Oscar viewership down 19%.

[misterjones]

I miss watching it when I was a kid. I wish it was still like I remember . . . possibly through my rosebud-colored glasses.

 

[SoCal Sam]

Opening 16 minutes of the 1967 show. This show was everything the 2018 show is not.

 

[chili555]

I stopped watching it because of the political rhetoric 2 years ago and also it seemed I was watching a production put on for the people in the industry not the ticket buyers, us.

Exactly.

What they fail to grasp is that I, and I assume most of you, don't care in the slightest what they think about the President, Congress, gun control, same-sex marriage, what they ate for breakfast nor what color their underwear, if any, may be.

I want them to do a good job on screen, collect their paycheck and shut up.

 

[soundmotor]

This is a very interesting period right now for the old guard in Hollywood. The Oscars over the last few years is the manifestation of a dying, flopping beast. It is the end of an era brought to that by the streaming subscription services such as Netflix and new players not yet in evidence. The model for filmmaking is a completely at risk proposition. Simplified, a pitch is made for a film and a studio agrees to do it (make it, buy it, or distribute it). It's then promoted during production, dumped into theaters, and they hope people will come see it so they turn a profit. And then the film underperforms. My old boss always said "Hope is not a plan.".

Netflix OTOH has you for $8-14 a month, about 100 million of us. They get instant feedback on everything within their catalog. How many watch it, did they binge watch, did they skip over it, did they start it, stop, then restart and binge, and so on. They can slice the data pie anyway they want to quantify whether or not they should do more or less of anything they offer. And this is all in front of user ratings (thumbs up / thumbs down button) which would affirm anything their algorithm spits out. I'd have to believe in the US at least that Netflix cuts a fairly wide swath through society and that drives their programming. Their programming in turn drives their subscriptions, and more subscribers adds even more data, which development of new shows, movies, & specials mines. How does Hollywood compete with that?

/short answer, they can't...put a fork in it.

 

[FONSguy]

Awww... I Missed it AGAIN?
What a shame.
When was it on?
Oh, I was watching Ash vs Evil Dead instead.
More entertaining.

 

[noogies]

The model for filmmaking is a completely at risk proposition. Simplified, a pitch is made for a film and a studio agrees to do it (make it, buy it, or distribute it). It's then promoted during production, dumped into theaters, and they hope people will come see it so they turn a profit. And then the film underperforms. My old boss always said "Hope is not a plan.".

... which is why, in an effort to eliminate or at least contain risk, they keep making the same damn thing over and over again.

 

[soundmotor]

... which is why, in an effort to eliminate or at least contain risk, they keep making the same damn thing over and over again.

Some would call that insanity.

 

[misterjones]

Opening 16 minutes of the 1967 show. This show was everything the 2018 show is not.

Thanks for posting this. I found it relaxing (as opposed to feeling twisted inside waiting for the next piece of political vitriol or egotism). It's the kind of pleasant TV that's hard to find, and it would be nice if the modern Academy Awards provided a similar pleasant respite from the unpleasantness. There was a time I thought that was, in fact, Hollywood's mission.

I especially liked seeing the two jokes aimed at then-governor Ronald Reagan beginning at 9:50. Note that Mr. and Mrs. Reagan are in attendance and laughed along with the audience. Though it's been a while since I've watched the awards, I suspect only a politician with the advance blessing of the Hollywood establishment could do that.