Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Seth MacFarlane On Tap To Become The Worst Oscar Host In History, Beating 1989's Debacle

He's never going to recover from this. The critics are killing him...

Listen -- a billion people are throwing up. That's a rough estimate of course, but every year somebody at the Oscars says a billion people on the planet are watching the program; however many watched this year's Oscar show, they may well have felt sickened by it. It was a stomach-churning, jaw-dropping debacle, incompetently hosted and witlessly produced.

But even in Hollywood and even on television, nothing is 100 per cent bad, and at about 11 p.m. Eastern time, Barbra Streisand magically materialized onstage to sing "The Way We Were" as a tribute to the late Marvin Hamlisch, and there wasn't a dry eye in the world. At last, a true living legend -- a genuinely thrilling star.

Then the producers managed to pull off a big emotional climax by having First Lady Michele Obama read the name of the Best Picture Winner ("Argo") "live" from the White House, peering out from under her bangs and lending the festivities at least of hint of -- what else -- festivity. And some much-needed class, too.

Streisand was in great voice, commanding and brilliant, the best thing on the show by far. Singing performances by Adele (the theme from "Skyfall"), Shirley Bassey ("Goldfinger") and a few others also helped elevate the proceedings from depths plumbed from the very outset on.

Hollywood historians will debate whether the 1989 Oscar show, disastrously produced by Allan Carr (with Rob Lowe singing to Snow White), will remain the worst ever or if this year's, sadistically concocted by producers Neil Meron and Craig Zadan, will take the dishonor as all-time most horrible. Both, let's face it, will live in infamy, like Pearl Harbor.

Skeptics were wisely taken aback when Seth MacFarlane, a squirrelly little ham whose forte is producing dirty cartoons for television, was chosen to host this year's event, and there was more astonishment when it was later announced he would sing and dance as part of his performance. He turned out to be the proverbial triple threat; he not only couldn't sing or dance but he was no stand-up comedian, either.

MacFarlane's attempts at irreverent humor -- like saying "Lincoln" star Daniel Day Lewis had attempted to "free" African American actor Don Cheadle backstage -- was apparently supposed to give the aging Oscarcast some kind of "edge." But people don't want an Oscars with edge; they want entertainment and schmaltz. MacFarlane laid one egg after another, many of them in the first seventeen hideous minutes: an off-the-wall sketch in which MacFarlane chatted with William Shatner (in his old "Star Trek" outfit -- from the TV motion picture series, mind you) about how to do the show.

There were mock headlines from "the future" assailing MacFarlane as having turned out to be the worst Oscar host ever, and the farce became fact; he WAS the worst host ever. Maybe not just of the Oscars, either -- maybe the worst host of anything.

"The show's a disaster," Shatner said kiddingly to MacFarlane, but the words rang horribly true, and only a few minutes in. Everything seemed wrong, even the set (at times, MacFarlane seemed to have been installed against a backdrop from the old "Hollywood Palace"), and especially a stupid bit of retro sexism directed at actresses in the audience, "We Saw Your Boobs." MacFarlane sang that accompanied by, for some completely unfathomable reason, the Gay Men's Chorus of Los Angeles.

Then Channing Tatum and Charlize Theron were trotted out to sing and dance "The Way You Look Tonight" from the classic Astaire-Rogers film, "Swingtime" -- but Astaire and Rogers they screamingly were not. Why hire MacFarlane to lure a younger audience to the Oscars and then have today's stars clumsily stumble through old-timey material?

So many details were mystifying or infuriating, like having a pair of socks, a white pair and a brown pair, re-enact a scene from the movie "Flight" starring Denzel Washington, or putting MacFarlane in a nun's habit so he could torment Sally Field (long ago the "Flying Nun" on TV) in a lame sketch taped earlier in the green room backstage. The saddest thing was that jokes meant to be self-deprecating just seemed horribly accurate, as when MacFarlane promised viewers "a telecast designed to put your patience to a test" or called his own movie "Ted" his "mediocre effort."

