Skip to main content

The 81st Oscars and Hugh Jackman

Billy Crystal is often seen as the bench mark for what makes for a good Oscars host. He's done the show so many times but was smart enough to get out whilst he could still out do himself.

81st Annual Academy Awards - Show
The LA Times has been particularly harsh of Hugh Jackman's first attempt at hosting the Oscars with several of their critics including, Patrick Goldstein (twice) and Mary McNamara suggesting Hugh wasn't up to par.

I watched the full show of the 81st Oscars and I've watched full shows of when Billy Crystal was hosting and to be honest, Billy never did anything that was far and away above Hugh - not even in the delivery of his jokes. I'm not suggesting I didn't like Billy. In fact quite the opposite, I'd certainly watch the Oscars if I heard Billy was hosting again. However Hugh was no less professional and carried out his role with stage presence and confidence.

If anything Hugh had to work harder than Billy because he didn't have the benefit of a pre-made video montage lampooning the various nominated films to lean on. Hugh isn't a comedian but he can send himself and others up in a light hearted, poking fun, kind of way that obviously is not intended to offend but raise a smile.

Hugh never takes himself too seriously and neither should his critics. Singing "I'd swim through a sea of human excrement" whilst holding Kate Winslet's hand and looking into her eyes is funny because it is Hugh singing it. He comes across as 'classy' but deep down he not above the average joe who laughs at toilet humor. Kate certainly got the joke.

I didn't find the 81st Oscars show a drag at all. If there are criticism to be made it should be directed at the... well... director. Some of the camera shots left a lot to be desired and have already been mentioned in the LA Times columns.

I did like Hugh's first opening number which was meant to be 'low rent' (so that's hardly a criticism by the LA Times) however his second number could've used much more polish and really came across as more of an excuse to showcase Hugh than pay serious tribute to movie musicals.

As his big musical piece got bigger Hugh was narrating each part as it was added. Unfortunately when Hugh said 'Stairs please' it didn't really work how it was supposed to because we could already see the stairs before they were fully lit. (I'm guessing the idea was that the stairs would be revealed when Hugh said that line).

The montage of songs in the big musical number seemed exceptionally difficult to sing because many of the song changes seemed quite jarring to my non-musical ears. Despite that Hugh managed to carry it well, along with his co-singers and dancers, if not entirely successfully.

I do agree with some of the comments made by people in response to the LA Times articles in that it would've been nice to see a little more of Hugh. During Will Smith's extended stay on stage he mentioned that Hugh was probably 'sleeping'. I must admit I was starting to wonder why Will was powering through so many awards without a break? At the same time I was thinking Will Smith would probably do a great job hosting this show too.

One thing that bugs me about many critics of the Oscars (not just the paid critics either) is that they often call for the less glamorous awards (like best sound mixing) to be dropped from the program. I hope they never are.

The Oscars are primarily an Awards show as well as a celebration of the previous year of movie making (not a fashion show as some people seem to think). Everyone involved in the process of creating a movie should get their moment to enjoy their success on the same platform as everyone else who works on a film.

So what if the acceptance speeches can be boring. More than likely it's the only part of the show that isn't scripted. It's the one place you're likely to get that spark of genuine enthusiasm and spontaneity that the rest of the awards often lacks. (No matter how much they try, the banter between presenters always looks scripted even when it isn't).

Hugh's role in the awards did achieve the hoped out come of increasing the ratings - if only by six percent from last year. Whilst the LA Times critics might be surprised by that I think the real test will come if Hugh gets to host next years Oscars as well.

After boosting the ratings of the Tony Awards two years running (probably the biggest reason why Hugh got the Oscars gig in the first place), if he can boost the ratings of the Oscars yet again next year then the LA Times critics will have to concede they are actually out of touch with what people like.

Comments

  1. I was surprised to read that you watched the Oscars, as I wouldn't have thought it was your thing. I suppose whoever is hosting it is the draw.

    I usually watch, and have done over the years, but didn't watch this time. I heard some of the awards on the 6pr radio, who kept crossing to them, but I wouldn't have wanted to hear if I'd been going to watch them.

    I just thought seeing maybe list somewhere or on the news would be enough this time. The different bits I did see on the news programs was enough to satisfy me this time, but maybe would have liked to have seen more of Hugh Jackman.

    They gave him good reviews on the TV segment on 6pr radio, saying that they thought he was a 'show man' no doubt.

    They did mention a negative remark that was made by someone, but I can't remember now by whom and what it was! I think it was said that they thought he wasn't up to it, or something of that nature, but I didn't agree with that.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated by an actual human (me, TET) and may not publish right away. I do read all comments and only reject those not directly related to the post or are spam/scams (I'm looking at you Illuminati recruiters... I mean scammers. Stop commenting on my Illuminati post!).

Buy Gifts and Apparel featuring art by TET.

Popular posts from this blog

Movie Review: Superman (2025) *No Spoilers*

T he one thing I like about James Gunn as a comic book movie director is that he leans into the comic book nature of the world and the characters.  He's not trying to do a realistic take on any of the characters. He's simply bringing the comics to life. It's still his take on the characters, but he doesn't shy away from their comic book origins. James Gunn's  Superman  is very much a comic book movie in every sense. Nothing is off the table because it's too 'comic-booky' and might look silly in a live action film.  To me that's incredibly liberating. It lets James actually tell a proper Superman story that isn't hamstrung by reality, or tip toeing into the fantastical just enough to allow Superman to exist in the real world. Superman begins in the middle of a battle. Metropolis is under attack by a super powered being known as 'Hammer of Boravia', however everything is not as it seems, and Superman (David Corenswet) must work with other s...

