Thursday, March 11, 2010

An Eye on the Oscar's

The Academy Awards Ceremony that we all know today as the Oscar’s is the eldest awards ritual in media, as it dates back to its first ceremony in 1929. Eighty-one years later, the Oscar’s are still going strong, although today it is a little less modest. Sunday night’s broadcast of the 82nd Annual Oscar Awards Ceremony, held at Hollywood’s Kodak Theater, offered an array of admirable awards, yet embodied a strange presentation.

With interviewers Kathy Ireland, Jess, Cagle, and Sherri Shepherd, the red carpet began the night with superficial confrontations and awkward conversations, catering very much to the viewing audience. The interviewers succeeded in barely offering anything intelligent to say. For example, when Sherri Shepherd pulled Jeff Bridges aside and addressed his wife exclaiming, “Your husband looks so… yummy!” In addition, many of the actors and actresses seemed distracted and obligated to do a few minutes of “face time”. Thus, last night, the red carpet seemed a forced introduction to the awards.

Live music, bright lights, and a huge stage set the glamorous mood. Neil Patrick Harris unveiled the Oscar’s with feathered dancers, glitter, and tuxedos in his showgirl-styled song and dance performance. Co-stars Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin from “It’s Complicated” were the humorous hosts of the night. The at-home audience was further addressed in the graceless spotlights on celebrity stars. Baldwin excitedly shouted “Hey there’s Woody Harrison!” and Martin announced “Oh look, its James Cameron!” Name-dropping was then followed by a snapshot of the actor. There’s a reason audience members looked un-amused and bored. However, Baldwin and Martin worked off each other in a fairly comical manor otherwise, but also made some slicing jokes that were borderline insulting to the stars.

The first award of the night, Best Supporting Actor, went to the very deserving Christof Waltz who played a malicious Jew hunter in “Inglorious Bastards”(2009). Following Waltz, first-time nominee, Mo’nique, from “Precious” (2009) gave a heavy speech after her award for Best Supporting Actress.

“The Hurt Locker” (2008), to many peoples’ surprise, stole the show with its dominating winnings. It won Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, Best Sound Editing, and Best Sound Mixing. Conversely, it was no surprise that “Avatar” (2009) won Outstanding Cinematography and Outstanding Visual Effects, as well as Outstanding Art Direction.

“Crazy Heart” (2010) won its well-deserved recognition receiving Best Original Song by Ryan Bingham and T-Bone Burnett, while Jeff Bridges took home the award for Best Actor. Sandra Bullock also won some acknowledgment for “The Blind Side” (2009) in her award for Best Actress.

Given the results, it is evident that deeper-rooted films with a real life inspiration were most successful in 2009. From the heart-wrenching true stories seen in “Precious” and “The Blind Side” to the violent and dark frontlines of Iraq in “The Hurt Locker,” prove emotional yet moving, and audiences have come to respect such relatable films.

A wide variety of presenters including the Penelope Cruz, Kate Winslet, Steve Carrel, Robert Downey Jr., Cameron Diaz, Ben Stiller, Sarah Jessica Parker, and Rachel McAdams offered fresh voices and familiar faces to the monotonously long ceremony.

As the Oscar’s are annually hyped up, entertainment purposes exceedingly overshadowed the award giving. From the red carpet to reminiscence, the tacky and exaggerated entertainment was amusing for unintentional reasons.

3 comments:

  1. Your approach to this piece is very interesting. I admire that you really tried to cover every aspect of the event from start to finish, though I feel that it came up a bit short on the criticism. Perhaps moving paragraphs around would be sufficient to fix this, but I felt that at the end of the article I was left not knowing how you feel about the overall event or what the event means for the coming year of new films. I really like your third-to-last paragraph, and I think I would have liked to have seen more of that in your piece. Although I am still impressed that you covered the entirety of the evening. That's daunting in such a tight word limit. Way to go.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with Jon in that your piece is very informative and comprehensive, but perhaps not as analytical. I think simply honing your lede to grab the readers attention and provide a roadmap (maybe insert your last paragraph up here) would make a big difference. That said, I appreciate that you unveil the pomp of the Oscars without discrediting the award nominees and winners. I also enjoyed your attention to and analysis of the dual audiences, especially in the second and third paragraphs. Nice review!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with Jon and Alex in that there may have been too much summarization and not enough analysis or critique. Starting with pure information doesn't quite grip readers as a lede should, but the insight and background information here is revealing and true of the awards.

    ReplyDelete