With MacFarlane flailing so miserably, the usual bugaboos of Oscar shows seemed more irritating than ever -- as when one of four men who won an early Oscar hogged the spotlight and thanked his children while the other three winners had to stand by silently. When will Oscar winners ever learn to shut up about their damn kids and stop treating this supposedly global event like a small-town pancake supper?

It seems a certainty that Zadan and Meron won't be invited back to ruin another Oscar show (the term "Academy Awards" was all but banished from the program; apparently it's considered too stuffy for today's hip audience) and, perhaps knowing that, they managed to infest this year's with tributes to their own work, mainly the Broadway musical "Chicago" which they turned into a film. You'd think "Chicago" had been the equivalent of "Oklahoma!" combined with "Guys and Dolls" for all the fuss made about it.

That the show was such a dreadful embarrassment seems especially unfortunate because the consensus has been that this year's list of nominated people and films is particularly auspicious, with many of the top winners remaining unpredictable until show time -- or some of them, anyway. Maybe there's an axiom lurking in the wings: the better the crop of films, the worse the Oscar show? It would take weeks of painful research to figure that out, and who would want the job of looking at all those old Oscar shows -- unless you went back to the Bob Hope or Johnny Carson days?

Then again, no matter how bad some of the old shows might be when revisited, this year's will remain the ultimate loser -- at least for the next twelve months, after which somebody else will take another whack at it. This year's edition could have earned one lasting distinction anyway -- the first time the Oscar telecast was even worse than the ridiculous and insipid Red-Carpet Show that preceded it.

by Anonymousreply 7902/25/2013

Seth did a perfectly wonderful job.

Don't know why the long knives are out for Seth MacFarland over this.

by Anonymousreply 102/25/2013

[quote]Barbra Streisand magically materialized onstage to sing "The Way We Were" as a tribute to the late Marvin Hamlisch, and there wasn't a dry eye in the world. At last, a true living legend -- a genuinely thrilling star.

This says all that you need to know about the writer. Some old old guy who worships Barbara.

by Anonymousreply 202/25/2013

McFarland is old and very out of touch.

by Anonymousreply 302/25/2013

Hunty, please.

The critics were all saying the same b.s. a couple of years ago with the Franco/Hathaway debacle and that their respective careers were ruined.

I suppose they missed the part last night were Miss Hathaway won an Oscar.

Some of the bits were quite lame, but aren't they always?

by Anonymousreply 402/25/2013

If you're so irritated by the Oscars having jokes and trying new things to make the show more interesting, why don't you just read the news the next day to see who won, since the results seem to be all you care about? Then at least we would all be spared this haughty, condescending review.

by Anonymousreply 502/25/2013

Seth can sing and dance and Barbara sucked. The aging queen that wrote this piece is an idiot.

by Anonymousreply 602/25/2013

It will be more about what the audience thought. Friends I was watching the show with thought Seth did alright overall. There's been worse.

The William Shatner bit was the worst part, but even the 'future' bits they showed that were going to make Seth 'the worst' weren't that bad. 'We Saw Your Boobs' was juvenile, but the 'fake' actress reactions was pretty funny.

by Anonymousreply 702/25/2013


by Anonymousreply 802/25/2013

The knives are out for Seth because everyone he has ever skewered on Family Guy or everyone that people like who he has skewered on Family Guy finally have a chance to get their revenge.

by Anonymousreply 902/25/2013

He was a TOTAL irritant. The writers should be swept out as well.

by Anonymousreply 1002/25/2013

[quote]Streisand was in great voice, commanding and brilliant, the best thing on the show by far.

Did this review cover last night's performance? Really?

by Anonymousreply 1102/25/2013

Shirley Bassey was in great voice. Streisand sounded like shit and looked like Mae West.

by Anonymousreply 1202/25/2013

Well, he didn't really celebrate the films. And honestly, as the show went on he was more of an announcer than a host. "Next up, this person!" There was no sense that he was really having any impact. He just kept appearing like some traffic cop - "there goes that, here comes this." It wasn't very inspired at all.

