Vents MagaZine Music and Entertainment Magazine
Related Articles
The last couple of Oscars telecasts were tough. Two years ago we had the COVID-19 ceremony, which culminated with Anthony Hopkins, who wasn’t there, winning Best Actor over the late Chadwick Boseman. I didn’t watch last year because they cut a few of the awards from the telecast, which I did not like. As such, I missed the Will Smith thing. However, I watched the most recent awards, which had a host in Jimmy Kimmel and all the categories, a nice return to form.
Of course, “form” for the Oscars is solid, but unspectacular. The Academy Awards telecast is always hit or miss. It’s long, perhaps overly long, and a couple comedy bits always fall flat. I flip channels during music performances. All in all, though, the show was a worthy watch. Kimmel was a good host, though he mostly just did the opening monologue and then largely disappeared. I did like that monologue, though.
In the end, I would consider this the Oscars of “Hey, wouldn’t it be nice to give this person an award?” There have always been elements to Academy voting not related to the performances. It has never been pure, and never been a meritocracy. These days, though, it feels like the primary voting desire is to make for a nice night.
This seemed obvious with the acting awards. We got wins for Ke Huy Quan, Jamie Lee Curtis, Michelle Yeoh, and Brendan Fraser. Quan is a comeback story. Curtis and Yeoh are venerated actresses who people like. Fraser is something of a comeback story as well. People felt good seeing them get awards, and in being part of giving them awards. It was indeed nice seeing them give speeches, but the Oscars shouldn’t be about “nice” moments. It’s supposed to be about the best at their craft being rewarded for it. That’s subjective, but it has nothing to do with “nice” moments.
Did it make for a better telecast? Perhaps. Does it benefit the Oscars conceptually? Not in my mind. Hey, at least it was a show worth watching for the first time in a few years.
