Neil Patrick Harris' first and last year as Oscar host- Page 5

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 4:14pm

Do a big music number at the oscars does not work, the tonys are a different story. I felt like he just thought that his Emmys gog could easily tans late for the oscars and it didn't. I do hope he hosts the tonys this year though.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 4:21pm

Make it shorter and tighter

Only give out the big awards live.The technical awards can be given out before as no one gives a rat's behind about sound editing or short subjects. Make it smaller and try going back to its roots. Do the telecast from the Pantages or the sumptuous Los Angeles.

The length is pure torture .It should be barred by the Geneva Convention as cruel and inhuman punishment.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 4:21pm

Make it shorter and tighter

Only give out the big awards live.The technical awards can be given out before as no one gives a rat's behind about sound editing or short subjects. Make it smaller and try going back to its roots. Do the telecast from the Pantages or the sumptuous Los Angeles.

The length is pure torture .It should be barred by the Geneva Convention as cruel and inhuman punishment.

[Far From Home]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 4:22pm

Where's Bob Hope when you need him.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 4:29pm

Dead.

[wonkit]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 5:07pm

I didn't watch last night. I don't have the stamina to be bored to tears for 4 hours to find the 6 minutes worth watching. How about 90 minutes, with meaningful clips from the 6 nominated movies, and the oscar announcements for the top awards with time for real thank you speeches. Show cinematography, score/song, director, 4 acting categories and best picture. Add in memoriam and one comedy sketch. Amen.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 7:15pm

I think Neil was fine. His material wasn't great (the jokes, not the opening number which I enjoyed) and he lost the audience early and had trouble getting them back when he wasn't shirtless or telling a John Travolta joke. The audience was just not with him and it didn't help that a lot of his material called out the people in the room for Oscar snubs.

[javero]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 7:20pm

Does NPH deserve a 2nd chance ala Ellen?

I now recall her 1st stab at hosting the Oscars. She never quite settled into her hosting duties and looked ill at ease throughout the event. But, the 2nd time was the charm for Ellen.

As unimpressed and un-entertained as I was by him last night, I'm not quite ready to label him the worst host ever.

[Demitri2]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 7:38pm

I've never been a big fan. He's adequate at best in COMPANY and his singing voice is serviceable, if that. I've never understood the adulation he's been given. However his record breaking ability to absorb and put over the tongue twisting rap like lyrics in the closing song each year at the TONY awards is quite impressive. I'd like to see him NOT host the TONY awards either but just have him come out at the end doing the final summation number.

And what I dislike most about Harris' delivery of a joke line is when he does this thing where he snorts to keep from breaking himself up. It's not at all natural. It seems purposely planned and just down right annoying. You don't snicker before or after delivering a punch line. It's like laughing at your own jokes. Overall I don't think Harris did a terrible job. There just wasn't anything outstanding about his hosting which I hope means he'll never be offered the opportunity to host again.

As far as the dress with the black balls...it was indeed a bizarre and tacky gown and anyone wearing it to a worldwide telecast deserves to be ridiculed. You would think someone who had planned to mention the topic of suicide, if given the opportunity, would've considered not dressing up like a clown. And why not a hat to match the dress?

[Broadwayhunk]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 7:46pm

I was hoping for a bit of class and grownup savoir-faire from Neil, but all we got was the same juvenile antics that pass muster of his fawning adulators on Broadway.

[Everlast85]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 7:54pm

He did a fine job with what he had to work with. He is incredibly entertaining, multi-talented individual. Don't like him? Don't watch him and stop bitching.

[jo]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 7:56pm

Some very insightful post-mortem comments on the Oscars.