The producers were no help at all. Here's an idea: before you plan a Bond tribute - book a few Bonds to appear! The Bond montage was like every bland, workman-like shots from the films - it didn't even focus on the Bonds! It was like they just clipped together linking material instead of anything remotely like a highlight of the series. How about some memorable villains? It was just explosions. I would've thought a segue from Shirley to Adele would've been a no-brainer.

Streisand, though obviously limited vocally now, still delivered a powerful performance. No one should expect a 72 year-old woman to sound like she did when she was 19 - that she doesn't is part of the performance.

Shirley Bassey rocked too.

by Anonymousreply 1302/25/2013

He was fine. It's a tough crowd and you can't please everyone.

by Anonymousreply 1402/25/2013

Bond men were needed...a line of them up there.

...and where was Tom Jones?

by Anonymousreply 1502/25/2013

I'm just going to leave this photo of Mr. Shales right here.

by Anonymousreply 1602/25/2013

[quote]He's never going to recover from this. The critics are killing him...

If Seth MacFarlane had relied on the voice of critics, he'd have no career. It means nothing.

Streisand was great for a seventy year old and Bassey was great too. Shirley spoke most of that song and saved her vocal strength when needed. NO human has the same voice at seventy that they had at thirty.

by Anonymousreply 1702/25/2013

I thought he was great

by Anonymousreply 1802/25/2013

February 25, 2013 Long Night’s Trip Across Decades By ALESSANDRA STANLEY It was a night of surprises and contradictions.

Not the awards, so much. Plenty of people expected Jennifer Lawrence to win best actress. Many bet that “Argo” would beat “Lincoln” for best picture.

Fewer could have foreseen that old Hollywood and new would come together in one M.C.

Seth MacFarlane, the creator of “Family Guy,” crooned sappy standards (“The Way You Look Tonight”) and carried himself like Fred Astaire. But he also stayed true to form, taking crude shots at Jews in Hollywood, women and even the Lincoln assassination. (He made a joke that despite brilliant impersonations by Daniel Day-Lewis and Raymond Massey, the actor “who really got inside Lincoln’s head was John Wilkes Booth.”)

The hedged-bets, have-it-all-ways ceremony made Sunday night’s one of the longer and most self-conscious Oscars imaginable. Even the music played to expel overly loquacious winners was arch: the theme of “Jaws.” But it wasn’t the acceptance speeches that prolonged the night; there were too many stars doing fatuous presentations — even Melissa McCarthy wasn’t funny. And by the time Michelle Obama made a surprise cameo, via satellite, to announce the best picture, it was almost midnight and too late to revive a sagging evening.

Mr. MacFarlane, a writer, director and animator with one feature film, “Ted,” and few acting credits, has a cult following among young men, but for many viewers, he may have been the least recognizable Oscars host since Lawrence Grant, a British character actor, in 1931.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, ever worried about the defection of younger viewers, has veered between pandering to new Hollywood and honoring the old, going from the too-cool-for-school actor James Franco, who bombed as a co-host in 2011, to Billy Crystal, who hosted last year.

They chose Mr. MacFarlane as a split-the-difference host: he’s a comedian with a profane Generation Y sense of humor who also has a bond with the A.A.R.P. (He recorded an album of 1950s standards in 2011, “Music Is Better than Words.”) And he worked hard to serve both audiences.

He delivered his usual borderline-offensive irreverence (he said that for Rihanna and Chris Brown, a couple with a history of domestic abuse, the super-violent “Django Unchained” was a “date movie”) with a winning smile. He also went retro with ’30s-style song-and-dance numbers. To bridge the gap, the producers, Craig Zadan and Neil Meron, even worked in a cameo of William Shatner as Captain Kirk of “Star Trek” traveling through time to stop Mr. MacFarlane from ruining the Oscars.

