2008 Woodie Awards
So many awards, so little significance
Jeff Mason
Issue date: 7/23/08 Section: Opinion
Does anyone really care about award shows any more?
Whether it's the Golden Globes, the Oscars, the Tonys, the ESPYs, the Emmys, the Writer's Guild Awards, the Director's Guild Awards, the Screen Actor's Guild Awards, the Grammys, the MTV Movie Awards, the MTV Music Video Awards, the BET Hip Hop Awards or Bravo's A-List Awards, I have a distinct feeling that they don't really matter as much as they used to.
Whether you see awards shows as elitist, media garbage or the definitive answer to the best the year had to offer, you can't deny that their importance is dwindling.
Take, for example, the Emmy Awards. The nominees were announced last week. Didn't know about it? Neither did I until I stumbled upon it while randomly browsing around the Internet. And I'm someone who followed the two previous year's races from the first day the nominations came out, mostly because I loved "The Office" and "30 Rock," both of which ended up winning the outstanding comedy series award.
What makes matters worse is that the Emmys don't even seem to be in touch with its core base of hardcore award show buffs, snubbing critical darlings like "Friday Night Lights," "The Wire," "Pushing Daisies" and "Battlestar Galactica." Meanwhile, the less enthusiastic and much more casual viewers ask why top rated shows like "Desperate Housewives" and "CSI" miss out on nominations.
So if they aren't pleasing either end of the spectrum, who are they trying to appeal to?
The Academy Awards are in a similar situation, watching what used to be one of the year's most celebrated telecasts go into a slump. Despite having 28 movies cross the $100 million dollar mark last year, only one of those movies ("Juno") was nominated at the Oscars in 2008. Three of the other nominees for best picture failed to cross the $50 million mark before the Oscar ceremony, according to BoxOfficeMojo.com.
This year, the Oscars are going to face a difficult situation, choosing from a pool of prestige pics and movies like "The Dark Knight." Actors Heath Ledger from the latest Batman movie and Robert Downey Jr. of "Iron Man" will undoubtedly be tossed around come January, and there has also been talk of introducing a "Best Action Movie" category to the Oscars.
But is that really enough? Can one category really make people tune in? The simple answer is no. People don't want to watch three hours of awards they know nothing about just to watch movies like "The Dark Knight" win.
Years from now, there may not even be a ceremony, or it may only last for 90 minutes. Or perhaps the winners would just be announced on the Academy's Web site.
Perhaps Stephen Colbert said it best at last year's Emmy Awards: "If entertainers stop publicly congratulating each other, the Earth wins."
How true.
Whether it's the Golden Globes, the Oscars, the Tonys, the ESPYs, the Emmys, the Writer's Guild Awards, the Director's Guild Awards, the Screen Actor's Guild Awards, the Grammys, the MTV Movie Awards, the MTV Music Video Awards, the BET Hip Hop Awards or Bravo's A-List Awards, I have a distinct feeling that they don't really matter as much as they used to.
Whether you see awards shows as elitist, media garbage or the definitive answer to the best the year had to offer, you can't deny that their importance is dwindling.
Take, for example, the Emmy Awards. The nominees were announced last week. Didn't know about it? Neither did I until I stumbled upon it while randomly browsing around the Internet. And I'm someone who followed the two previous year's races from the first day the nominations came out, mostly because I loved "The Office" and "30 Rock," both of which ended up winning the outstanding comedy series award.
What makes matters worse is that the Emmys don't even seem to be in touch with its core base of hardcore award show buffs, snubbing critical darlings like "Friday Night Lights," "The Wire," "Pushing Daisies" and "Battlestar Galactica." Meanwhile, the less enthusiastic and much more casual viewers ask why top rated shows like "Desperate Housewives" and "CSI" miss out on nominations.
So if they aren't pleasing either end of the spectrum, who are they trying to appeal to?
The Academy Awards are in a similar situation, watching what used to be one of the year's most celebrated telecasts go into a slump. Despite having 28 movies cross the $100 million dollar mark last year, only one of those movies ("Juno") was nominated at the Oscars in 2008. Three of the other nominees for best picture failed to cross the $50 million mark before the Oscar ceremony, according to BoxOfficeMojo.com.
This year, the Oscars are going to face a difficult situation, choosing from a pool of prestige pics and movies like "The Dark Knight." Actors Heath Ledger from the latest Batman movie and Robert Downey Jr. of "Iron Man" will undoubtedly be tossed around come January, and there has also been talk of introducing a "Best Action Movie" category to the Oscars.
But is that really enough? Can one category really make people tune in? The simple answer is no. People don't want to watch three hours of awards they know nothing about just to watch movies like "The Dark Knight" win.
Years from now, there may not even be a ceremony, or it may only last for 90 minutes. Or perhaps the winners would just be announced on the Academy's Web site.
Perhaps Stephen Colbert said it best at last year's Emmy Awards: "If entertainers stop publicly congratulating each other, the Earth wins."
How true.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
jay
posted 7/23/08 @ 12:02 PM CST
wow...this person is crazy. of course people care. maybe just not you
Adam H
posted 7/23/08 @ 1:49 PM CST
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7241326.stm
Well if these people care they aren't showing it via their TV viewership.
Post a Comment