dagblog - Comments for "A Short Guide to Bad Oscar Hosts" http://dagblog.com/arts-entertainment/short-guide-bad-oscar-hosts-16259 Comments for "A Short Guide to Bad Oscar Hosts" en (No subject) http://dagblog.com/comment/175250#comment-175250 <a id="comment-175250"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/175242#comment-175242">Ya got me, Ramona; he only</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><img alt="smiley" height="20" src="http://dagblog.com/modules/ckeditor/ckeditor/plugins/smiley/images/regular_smile.gif" title="smiley" width="20" /></p> </div></div></div> Tue, 05 Mar 2013 21:31:29 +0000 Ramona comment 175250 at http://dagblog.com Ya got me, Ramona; he only http://dagblog.com/comment/175242#comment-175242 <a id="comment-175242"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/175119#comment-175119">Both? When was the first</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>  Ya got me, Ramona; he only did it once. I must have confused him with somebody else.</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:51:41 +0000 Aaron Carine comment 175242 at http://dagblog.com Both? When was the first http://dagblog.com/comment/175119#comment-175119 <a id="comment-175119"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/175110#comment-175110">Your&#039;s is definitely a</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Both?  When was the first one?</p> </div></div></div> Fri, 01 Mar 2013 17:49:00 +0000 Ramona comment 175119 at http://dagblog.com Your's is definitely a http://dagblog.com/comment/175110#comment-175110 <a id="comment-175110"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/arts-entertainment/short-guide-bad-oscar-hosts-16259">A Short Guide to Bad Oscar Hosts</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>  Your's is definitely a minority opinion. Both of MacFarlane's Oscar gigs have been widely praised.</p> </div></div></div> Thu, 28 Feb 2013 23:51:08 +0000 Aaron Carine comment 175110 at http://dagblog.com I didn't see the Conan joke, http://dagblog.com/comment/175067#comment-175067 <a id="comment-175067"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/175055#comment-175055">I watched maybe 45 minutes of</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>I didn't see the Conan joke, so I can't comment on what went might have misfired there. As far as "too soon" goes: I've seen comedians get successful laughs out of the <em>Kennedy</em> assassination, which is a much rawer wound, and something that happened in living memory. But they sure as hell aren't sloppy with how they put jokes about that together.</p> </div></div></div> Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:16:15 +0000 Doctor Cleveland comment 175067 at http://dagblog.com I certainly agree that it was http://dagblog.com/comment/175066#comment-175066 <a id="comment-175066"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/175032#comment-175032">Struck me very much as Bob</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>I certainly agree that it was a mistake to go with a  juvenile and down-market MC in a year when grown-up film was having a triumph. This was they year that the Academy could point to a whole raft of high-quality and basically thoughtful nominees, most of which were making whole rafts of money.</p> <p>As for Bob Hope ... I recall being baffled by him when I was growing up. Why was this person famous? Why was this considered funny? Only later when I saw some of his very early work did I realize what a sad thing it was that he had let his original, ferocious talent turn into... whatever that was.</p> </div></div></div> Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:09:06 +0000 Doctor Cleveland comment 175066 at http://dagblog.com I watched maybe 45 minutes of http://dagblog.com/comment/175055#comment-175055 <a id="comment-175055"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/arts-entertainment/short-guide-bad-oscar-hosts-16259">A Short Guide to Bad Oscar Hosts</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>I watched maybe 45 minutes of the Oscars. I did see the Lincoln joke, and Conan told a milder form of the same joke a few days ago. I groaned both times. Was it too soon? Yes, it will always be too soon for me. </p> <p>I went back and watched the Shatner bit online. I do agree that the opening bit could have been tightened up. I didn't object to I Saw Your Boobs because Hollywood has been all about playing peek-a-boob for a long time. If Jennifer Lawrence had shown her boobs while tripping, no one would remember what MacFarlane did.</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:19:18 +0000 Donal comment 175055 at http://dagblog.com You make some excellent http://dagblog.com/comment/175036#comment-175036 <a id="comment-175036"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/arts-entertainment/short-guide-bad-oscar-hosts-16259">A Short Guide to Bad Oscar Hosts</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>You make some excellent points.  I think McFarlane seemed nervous and unsure of his material, and then expected to get over the weak stuff by counter-punching, that is, he expected not to get laughs from the material so much as from his reaction to the material not going over.  I thought the Lincoln / Booth joke was a good example of that; the joke itself was mediocre, but designed to get a reaction, just so that he could do the 'too soon?' comeback, which he thought would be the real laugh-line. </p> <p>You're right too that he has the necessary comedic skill-set, heck, he can even sing!  But the material and his commitment to delivering the material just wasn't there.   </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> </div></div></div> Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:51:58 +0000 MrSmith1 comment 175036 at http://dagblog.com So television's Seth "Family http://dagblog.com/comment/175034#comment-175034 <a id="comment-175034"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/arts-entertainment/short-guide-bad-oscar-hosts-16259">A Short Guide to Bad Oscar Hosts</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>So television's Seth "Family Guy" MacFarlane was too crude for the take-themselves-too-seriously Oscar's.  Who could have possibly predicted that.</p> <p>Well, me, I guess ... even though I cannot recall ever being able to watch either show straight through.  There is their different mediums, of course.  Television versus film -- not simply movies, mind you,  <em>film</em>.  But really all you have to look at is their respective demographic audiences to see the mismatch.</p> <p> </p> </div></div></div> Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:39:05 +0000 EmmaZahn comment 175034 at http://dagblog.com Struck me very much as Bob http://dagblog.com/comment/175032#comment-175032 <a id="comment-175032"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/arts-entertainment/short-guide-bad-oscar-hosts-16259">A Short Guide to Bad Oscar Hosts</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Struck me very much as Bob Hope reincarnated for the 21st century. Same exact type of humor and presentation (very lame in both cases, mho), adjusted <em>only slightly </em>for more risque times. Those who don't think so haven't been subjected to enough of Bob Hope's performances as an emcee of various shows (also mho, of course.)</p> <p>It <em>was </em>kind of strange and sad that in a year that Hollywood seemed to have finally gotten its act together as far as furnishing some innovative contemporary pop culture choices for everyone (and not just the 16-21 yr. old male demographic, ) that the Academy show producers felt it was time to make a statement about vaudeville never dying.....</p> </div></div></div> Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:10:51 +0000 artappraiser comment 175032 at http://dagblog.com