Anne Hathaway won an Oscar, but she also deserved an award for most succinct, gracious acceptance speech, praising her fellow nominees by name, as well her co-star, Hugh Jackman, among others. Daniel Day-Lewis outdid her: Known for being deeply serious, he said that he had been up for the part of Margaret Thatcher, and that he had prevented Steven Spielberg from making “Lincoln” a musical.

Ms. Lawrence tripped on her way to the stage but didn’t make any faux pas in her acceptance speech. She was less guarded on the red carpet, complaining to one interviewer that she was hungry and moaning presciently that the show is too long. With another, she let fly a profanity that ABC barely bleeped in time.

It wasn’t the first time she’s flouted awards-show etiquette: At the Golden Globes, she began her acceptance speech by dissing Meryl Streep. (Mr. MacFarlane referred to the gaffe in a joke, saying that he heard Ms. Lawrence say that win or lose, “it’s just an honor that Meryl Streep wasn’t nominated.”) It could be a rebellious streak in her, but mostly it’s a reminder of how young and unworldly some stars are, despite all the coaching, minders and Dior gowns.

The Oscars almost always lose energy midway because the front end is loaded down with technical awards. The producers tried to liven up the night with a theme — movie musicals — but even that tribute grew overly long, larded with unnecessary performances that had nothi

by Anonymousreply 1902/25/2013

Gee now who would have expected a pan from someone who writes...

[quote]Skeptics were wisely taken aback when Seth MacFarlane, a squirrelly little ham whose forte is producing dirty cartoons for television, was chosen to host this year's event.

by Anonymousreply 2002/25/2013

Seth MacFarlane doesn't give a shit about what "critics"think. They are a bunch of useless gasbags.

by Anonymousreply 2102/25/2013

R17 but Bassey had that strength when needed. Streisand barley eked it out and looked like Elvira.

by Anonymousreply 2202/25/2013

I figured they had a hard time roping people into appearinng for the Bond thing when they chose Halle Berry. Was Denise Richards busy?

by Anonymousreply 2302/25/2013

Bassey was noticeably flat several times.

by Anonymousreply 2402/25/2013

[quote]And honestly, as the show went on he was more of an announcer than a host. "Next up, this person!" There was no sense that he was really having any impact. He just kept appearing like some traffic cop - "there goes that, here comes this." It wasn't very inspired at all.

But how is this different from what pasts hosts have done? They do their opening monologue/skit and then the rest of the show they emcee the event. What was Seth expected to do, turn the show into a 3 hour stand-up routine? Not even past hosts like Whoopi or Chris Rock or Ellen Degeneris could sustain the excitement of their opening monologues and keep us from the sheer boredom of acceptance speeches and bad song and dance routines.

by Anonymousreply 2502/25/2013

Link is to a poll in the LA Times on MacFarlane's performance. A strong plurality favor having him back!

by Anonymousreply 2602/25/2013

I bet it will be Tina Fey next year.

by Anonymousreply 2702/25/2013

R25, this was the first time I've seen an Oscar host announce who would be presenting after the commercial break. It was very high school talent show.

by Anonymousreply 2802/25/2013

I bet it will be Tina and Amy next year too but I thought MacFarlane did fine. For the most part I enjoyed the show. It did drag in some parts. It always does.

I love music, especially schmaltzy music, but I think they tried to cram too much of it in.

I still think Jaws was rude.

I don't know how much was MacFarlane's part and how much was the mysterious team of writers but the script always falls short and is lame.

The audio was atrocious.

Streisand was not atrocious but noticeably past her prime.

by Anonymousreply 2902/25/2013

This review is particularly nauseating. Some tired old queen all in a tizzy. What else is new. "We just want entertainment and schmaltz"...not really, gramps.

by Anonymousreply 3002/25/2013

He was just awful. It's fine to poke fun at the industry but the stupid show is to celebrate the movies not insult it all. He was also terribly racist.

by Anonymousreply 3102/25/2013

[quote]The producers were no help at all. Here's an idea: before you plan a Bond tribute - book a few Bonds to appear!