James Gunn's Social Media Monkeys Joke Was a Highlight of His Superman Movie For Me

B efore James Gunn's Superman Movie was released there was a whole rumor going around that the movie would feature monkeys on computers trolling Superman's social media, sparking much outrage. #supersh*t. I didn't know this was even a thing until just prior to writing this article. I did a search to see if anyone had posted a clip of the monkeys scene from the movie and got pages of discourse featuring videos and articles prior to the film. Most of it from Gunn detractors (let's say) seeing it as some kind of childish swipe at them... well not them specifically but, you know, those other people who have every right to hate on anything sight unseen. Anyway, I'm not going to give even one such example a link or air because it's kind of sad watching someone devote so much commentary to a throw away gag that is absolutely a nod to James Gunn's Superman trolls.  The whole reason this post exists, is to say I loved the joke, because fourteen years ago, and I...

I'm Confused About Why People Prefer to Say Discombobulated?

D iscombobulated. Is a word that I think someone rediscovered about three or four years ago (maybe more because the pandemic years have thrown out my sense of time) and now I hear it a lot. It's not a new word by any means, but when I started hearing multiple celebrities using it in everyday sentences, I actively had to look up what it meant. Define it with as many synonyms as you like but essentially it's just another word meaning 'confused'. Seinfeld Quotes: Quotes.net The words are pretty much interchangeable. He was discombobulated by too many choices. He was confused by too many choices.  My confusion is the length of the word. It's unnecessarily long with too many syllables. There are many other words that mean confused, and therefore also mean discombobulated. Most of them are shorter and easier to say. So why not just say 'confused'? Perhaps discombobulated sounds more intelligent, maybe?  Hawaii Five-0 Quotes: Quotes.net I've noticed it gets us...

Movie Review: A Complete Unknown (2024) *No Spoilers*

Y ou would think the Bob Dylan story would be 'wind-swept and interesting,' to quote Billy Connelly, however, despite  A Complete Unknown  being quite an engaging film, it feels like it missed the years that really shaped him as a song writer/performer. The film starts in 1961, with a then unknown, 19-year-old Bob Dylan (Timothée Chalamet) arriving in New York City with his guitar.  From there he forges relationships with musical icons on his meteoric rise, culminating in a groundbreaking performance that reverberates around the world. The problem being, according to this film, Dylan arrived in New York, for the most part, fully formed as a folk singer/song writer. In virtually no time he makes a very important connection that puts him on the trajectory of doing the work and becoming a name, before making his world changing performance. While there is some drama behind the scenes with his various relationships, none of it is particularly unique to any number of up and com...

I'm Joining the Illuminati Brotherhood By Personal Invitation of Hiltom Rothschild... Wait, What?

How special am I to have finally come of age (53 years young) and am now eligible to participate in building the world alongside other members of the Illuminati Brotherhood... Yes I've received the call by way of an email, which I'm sure is real because I had to translate it from the Dutch language and it was personally written by Hiltom Rothschild, one of the non-existent members of the Rothschild family (or perhaps deep undercover because Google has never heard of them?). A Transcript of the email below: To: etourist From: Illuminati Brotherhood  Subject: Illuminati Broederschap (Illuminati Brotherhood) I am Hiltom Rothschild, a member of the Rothschild family, one of the 13 families of the Illuminati brotherhood. I'm here to let you know that you've come of age and are eligible to participate in building the 🌎 world. It is a calling and a privilege to honor him with pride and gratitude as not everyone will ever be chosen by the LIGHT, many are called but few are ch...

Australian Federal Election 2025 - World's Most Boring Government Re-elected by Landside - We're Even More Fine!

Anthony Albanese Victory by ChatGPT and TET. W hen I started writing about the 2025 Federal election the polls were suggesting the world's most boring government was crusing to a defeat . As it turns out, boring is good, and Australia wants more of it, handing the current government a landslide win with a majority vote. Anthony Albanese became the first PM since John Howard to win a consecutive term, and the first Labor PM since Bob Hawke to do so. Some of that comes down to the leadership revolving door both major parties had through the mid 2000s. Although Anthony is my preferred PM over Dutton the irony is Dutton sounds more like a leader with a fairly commanding voice and an ability to speak well, without sounding like he's waffling and dodging questions, even if he is. Anthony, on the other hand, does have the ability (and speech writer) to say a lot of inspiring things but it gets lost in the delivery. He doesn't seem to know when to emphasise a point for effect. In h...

Unitree's R1 Humanoid Robot Brings the Cost of Advanced Robotics Hardware Down to Less Than USD$6000 (Robot Uprising Update)

Unitree's R1 Humanoid Robot. The first humaniod robot prices under USD$6000. C hinese robotics developer, Unitree, has launched the  Unitree R1 Robot , an advanced humanoid machine, for under USD$6000. Standing at 5'5", this very agile robot walks with a very natural 'human' gait, and can easily perform cartwheels or get up from a fall. It is controlled by AI and is capable of conversation but also comes with a remote control (so you can turn it off if it starts asking about someone named 'Sarah Connor'). Rather than me describe it, watch AI Revolution's video (below) to see it in action and hear their take on why this robot is a big deal. China’s New AI Robot Is So Good and Cheap It’s Scary: Unitree R1  -  AI Revolution You'll notice that the robot doesn't have proper, human like hands, but apparently this is an option you can purchase as an extra (dexterous hands are listed as 'optional' on educational versions of the robot on Unitree...