Re the Jackman hosting --

*He did NOT bomb as someone alleged in the earlier part of this thread. His Opening number drew an instantaneous STANDING OVATION from his peers ( most of the nominees were seated in the front part of the hall) and you can hear the thundering applause from the general audience as well as the gurgle of laughter as the opening number went on. Plus, one does not say "Thank You" at the end if you think your efforts were not truly well-appreciated.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Terhj8mjPwY


*I do not know what the situation was for the more recent Oscars, but Jackman once shared that he was left pretty much on his own to devise his opening number. He narrates that in their first meeting, he was given a number of minutes for that part but no other help was offered. His own team found the right team to write the Opening Number - which turned out to be relevant, amusing and funny, well-segmented, and which showered attention on the nominees and not on the host ( although he turned out to be gracious, seemed sincere, self-deprecating, and who performed his gig very well). Perhaps his being a major film star added to his appeal to the audience in the hall?

One of the members of that team, Joel Stein, wrote about the effort (and how Jackman was with them all the way) in his column in Time magazine. I think the team was not really known for writing for awards shows but probably had a feel for the public pulse. The number eventually won an EMMY for the writing team!

*The number continues to get attention - a recent check shows a close-to-10 million hits on YouTube, more than any other Opening numbers of recent history.

*The other major musical number ( The Musical is Back) won audience approval for its showy spectacle ( compared to the Opening number and provided the right balance) and featured not just a known pop star ( Beyoncé) but also two love teams from that year's movie musical triumphs ( Mamma Mia! and Hairspray). It was worked out together with Baz Luhrmann. It heralded the return of the genre. Les Miserables, Into the Woods, Pitch Perfect being the more recent commercial hits.

*Also, the 2009 show did not shower too much attention on the host alone. I remember two distinct features which were not just informative but also appealing. The show featured slices of the fine attributes of film-making narrated by other teams of movie stars ( movie audiences want to see other beloved faces, too). Also, it innovated on how the acting nominees were presented ( with other actors giving individual tributes to each nominee) and instead of lumping together the best picture nominees ( as it did in the 2015 Oscars) spent a bit more time on the individual movies ( the audience is there to root for the movies they liked best, not for the host).

*He also shared that there was a monitor in the wings ( or wherever the host stayed) because he said he was elated to have Steven Spielberg watching parts of the show with him. Spielberg who was part of the group/committee which planned and oversaw the Oscar ceremonies then was actually the one who offered the hosting gig to Jackman.

*One other comment offered by CBS re that gig - during the intervals, Jackman sang, joked around, and offered a bit of food to some starving people in their gowns - it kept the energy level high and that resonated to the audience in the hall so they looked like they were actually enjoying the show.

*Btw, it was a different set of producers at that time. I think film producer Laurence Mark ( Dreamgirls) was one of them, who will soon be working with Jackman on GREATEST SHOWMAN ON EARTH as producer for this new live-action movie musical.
























Updated On: 2/24/15 at 07:56 PM

[sueb1863]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 8:10pm

I usually enjoy NPH but he was way off last night. I doubt they'll ask him back.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 8:24pm

NPH could teach John Travolta a thing or two about men's wigs. NPH's wig looked great.

[JamesBroadwayWiner]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 8:57pm

I find the oscars always to be incredibly boring. I do not think that NPH was to blame for that. It's just the nature of the oscars--to be boring!

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 9:41pm

I didn't think he was as bad as some people said..but I don't think he was as good as I have seen him. He had some bad moments and some nice ones as well...

However, three hours + of any award show is too much for me. I DVR'ed it and watched the parts I wanted to today...and fast forwarded through commercials and many other items. So I was probably in a better spirits than someone who was watching it live...

[kyle4]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 10:22pm

"It don't take a wiz
To know that only a desperate man
Would drop his pants in show biz"

[sctrojan65]

Posted: 2/23/15 at 11:03pm

Never been all that impressed with him really.

That being said, I now hear he's being mentioned (over on a Disney board I subscribe to) as a possible 60th Anniversary Ambassador for Disney. In the way Julie Andrews repped for the 50th.

To that I say, please. No.

