I'll Just Go To The After Party

It's Oscar time again!  Is it just me, or does it seem like people aren't really looking forward to it this year?  Sure, they're talking about making predictions, and talking about covering the red carpet.  But it feels like they're going through the motions. 

I don't know why; many of the leading movies seem pretty accessible. There's controversy over American Sniper. People can get angry over Selma getting left out - they love to complain about the Academy's decisions. 

I guess it's partly the movies themselves: I'm glad Julianne Moore will finally win an Oscar, but playing a woman facing Alzheimer's disease is such a clichéd way of doing it. It's nice that Birdman is doing well, but it doesn't seem to have the hipster popularity that will lead to Pulp Fiction/Forrest Gump style anger when it doesn't win. And I'm supposed to care whether the best actor is the guy playing Stephen Hawking or Alan Turing? 

So when I consider watching the three-plus hours of the telecast, it seems like seven or eight. I've never felt better about ignoring it and reading the winners' list in the morning.

One More Chance To Use The "Oscar" Tag

There's been plenty of criticism of Seth MacFarlane's hosting of the Oscars this year.  I can't comment on the claims that it was sexist because I didn't see much of the show, particularly the now infamous "We Saw Your Boobs" song.  But a lot of the criticism is just about him not being funny, and there I think people need a little perspective.

It all reminds me of when David Letterman hosted in 1995.  I've never been a big fan of Letterman's humour, but I couldn't help but feel sorry for him.  As I saw it, here's what happened:

• Letterman host a talk show.  He and the show are widely praised.
• His humourous reputation gets him a gig hosting the Oscars.
• He hosts the show, doing exadtly the same kind of jokes he does on his talkshow.
• His hosting of the Oscars is considered an embarrassing failure.

MacFarlane follows much the same pattern of host-gets-criticised-for-doing-what-got-him-the-hosting-job.  It all underlines the problem that even the organizers of the Oscar show don't seem to get: being considered funny by everyone in modern society is really difficult, and getting near impossible.  In the 500 channel universe, there really aren't any Bob Hope-like pan-cultural comedy touchstones anymore.

A few people pointed to Tina Fey as a possible host.  I think she's one of the few people who might actually be able to pull it off.  Unfortunately she has flatly refused.  And I can understand that, given people's high expectations.  So the job of Oscar Host could become like the job of Republican Presidential Candidate: anyone with the skills to be good at it will also have the skills to realise it's a thanklessly impossible job.

Daydream on Elm Street

Hey everyone, it's crappy movie time!  See, the summer is dedicated to blockbusters.  Quality movies come out in the fall, so they're still memorable to Oscar voters.  Family movies get released in time for the holidays.  But lately there are so many blockbusters that they enter the theatres in the spring in the hope of a really long run.  Lots of Oscar bait makes a token appearance in December to qualify for that year's awards, then gets wider release in early January.  All this means that the second half of January until the start of March is the only time the studios have to dump their worst stuff.  For the next few weeks, we'll be treated to the flicks that were only just better than direct-to-video.  Or direct-to-Netflix or whatever they say now.

And sure enough, here comes Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters.  Yes, a grown-up action-horror movie based on the old story.  One article I just read on it says there is a comedy angle to it, which could make this concept work.  But the ad I saw didn't seem to convey that, so I'm not holding my breath. 

Regardless of whether it's any good or not, it's perhaps the most extreme example yet of the darkening of pop-culture.  It seems like any long running franchise gets a little darker, more violent, grittier every time it's reinvented.  I don't mind any of those qualities, but it's getting a little tiresome, especially when it's getting applied to what our society knows as children's stories.  What's next?

• The Cat In The Hat reimagined as a supernatural, half-man-half-tiger killing machine
• Thomas the Tank Engine as a horror movie about machines coming to life and turning on their owners
• Where the Wild Things Are: the movie just writes itself
• Let's not even think of The Very Hungry Catepillar
• Or the Muppets.

You'd think there'd be a market for taking stories the other way: after all, more people can get in to see family movies.  Come on Hollywood, let's see a Cujo reboot.

Final Thoughts on Angelina's Leg

The buzz over Angelina Jolie's leg-revealing dress from the Oscars has thankfully died down.  This helps me answer a question first raised when the public took note of Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino's abs:  If we each get 15 minutes of fame, how much should an individual body part get?  Thankfully, significantly less.

The question that's still unanswered is: why?  No, I don't mean the grand, soul-searching "why?" that I ask myself every time I deal with popular culture.  I mean, even accepting for a moment that the human race has bizarrely distorted priorities, I can't figure this out.

I had the same question a few years ago after Madonna and Britney's infamous kiss at the MTV awards.  Yes, there are lots of people who want to see that sort of thing.  But if you want to see women kissing (among other activities) it's also easy to find.  Even if it was specifically Madonna and Britney Spears that you wanted to see kissing (among other activities) there's probably a Photoshopped image of it out there somewhere.

Similarly, I can understand why many people would want to see a beautiful woman's leg, but it's simply not that hard to see in our society.  I just Googled "Angelina Jolie," and verified that yes, among the images you'll be shown, there will be pictures revealing one or more bare legs.  (The things I do for this blog!  No, seriously:  I mistakenly Googled it after I had logged in to Google to write this post.  Thanks to Google's new everything-is-shared security policy, they know who I am, and now think I have a celebrity leg fetish.)

My guess is that it's all part of the fragmentation of society.  With so little in common across society, the touchstones that form the bulk of water-cooler conversation and late-night monologues become rarer and more basic.  A few more decades and all we'll be able to talk about are colours:  "Did you see that?  She was wearing a red dress!"