeals to many people, if only to get the word out not about the Best Picture winner we don't care for, or the really interesting movie that pulls a Best Supporting Actress nomination. The powerful picture that takes home Best Foreign Film. Etc. Etc. It's good when great movies earn exposure. Which is why I was in favor of the ten nominations idea, which is apparently now being rejiggered once again.

The problem is the turgid, straight-faced presentation of the titles you showed. The Academy segregates, and never makes something off the beaten path look as fresh or appetizing as it should (Best Documentary Short-Form feels like a sojourn to the library every year). How often does some starlet or young male actor come up to rattle off some pre-processed, studio-approved jibe about a Best Picture candidate, saying something like, "This is a story about two lovers. Divided by fate. By history," bla bla bla, clearly not having seen the movie in question?

Great movies are EXCITING. We know this as movie fans. Even when they are quiet, introspective, or just plain strange, they have something that lights our synapses, that electrifies us. Something we can relate to on a deeper level. The Academy needs to bring this to life, and not continue this path of "everything needs to be sober and respectful" or "let's make a joke about how no one has seen this" (a la "The Reader").

It's not about demographics, it's about enthusiasm. Last year's broadcast was a goddamned funeral dirge. Just because you have young hosts doesn't make it youthful or fresh. You need to break some eggs, go wild, break a few rules. Present these movies with passion, with excitement. Tank one year in the ratings, go experimental, and the buzz will be strong enough to come back the next year.

How to do this:

-Off-the-grid host. There are tons of names that haven't hosted yet, funny, entertaining performers. Some are cinephiles! If you spend forty five minutes listing off names, you're sure to get ten must-have rookies.

-Present the ten nominees within their own separate montages. Save the less popular ones for the beginning of the telecast. Have the director of each film co-edit a montage with another director of their choice.

-More man-on-the-street stuff. Errol Morris did a mini-doc that aired on the show a couple of years ago where people discussed their favorite movies. Do that a few times during the show with people praising the Best Picture winners.

-Stop pretending there's a bigger movie universe out there beyond the nominations. There is, but we don't need a montage during the Oscars of how exciting Transformers and Wolverine were, that just distracts and it's insulting.

-Shrink the Academy. It's too big, and not that prestigious anymore. Who cares what Maya Angelou and the butler of Samuel L. Jackson think of the Best Actor winners? Make it a rotating membership, where you join the Academy for about three years, and shrink the roster to maybe eighty people. Wittle out those that seem ill-suited to the Academy Awards (Gerard Butler, who I'm not certain is in the Academy, probably isn't the best authority on these matters).

-Wallpaper the broadcast with commercials from the smaller movie companies. Academy ad space is pricey, so set aside part of the budget to allow the smallest films to showcase commercials for their films on DVD or in theaters.

-Do Best Original Song, but have the songs covered by popular modern acts. Mix it up. Also, nominate better music, because, shit, people.

-No more goddamned red carpet shit. Again, this will provide the added ad dollars, but I think the red carpet show is so long and tedious that it's soured people on the actual awards. Either have the red carpet coverage done by actual journalists asking interesting (and sometimes fun) questions, or cancel the whole fucking thing. If Justin Bieber shows, ask him what his favorite nominated movies are, and why. Don't ask him about anything else, please.

I would also suggest more comedy sketches, but it depends on who they hire. No more fucking Bruce Villanch. Have sketches done by Louis C.K. Better yet, just hire everyone that used to work on the Dana Carvey Show, including Charlie Kaufman.

If the MTV Movie Award winners are any indication of what draws a young crowd in, I say fuck 'em.

I'd suggest that we simply not focus on young people and just concentrate on a viewership of 25 and older. People who actually know who Warren Beatty is and who have seen flicks like French Connection, Rocky and Singing in the Rain. Or at least Million Dollar Baby, Gladiator and Heat. I think otherwise it's like trying to make the Country Music Awards interesting to T.I. / Flo Rida / Big Sean fans. There may be a little chance of a Taylor Swift / Flo Rida feat. that somehow fits in (in this case, Harry Potter VII.2) - but that only happens by luck. You can't plan this. You can't count on that. You shouldn't, because it's good that it's different. The Academy Awards don't need to and shouldn't ever be MTV Music Awards Part II.

Gabe, I think that you're right. What's really missing is excitement and focus on movies. You're absolutely right that the red carpet show should be more than a simple commercial for dress designers. I'm sick of hearing the same two questions over and over again: how awesome is it to be here (aw soo awesome) and what dress are you wearing tonight (I know many women are interested in this, but at best, it should only be an additional topic. It should always be about the people and movies presented first). Instead, do stuff like having the host drive on stage in the fucking DeLorean. Constantly remind people of the great movie history, and not by having yawn inducing montages.

I also really like your idea of improving the presentations of the nominees. I'm sick of seeing voids like Jennifer Lopez and Taylor Lautner getting on stage just because they happen to have a movie out in a week after this... reminding everyone of it. Yeah, there's excitement missing. There's passion missing. People should take a look at the Emmys. People really easen up and aren't as uptight over there. I too want someone to present who actually has seen the nominated work. To tell us what's really cool about it, by not using any of the generic shit descriptions we're used to hear.

Love your idea of popular artists re-interpreting nominated songs. And please: never, ever, ever have 3 out of 4 nominated songs from the same movie again. That's simply bollocks.

And what's really, really missing - a real element of surprise. A winner that can absolutely not be guessed before. So often most winners already are pretty much a given, or you already know it'll be a race between two nominees. I've no idea how to do this, but there should at least be one such category.

Also, please KICK the best short / best documentaries categories, or get them anywhere else, or just quickly mention the winners. Show all the shorts on the official Academy website. I know it's controversial, but let's be honest: the interest in these is just too small. I bet over 90 percent of the people in the fucking Kodak theatre alone haven't seen half of the presented flicks. So you've got people up there who no one knows holding 3 minute thank you speeches for flicks no one has seen, not even the people in the room. And when Best Supporting Actress stands there and lovingly talks about how she got into making movies they play the please gtfo because we don't have the time for this music? SERIOUSLY?

And can we please not have a full-on script for the moderators? I mean they have experts as hosts. Jon Stewart doesn't need a teleprompter. Steve Martin did stand-up comedy shows in the three digits. What's the problem, trust? Do they really think they would screw it up or suddenly whip a dick out? Or do they actually think forcing Franco in drag and writing words for Steve Martin is BETTER than whatever they would come up with?

Larry David should host.