Nikki Finke -- who live-blogged the Oscars and tore them to shreds *far* worse than the old Barbra-loving queen who wrote the blog OP posted -- explained that one. Connery and Moore refused (Connery because he has decades-old beef with the Broccolis), and obviously you can't have a retrospective without the two men who made the most (and, in Connery's case, most of the best) Bond films. I gather that that's why they had Shirley Bassey sing instead ... which I won't complain about one fucking *bit*.

As for the show as a whole, it wasn't *that* bad IMO, but OTOH I really like Seth MacFarlane. The opening 20 minutes was definitely a clunker, however, and I'm still unclear why the fuck they did "All That Jazz." Did Michael Douglas grease a few palms now that CZJ is preparing to reenter the spotlight? (she has several upcoming films)

I watched with a group of about 30, and we bestowed a few special awards, such as Most Obviously Coked-Up Oscar Winner to Tarantino. The older gays at the party almost had a collective seizure when Barbra came on stage. The younger people were happy about Christoph Waltz's semi-surprise win for "Django" (and really, he did deserve it more than Tommy Lee).

Nikki Finke also predicted, accurately, that the Academy is sick of Spielberg and it would be a poor night for "Lincoln" in the winners category. It was, except for the single most obvious lock of the night of DDL winning Best Actor.

Finally, I definitely do *not* think this was worse than the Franco/Hathaway disaster two years ago, and definitely not on the level of the '91 Oscars.

by Anonymousreply 3202/25/2013

The idea of this show is not to embarrass the people being honored. Why do we seem to feel it's ok to act this way? I guess we are becoming a society that does not respect people.

by Anonymousreply 3302/25/2013

I thought he was refreshing as a song and dance man and made me remember the telecasts when I was a kid. Plus, he's damn hot in a tux!

by Anonymousreply 3402/25/2013

Tom Shales has always been a twat.

by Anonymousreply 3502/25/2013

Seth was the best host of the oscars in memory. He bombed the opening, but even that was better than many I recall.

The critics are the problem, they have no taste whatsoever.

I didn't note any racists comments in the entire show.

by Anonymousreply 3602/25/2013

You realize since the explosion in social media and online voting etc. how frequent the gap is between the insiders and regular people. Not entirely sure if that applies here but you look at the LA Times poll and the results for him were quite favourable.

by Anonymousreply 3702/25/2013

It was such a mistake giving the plebeians Internet access, r37.

by Anonymousreply 3802/25/2013

The problem with the Oscars is nobody knows what it's supposed to be.

If the host gets biting, delicate sensibilities reach for their smelling salts.

If the host is dull, everybody's mad because the host is dull.

I remember two broadcasts in particular: one where they enforced a strict dress code on the ladies and everybody looked spectacular, like old Hollywood glamor. The other where they did a tribute to Gone with the Wind and Olivia de Havilland narrated the segment in person.

If they want to celebrate film, they should celebrate film. If they want to do a ratings buster comedy fest, they should pull out the stops.

I don't know what the Oscars should be to be a success. Nobody seems to.

by Anonymousreply 3902/25/2013

The entire ceremony is broken. Before I say the next thing, I want to say that I'm 33 years old. If you look at clips from the old days, it appeared to be a nice, elegant, understated dinner. None of the spectacle and over the top bullshit. Some of the people at the Oscars aren't even movie stars. Make it elegant again.

by Anonymousreply 4002/25/2013

[quote]but Bassey had that strength when needed. Streisand barley eked it out and looked like Elvira

Granted she doesn't have the voice she had, she was also singing In Memorium for a close friend of forty years. I know lots of people don't think she's human, but she is.

by Anonymousreply 4102/25/2013

[quote]Seth MacFarlane doesn't give a shit about what "critics"think. They are a bunch of useless gasbags.