Just because he's the flavor of the month right now doesn't mean he has enough longevity to rep Disney for such a huge milestone. IMO.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 2/24/15 at 12:28am

I especially appreciate those who say "if you don't like Harris, don't tune in!" Some of us have been tuning in since childhood (personally speaking, circa 1962). It's the honored films and artists we watch, not some overexposed host du jour. And to those who say he made the most of what he was given: well, so has every host since the show began. It's how one handles the real-time augmentation and annotation of "what's given" with improvisational acumen that separates those who master the show and those who do not. Last night, mastery was not a word I'd employ to describe the hosting performance.

Updated On: 2/24/15 at 12:28 AM

[broadwaysfguy]

Posted: 2/24/15 at 12:43am

wrong venue for Neil

oscars are probably beyond repair as a watchable entertainment "event"

If i were made executive producer with the job of fixing the oscars

1)The host would be a great stand up comedian who has also been a movie star
2) The only awards presented on the live show would be for actors, actresses, directors, song and movie
3) move to sit down table format like the Globes and Serve LOTS of great free alcohol
so winners ar looser and more spontaneous....
4) break all remaining categories like best film and actor actress categories into drama and comedy/musical (why should a brilliant comic performance compete with a great dramatic performance...retarded....
5) have behind the scenes looks about the making of the nominated films
6) instruct all award winners that they can only thank people in ONE sentence that takes no more than 10 seconds, the rest of their acceptance has to be about what they are feeling, why they got excited about the role in the first place, etc, stuff that other people outside the industry would CARE about
7) a nostalia number like sound of music should be done every year
eliminate the tribute to dead people (should I clap or not clap)
9) feature two commentators like in best of show who are watching celebrities in their seats and commenting on them and their outfits(they would cut in during diff segments in the show)
10) show real best acting segments a few min in length from each film

****make the show 2 hours maximum
If none of us will spend more than two hours watching their movie, why are they trying to make us spend 3.5 hours watching the drivel that gets put out???

[AHLiebross]

Posted: 2/24/15 at 5:33am

Broadwaysfguy, I really like your suggestions. With regard to the table format (only problem, it would require LOTS of space), I think the Oscars were presented at a dinner, back in the Gable-Lombard days.

[sueb1863]

Posted: 2/24/15 at 6:26am

It was a tough year to host, too. The vast majority of nominees were smaller films that weren't huge box office hits, so fewer people tuned in, and he didn't have much to work with.

[jo]

Posted: 2/24/15 at 6:49am

Maybe it was just a little better in 2009 --

*Slumdog Millionaire ( commercial hit and Oscar winner)
*Milk
*Nixon/Frost
*The Reader ( even the Oscars host confessed he didn't have a chance to see it )
*Curious Case of Benjamin Button ( another commercial hit)



Yet the host dwelt on each of these nominees with equal fervor...and teased about The Dark Knight and The Wrestler for good measure ( both were not nominated).


But the front/second row attendees seemed more prominent for that year ( Pitt and Jolie, Penn, Hathaway, Winslet, Rourke, Downey, Penelope C, Meryl ( always Meryl), Amy A et al.

C'est la vie.



Updated On: 2/24/15 at 06:49 AM

[indytallguy]

Posted: 2/24/15 at 8:52am

I wonder about the split between people who watch the Oscars and those who do the Oscars. It has long been a long and somewhat interminable affair regardless of who is hosting. I gather with friends and the show moves from the foreground to the background of our attention. We zero in on moments we want to catch and vaguely attend or ignore those that we don't. Sort of like a Super Bowl party.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/24/15 at 12:49pm

We saw all the movies nominated. Liked Boyhood over Birdman

The acting awards were well deserved. It is a shame Cumberbatch & Keaton went home empty but going in you have an 80% chance of losing. Odds are better in Vegas

Simmons was like a dealer playing with a stacked deck. Everyone in the world knew he would win so that was no suspense at all.

Updated On: 2/24/15 at 12:49 PM