New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

So, should the Oscars be aired earlier in the season? We started in mid-January, with the Golden Globes being aired and gaining much controversy, thanks to Ricky Gervais’ caustic performance as host. It’s unlikely — based not only on the personalities of James Franco and Anne Hathaway, but by some of their comments — that the Oscar hosts will do the same. What’s more, one theme of the season that’s pervaded pretty much all of popular culture (a bit hyperbolic, sure, but I’d be willing to agree that it’s true) will work against high ratings: there are no surprises. The King’s Speech, Aaron Sorkin, Natalie Portman, Colin Firth, Christian Bale, and so on: these are among your winners. If I can tell you that now with about, say 99% confidence, why watch? Though viewers may not be that reticent, some people may watch just as a force of habit, nothing else.

There is, surprisingly, precedent for moving the Oscar telecast up in the calendar year, but you have to go back to the beginning. In 1930, there were two Oscar telecasts: one for 1928-1929 and one for 1929-1930. Certainly, there can’t be an Oscar telecast that early in the year unless the Academy changed the eligibility timeline, something I can’t imagine they’d be okay with, even considering their recent odd choices. Once the eligibility timeline changed, most of the Oscar telecasts aired in March — some were even in April, most recently the telecast in 1988 for the year in film in 1987. The Academy should strongly consider it, if only because they probably want to remain relevant. The Academy assumes it’s always going to be relevant, because it’s the Academy. But it’s one thing if, for example, the Super Bowl is in early February. Everyone’s going to watch. The Oscars don’t have the luxury of assuming the same.

I’d suggest that the Academy set a new standard, and air the Oscars the weekend after the Super Bowl. There’s no way, of course, that the two events would be shared on the same week or night (which is more likely). With the proliferation of cable channels and niche audiences, there’s no reason for the Oscars to think they can gain the same massive Super Bowl viewership (for those who didn’t see, this past game was the most popular TV program…ever). What the Oscars can do is make the awards season more bearable, and perhaps even tighter. The Golden Globes could still air near MLK Day, but why should the Oscars wait so long? They’ve gotten better in the past couple of years, but there’s a point where waiting for the awards to drop — surprises or not — is just dull.

The Oscars should never be dull. Obviously, the Academy can’t help it if one film or another dominates the awards circuit, whether it be critics lining up behind one movie or guilds lining up behind another. Waiting for the inevitable is always dull, though. Sure, the Oscars could be filled with twists, turns, and shocks. The likelihood is low, and even if they do come, most people may not watch because they assume they’ll be bored with the expected victors. You may disagree with the Academy’s decision to expand the Best Picture category from five to ten nominees, but it is a shake-up. What the Academy needs to do now is look at the 2010 awards season, learn from its mistakes, and move its schedule further. Valentine’s Day weekend, or even Presidents’ Day weekend, would be a perfect time to say hello to a new Oscar telecast.

Continued:       1       2