Honey, he cares about his bank account. He just fucked himself in the industry.

by Anonymousreply 4202/25/2013

[quote]The critics are the problem, they have no taste whatsoever.

The public at large hated it dear. It's a huge scandal now. Damage control is happening.

by Anonymousreply 4302/25/2013

Ignore R43 -- just trying to stoke up the discord.

Seth MacFarland did a FINE JOB as the 2013 Oscar's host.

by Anonymousreply 4402/25/2013

He's carrying the vote on NPR.... most loved him, second most thought he was somewhere in between terrific and terrible. This is not a disaster for anybody.

by Anonymousreply 4502/25/2013

So is all this criticism is at bottom over Jew jokes in Hollywood, California? Is that it?

by Anonymousreply 4602/25/2013

Is Seth's surname had been MacFarlandstein, do you think his pokes would have gone over better?

by Anonymousreply 4702/25/2013

Look, these people get touchy when someone gets irreverent at the GOLDEN GLOBES. MacFarlane was doing Globes schtick at the wrong show.

[quote]Don't know why the long knives are out for Seth MacFarland over this.

IMO, the only joke he made that explains this level of backlash was the Jew baiting. As soon as that happened I knew he was going to be persona non grata.

by Anonymousreply 4802/25/2013

[quote]Honey, he cares about his bank account. He just fucked himself in the industry.

Sweetie, you care much more than anyone else. The world is turning, Family Guy is still syndication world wide and in current production and "TED 2" will be in theaters summer of 2014. Now go take a nap.

by Anonymousreply 4902/25/2013

[quote]a stupid bit of retro sexism directed at actresses in the audience, "We Saw Your Boobs." MacFarlane sang that accompanied by, for some completely unfathomable reason, the Gay Men's Chorus of Los Angeles.

OK, if this queen doesn't get the joke there I dont know why the rest of his critique is valid. It was dumb, but not "completely unfathomable".

by Anonymousreply 5002/25/2013

[quote]Honey, he cares about his bank account. He just fucked himself in the industry.

Honey, he has more money than he can spend in 10 lifetimes. Do you have any idea what creating a tv show that plays in round-the-clock syndication pays?

The question is can he show his face at industry parties or is he going to have to lay low for a few years.

by Anonymousreply 5102/25/2013

[quote]And honestly, as the show went on he was more of an announcer than a host. "Next up, this person!" There was no sense that he was really having any impact.

But isn't this what every host does? I'd say this is still better than the Hathaway/ Defranco year, where he just seemed so uninterested in hosting.

by Anonymousreply 5202/25/2013

It was bushleague of Affleck to comment on the show, to the host, while it was still in progress. Is he really that humorless and thin skinned? The one person who might have a real beef with McFarland is Clooney. The joke about the little girl being sixteen years too young for him was tasteless. And then McFarland threw him a chocolate Oscar. Weird and awkward and Clooney looked like he wanted to return the favor but with a much larger statue placed in a very private body part. I commented in another thread that if Argo won for best picture it would be because Clooney has a lot of friends in Hollywood, not as a pity win for Affleck. I really think that now.

by Anonymousreply 5302/25/2013

Chicken Little much, r43? Christ, your hysterical.

by Anonymousreply 5402/25/2013

The ceremony would be a lot more pleasing to the public if they left out the technical awards. Fact is, no one cares to hear long speeches by people winning prizes for sound, editing, make-up, costumes, animated films or short films.

If they gave out those awards in a separate ceremony, everyone would be much happier.

I thought Seth MacFarlane was fantastic. I'd never heard of him before, so I was shocked by what a good singer & dancer he was. He was brilliant! But he should not have told that John Wilkes Booth joke.

by Anonymousreply 5502/25/2013

I though Macfarlane came across as a smug, fratboy douche. I like when the host just keeps the awards coming and keeps out of the way.

