More secrets leaked about Oscars telecast
Those rascals Bill Condon and Larry Mark are at it again. Those producers of the Oscars' TV show — master showmen both — continue to leak tidbits about the Feb. 22 ceremony, this time to the New York Times' Michael Cieply. All this leakage is sending Hollywood into twitters.
Today I got a frenzied phone call from a top Oscars consultant, gasping, "Did you hear that there may not be a red carpet arrivals area at the Kodak this year?!"
No, not so. Calm down! There's scuttlebutt, yes, that Oscars chiefs -- who are intent upon hushing up the names of stars who'll present awards -- may hide some superstars from media gaze by sneaking them in a back door. But they'll still roll out the red carpet.
Also leaked is news that producers have asked studios to provide footage of major releases due out next year so that host Hugh Jackman can "sign off the broadcast with fresh 10-second snippets of two dozen new movies, to run on a split screen with the end credits," reports the Times. "That and other changes are aimed at raising low ratings for what the academy, which depends on the Oscars for almost all of its roughly $70 million in annual revenue, has been calling 'The Biggest Movie Event of the Year.' "
Best news I've heard so far: Producers have expanded the input of Bruce Vilanch from mere gag-writer to serious creative contributor. Hurrah! That's long overdue! The Times notes that Vilanch "let slip that there might be a shift in what he called 'the grouping' of awards, though he declined to say what that might mean. Others said the show itself would have a narrative line, with the awards arranged to tell a story that will involve presenters as well as nominees."
That's all well and good. I really love the fact that Condon and Mark are so bold while daring to re-invent the show. I'm just very leery of them ditching some sacred traditions like having last year's winners of acting awards bestow them to this year's recipients of the opposite gender. To nix that is like booting daddy out of his job to walk his daughter down the aisle at her wedding, don't you think?
Photo: L.A. Times
RELATED POSTS
Oscars Show Breaks with Decades-Long Tradition
Quiz: Can You Spot Meryl Streep's Oscar Nomination?
Does Meryl Streep Really Deserve Another Oscar Nomination?
Read Gene Seymour's Oscars Predictions
Get Gold Derby on Twitter. Get Gold Derby RSS feed via Facebook. RSS Feedburner. RSS Atom. Join the Gold Derby Facebook group.
They need to leave this alone. It is a great tradition that needs to be kept. The one thing I would like to see is a WOMAN give out the Best Picture award. When was the last time that happened??? I say let Meryl Streep do it. She's the most nominated actor and hardly is seen on stage!
Posted by: Anthony | February 03, 2009 at 10:54 PM
Get DiCaprio to present Best Acterss - give him a chance to show he's a good sport (shoulda been nommed) and set up a Leo hands the Oscar to Kate moment. Unless Meryl steals the moment and proclaims Leo as her best friend in the whole wide world. WHY am I not producing this show?!?
Posted by: TorontoTom | February 03, 2009 at 06:22 AM
I think it's because Mariam Coutillard presenting Best Actor isn't BIG enough, know what I mean? Daniel Day Lewis probably isn't attending. I suggest pulling some strings and getting Jen Aniston to present Best Actor with Brad and Angelina squirming while she opens the envelope.
Posted by: TorontoTom | February 03, 2009 at 06:20 AM
I prefer last year's winners to present to this year's winners but Oscar hasn't always done that.
In 1976 Lee Grant did not present the first award to Jason Robards though she was a nominee. The same year Jack Nicholson presented Best Picture, not Actress which was given to Louise Fletcher, the previous year's winner in THAT category. The following year Beatrice Straight present though she took part in the opening number! For 1988 Cher presented Best Picture, not Actor.
So the tradition varys. It is not etched in stone.
I can understand not having the previous winner present if they're not attending but if they are there, why not?
Posted by: Barrie Milton | February 02, 2009 at 03:28 PM