Tag Archives: oscars

Feb 13

Oprah … Uma …. Yma?

Posted on by

In 1995, just a couple of years after he moved his late-night talk show to CBS, David Letterman hosted the 67th Annual Academy Awards. Letterman’s performance that night was widely – though not universally – criticized, and Letterman himself has made hay out of it ever since with self-deprecating jokes based on the premise that he was the worst host ever.

I actually enjoyed it, although admittedly I tend to be a Letterman apologist, and was even more of one in 1995. I do admit that Letterman brought in a couple of his signature bits (Stupid Pet Tricks? Really?) that, while funny, had no connection to the event and didn’t really belong there.

One of the jokes Dave made that night was based on the fact that both Oprah Winfrey and Uma Thurman were in the audience. Letterman acknowledged them by pretending to introduce them to each other. “Oprah … Uma. Uma … Oprah.” It was gentle fun based on two unusual names, but it became sort of the lightning rod for criticism of Dave’s performance. It also probably contributed to the perception, justified or not, that Oprah had a grudge against Dave.

Here’s where I’m going with this. I am currently reading (through the program which lends library books to Kindles) the book Fierce Pajamas: An Anthology of Humor Writing from The New Yorker. I was stunned to get to a 1962 piece entitled “Yma Dream” by Thomas Meehan, in which the author has a dream of hosting a party attended by singer Yma Sumac, actresses Ava Gardner, Ona Munson and Ida Lupino, diplomat Abba Eban, Oona O’Neill Chaplin, Italian playwright Ugo Betti, the Aga Khan, and so on, the humor of which stems from the introductions: “Aga – Yma, Ava, Oona, Ona, Ida, Abba, Ugo.”

I have no idea if Letterman or his writers ever read this; Dave would have been 15 in 1962, when the piece was published in the New Yorker. “Fierce Pajamas” didn’t come out until 2002, but it’s possible that the piece was included in some other anthology in the interim.  If nothing else, it’s a funny coincidence, and proof that the joke was funny after all.

Jan 19

The members of the Academy

Posted on by

All of the furor over Ricky Gervais’ performance hosting the Golden Globe Awards last weekend has helped to reveal the strange split personality of awards shows.

I did not see the Globes; I’d gotten a little tired of Gervais lately, and thought his recent profession of atheism was more insufferably smug than enlightening. However, I’ve read many of his jokes from the awards ceremony, and have to admit they were pretty funny.

The trouble is that an awards show is two different things. To the people who are eligible for awards, and their friends, family and co-workers, an awards show is a time for pride and recognition. I know what that’s like; if I’m up for a Tennessee Press Association award, or a Tennessee Associated Press Managing Editors award, it’s an occasion for pride and good feelings.

But somehow, entertainment industry awards are of interest to people outside the circle of past, present and potential recipients. The major awards – the Oscars, Emmys, Grammys and Tonys – were put on television because we, as a society, are fascinated by celebrities and glamour and what have you, even though we don’t have any real stake in the competition.

In the old days, the glamour, and the occasional Bob Hope witticism, used to be enough to sustain our interest. But now, with a new awards show popping up each week, and with some aspects of the traditional awards show telecast seeming tired and shopworn, producers have to try to stack the deck to keep the home viewers interested. Even awards shows have started making self-conscious fun of the scripted patter between award presenters.

Speaking in my role as a home viewer, I like it when there’s a clever host saying funny things, and poking holes in some egotistical entertainment industry windbag. During David Letterman’s funny but much-reviled turn hosting the Oscars, he introduced the politically-active couple of Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon as presenters with a plaintive “Let’s see what they’re pissed off about this week,” and I roared with laughter as Robbins and Sarandon glared. I like it when producers try to keep acceptance speeches short, and I am annoyed when someone insists on thanking every single person in the Greater Los Angeles telephone directory, individually, in alphabetical order, despite the orchestra’s best attempts to play him or her off the stage.

But if I were up for an Oscar, or even a Golden Globe, I’m sure I would feel differently.

That’s the problem; the things that make a good awards show telecast, from the perspective of the home viewer, are often at odds with the things that make a good awards ceremony, from the perspective of the people involved in honoring and being honored.

I’m not sure there’s a good way to reconcile the two, and I’m not sure what that says about the future of awards shows on TV.

Mar 05

Plowing yourself in the foot

Posted on by

Corn producers are complaining about a documentary called “Food Inc.” which is up for an Oscar this weekend.

Here’s the conclusion of an AP story about the controversy:

Dan Glickman, former secretary of agriculture under President Bill Clinton and current chairman of the Motion Picture Association of America, says the film is a welcome addition to the debate over so-called production agriculture, but called it “a piece of advocacy work” that is not always objective.

“I think production agriculture, the corn growers, have a good story to tell, and a lot of times I don’t think they have engaged in the debate,” he said. “The more they protest, the more people will want to go see the movie.”

I haven’t seen this documentary — although I now want to — and can’t express any opinion on it. But that last sentence from the quote is absolutely, positively true. Boycotts and protests related to TV shows, movies, record albums and what have you are usually counterproductive, and often they are spectacularly so. All you do is call attention to the project and make yourself look like a nay-sayer.

Christians, of course, fall into this trap more often than most. I would argue that some of the projects protested by Christian groups weren’t as bad as they were made out to be, or else had artistic merit which the protestors refused to acknowledge alongside the flaws. Sometimes, Christians will protest something sight-unseen. I remember a TV miniseries about Jesus in the 1970s which drew heavy church protests based on some of the rumors and news reports in advance of its airing, and maybe some off-hand remark made by one of the filmmakers which was taken as impious. Once it came out — once people had the chance to see what they were protesting — it turned out to be reverent, and appropriate, and the people who protested it wound up looking like idiots.

But even if you had a project which every single Christian, everywhere, agreed was offensive, a protest might not be the best way to address it. As I said, protests tend to be counterproductive, to promote rather than impede the target. The gospel of Christ is history’s biggest “yes.” Why do we keep trying to associate it with “no”?

Wouldn’t it be better to channel some of the energy and enthusiasm that goes into protests into positive projects instead? Give to a Christian college with a strong film school or a strong music department. Or set up a scholarship for young Christians who want to study the arts, whether at secular or church-based schools. Be proactive, not reactive. Set up the next generation of filmmakers and musicians to use their media for constructive messages. But remember that constructive doesn’t have to mean heavy-handed or evangelistic.

Above all, support the projects that are worthy of support and attention.

Feb 24

I would like to thank the members of the academy

Posted on by



I would like to thank the members of the academy

Originally uploaded by jicarney.

I’m sorry to spoil the surprise, and I think you should still watch tonight’s telecast even though you know I’m going to win.

(Astute readers will remember this photo from last February’s California trip. I was there the week before the Oscars, and when my brother and I were doing the Hollywood Boulevard thing there was an Oscar-themed exhibit at the Hollywood and Highland mall, which adjoins the Kodak Theatre. This is an official replica, genuine in size and weight, with which visitors could pose. If you look very carefully, you can see it is tethered by a cord to the display base in the lower left corner.)

Feb 17

Un-nominated

Posted on by

Turner Classic Movies is running only Oscar-winning and Oscar-nominated movies this month, as part of its annual “31 Days of Oscar” promotion. But don’t look for “King Kong,” or “His Girl Friday,” or “Duck Soup,” or “My Darling Clementine.” TCM’s “Movie Morlocks” blog has a great post about some of the greatest films of all time — many of them added to the National Film Registry as worthy of preservation — which never received a single Oscar nomination.