Tina & Amy in 2014. Or bring back Steve Martin.

by Anonymousreply 5602/25/2013

I've never seen an Oscars that was what you might call good. One of the pleasures of not having seen any of the nominated films is not being tempted to watch.

by Anonymousreply 5702/25/2013

Did Adele and Norah Jones get the same standing ovation that Les Mis, JHud, and Shirley got? I couldn't tell if the ingenue CZJ got one, but the only two performances that I thought really deserved it were JHud and Shirley.

by Anonymousreply 5802/25/2013

R53? If you're going to bitch at least get Seth's name right: it's MacFARLANE you fucking douchebag.

by Anonymousreply 5902/25/2013

Talented guy but I found the whole thing embarrassing.

by Anonymousreply 6002/25/2013

MUCH ado about nothing

by Anonymousreply 6102/25/2013

I want to say a heart felt fuck you to a lot of the assholes who have posted here. You are ageist turds of what -- forty? You're really morons and scum, with the taste of rancid rats.

I like MacFarlane, his usual product and his sense of humor. BUT the Oscars have become a mess and have been for at least a generation. He certainly had input into the content; he's a writer himself with a carefully designed public persona, at least one of the named writers at the end is an associate of his, and I believe a second is also someone who has written on various of his shows.

BUT there are producers, and Zaden and Merwon are two of the asscrack pimples of the world, they had ultimate control and would have designed and negotiated all the big numbers. They deserve blame for the idiotic 'tributes' all of which misfired; and one preposterous and embarrassing one, the Musicals homage, was blatant self promotion. And they are both over sixty, so theirs was not a 'young' sensibility at all. They are winners of the "Rancid show queens from 1970" lifetime awards. The coarseness and campy stupidity so jarring in this context was theirs not MacFarlane's.

But bad as their work was -- and they would have chosen to have the orchestra in a studio, which contributed to the balance problems where many of the singers were drowned out -- the Oscars show is a bloated, outdated mess. It should be no more than a two hour homage to the best commercial movies of a given year in general, and the nominees in particular. It needs a certain formality and dignity, even at the risk of being boring to the idiots posting here (and despite the strenuous efforts to avoid boredom this year it was dull as shit).

Snark, satire and send ups have no place in this context; it's not a booze fueled joke like the Golden Globes. The only tribute should be a better, more compendious memorial section (look up "compendious", stupid DL cock suckers) and perhaps some longer and better chosen clips from the best picture nominees.

Give the awards and get it over with. The host should be less a personality than a facilitator and someone with dignity and charm would be a good idea (Jean Dujardin if his English is good enough would be one choice, Sreep if she isn't nominated might be another). Some wit wouldn't come amiss but stop trying to force the farce.

Money is might in LA. Macfarlane will be fine. But he should do what he does best on his own terms.

by Anonymousreply 6202/25/2013

The show as a whole is the first one I've enjoyed in years. And Seth's smile, wit and energy was just what it needed.

Haters. I hope he's back next year.

by Anonymousreply 6302/25/2013

I made a mistake and got his name wrong. I don't watch The Family Guy. No matter how much you wish it were so, he's not going to be your boyfriend, r59. I take it you know him PERSONALLY since you are on a first name basis with SETH. As for your need to shame someone who simply made a mistake, and made a comment based on what I saw and heard, I have to say that you add nothing to the conversation. Take your childish need to lash out at strangers and put it where Clooney probably wanted SETH to put that chocolate Oscar.

by Anonymousreply 6402/25/2013

The Family Guy.


What's that sonny? Speak up!

by Anonymousreply 6502/25/2013

[quote]The problem with the Oscars is nobody knows what it's supposed to be.

I think that is an excellent point, r39. It really isn't clear what the Oscars are SUPPOSED to be, which in turn makes it hard and/or unfair to judge how it went.

It is supposed to be mainly about the awards? "Celebrating" the movies? Musical acts? A variety show? Comedy sketches? A tribute to Hollywood legends? Recognizing the behind-the-scenes people who (unfortunately) no one cares about? Is it meant to be edgy or safe?

To varying degrees it tries to be all of these things simultaneously, and is therefore always going to disappoint a lot of people.

Personally I thought Seth MacF was fine, and he did very well with the singing and dancing as well as the comedy.

But I think it would help the Oscars tremendously from a reception standpoint if they clarified what they want / intend to be.

by Anonymousreply 6602/25/2013

His FANS aren't doing him any favors.

by Anonymousreply 6702/25/2013

"Fact is, no one cares to hear long speeches by people winning prizes for sound, editing..."

Film fans do. Which is who should be watching. Joe Superbowl has no business tuning-in. And it's a little depressing how the airheads turn it into a fashion show ("Who are you wearing?").

by Anonymousreply 6802/25/2013

[quote]Joe Superbowl has no business tuning-in.

Because no one likes football AND movies.

by Anonymousreply 6902/25/2013

I wish Johnny Carson would host next year.

by Anonymousreply 7002/25/2013

[quote]the Oscars show is a bloated, outdated mess.

As was your seven paragraph posting.

by Anonymousreply 7102/25/2013

No one is hearing long speeches from people behind sound editing, sound mixing, VFX. They are hearing 20-30 second speeches. Can we not abide that much honor for the artists responsible, I don't know, for what we see and hear on screen?

by Anonymousreply 7202/25/2013

People behind the scenes usually give the worst but most sincere speeches. Look at documentary film and tech awards - regular guys who often ramble and thank their local starbucks barista.

by Anonymousreply 7302/25/2013

MacFarlane's biggest crime? He just wasn't funny.

The first seventeen minutes was simply horrible. Shatner's overly-deliberate delivery certainly didn't help - but what would you expect? THAT'S Shatner.

I'll admit I did giggle a couple of times during the silly sockpuppet sketch but that one "bit" wasn't enough to rescue the opening. Was it "meta"? Nah, metamucil.

As others have said, for all his supposed edginess a lot of his jokes were tired or just lame. The Uma/Oprah/Letterman comparison is an apt one because, like Letterman, a lot of the host's material seemed to be about himself.

by Anonymousreply 7402/25/2013

You don't start the show with a seventeen minute production number. Before any awards are handed out! The momentum was completely blown, and people were bored to tears right at the beginning.

Get rid of the ridiculous red carpet fiasco. Let E handle that shit. Do a brief two minute highlight of the stars walking the carpet, like they did for decades. Enough with the "pre game" shit. You're not the superbowl.

Stop with the numerous fucking tributes and montages. Move the humanitarian and special awards back in. It's idiotic that they took the special honors out because of time contraints, but then they go and overload the show with a bunch of unnecessary frills.

And move it back to Monday nights in March. It's overkill having every awards show back to back. And again, it's not football. Put it back on Monday nights.

Look at how the globes, Tonys and Emmys do things. Fast and funny.

by Anonymousreply 7502/25/2013

I am surprised that Seth is coming under such attack on DL where a person's worth is solely determined by their alignment with gay rights/marriage. He's a great ally bitches. If you like some of the aging phony twats in the music biz, you should love Seth.

by Anonymousreply 7602/25/2013

The Oscars should be extremely stripped back. Everyone should sit on the floor in their gowns and tuxes and play "Pass the parcel" with statuettes.

Either that or it should be like Gladiators. The winner is announced, but they have to complete an obstacle course to get the actual award.

by Anonymousreply 7702/25/2013

Seth McFarlane sucked. Why was he even chosen? I think Seth himself knows he was bad. It's not all his fault though. His writers/the Oscar writers should take some of the blame.

by Anonymousreply 7802/25/2013

One thing I don't get about the oscars is how they try to revamp it all the time, yet they still have Bruce Vilanch as the main writer, since 1989. You would think they would have tried someone else to see if he's part of the problem. The man writes acts for Diana Ross and Florence Henderson for crying out loud.

by Anonymousreply 7902/25/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!