The 96th Academy Awards Live Feed Thread | Oppy wins it all, but Ryan Gosling is still kenough

[CoolioD1]

12 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Thye would know him as Jonathan Crane, aka The Scarecrow from the Dark Knight movies, if anything.

never heard of it.

[Eric Prime]

https://deadline.com/2024/03/oscar-ratings-viewership-2024-oppenheimer-1235854597/

 

Quote

It’s not the near sweep that Oppenheimer had, but ABC certainly has something to celebrate out of last night’s Academy Awards.

 

With the final numbers in, 19.5M viewers tuned in to watch the 2024 Oscars, according to Nielsen data. That’s a 4% win over the 18.8 million who tuned in for the 95th annual Academy Awards in 2023, propelling the show to a 4-year audience high.

 

The telecast also was at a 3.8 demo rating, compared with last year’s 4.0 — down, but not by much.

 

Whatever the reason or reasons, with this lift, ABC finally has the bragging rights to say that this was not one of the least-watched Oscar ceremonies of all time. Viewership has been on a steady incline over the past several years, rising quite heftily from the hostless 2021 Oscars, which drew an audience of 10.4 million.

 

In 2022, the year of the slap seen around the world when subsequent Best Actor winner Will Smith took a whack at presenter Chris Rock, viewership leapt up to 16.6M.

 

In that context, note that this year’s Oscars started an hour earlier that usual, running from 7 pm ET/4 pm PT to around 10:25 pm ET/7:25 pm PT. Moving the kick-off to earlier Sunday was an attempt to keep the broadcast and hence advertisers and viewers in primetime. That’s a departure from way too many previous years when the Oscars ran well past 11 pm ET.

 

Still, even with that and this year’s uptick, it’s unlikely that the Oscars, or any award shows for that matter, will reach the audiences they did a decade ago. The Oscars have been on a steady decline for the past decade, after scoring more than 43M viewers in 2014.

 

By 2020, that audience was nearly halved with 23.6M tuning in. The pandemic certainly accelerated that decline, completely tampering the ratings. But now, as today makes clear, they are on track to reach, if not exceed, pre-pandemic levels.

 

[JimmyB]

Thought the ratings would get a bigger boost with two huge movies leading the awards.  At least viewership was up a little.

 

The telecast also was at a 3.8 demo rating, compared with last year’s 4.0 — down, but not by much.

[titanic2187]

1 hour ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

 

It was poorly done, not just by the Producers but by Pacino as well. The whole "my eyes see Oppenheimer" with a question mark tone in his voice. Very weird. Nobody was sure if he was joking or what. Compare this with older days. Harrison Ford in 1994: "The Oscar for Best Picture of 1993 goes to...Schindler's List" and he says it with full authority. 

 

 

With emma stone wining best actress, announced just before best picture, Al-Pacino messy announcement probably was a subtle tribute to La la land vs moonlight mixed up disaster during 89th Oscar? 

[Eric Prime]

4 minutes ago, JimmyB said:

Thought the ratings would get a bigger boost with two huge movies leading the awards.  At least viewership was up a little.

 

The telecast also was at a 3.8 demo rating, compared with last year’s 4.0 — down, but not by much.

The biggest problem is that the Oscars are still stuck only being available on broadcast TV. There's tons of people who don't have cable or a way to watch live TV, and they would probably be more than willing to watch the Oscars on a YouTube or even Disney+ livestream.

 

The Super Bowl has been free to stream for nearly a decade, which led to even the most recent game hitting a ratings high. But the Oscars is inaccessible for many due to some stupid ironclad contracts.

[Eric Prime]

 

[abracadabra1998]

The Grammy’s were on Paramount+ I believe and they had quite a rise in viewership, I still think if the Oscars did that they would do gangbuster numbers. They’re still the most popular awards show in town by far 

[titanic2187]

Heron won was definitely my happiest moment in a mostly expected event. It is hard to believe, no matter how much legacy Miyazaki carries, heron actually beat out a heavy favourite, which is at one point considered to have outside shot of best picture nomination. 

 

 

[JimmyB]

16 minutes ago, Eric Atreides said:

The biggest problem is that the Oscars are still stuck only being available on broadcast TV. There's tons of people who don't have cable or a way to watch live TV, and they would probably be more than willing to watch the Oscars on a YouTube or even Disney+ livestream.

 

The Super Bowl has been free to stream for nearly a decade, which led to even the most recent game hitting a ratings high. But the Oscars is inaccessible for many due to some stupid ironclad contracts.

It's for free over-the-air on your local ABC station like the Super Bowl was free OTA on CBS. The Oscars were on streaming services like Hulu Live TV, YouTubeTV, AT&T TV. You could also watch on ABC.com or the ABC app after authenticating with your TV provider. The American Sign Language live streamed it on YouTube.

 

The Super Bowl is mostly watched over-the-air as well and they now count out of house viewers like bars that started in 2020. The game being great and going into OT was the perfect setup for an all time ratings high.  

 

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/super-bowl-ratings-historical-viewership-chart-cbs-nbc-fox-abc/

 

 

 

[dudalb]

13 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

Heron won was definitely my happiest moment in a mostly expected event. It is hard to believe, no matter how much legacy Miyazaki carries, heron actually beat out a heavy favourite, which is at one point considered to have outside shot of best picture nomination. 

 

 

That is what you get for releasing only half a movie.......

[filmlover]

3 hours ago, redfirebird2008 said:

The other one I could see is Greta Gerwig with her final Barbie movie. Let's say she does a very strong trilogy and everyone knows she is finished with Barbie after 3 movies. I could see them jumping on board to give her a trophy for that. 

Barbie 1 was hardly an awards juggernaut, the currently-unannounced-but-entirely-inevitable (the payday for everyone is gonna be way too good for any of them to say "no") Barbie 2 will face major hurdles to overcome to repeat its success. That said, once it's announced, I hope they report the breakdown as to how much everyone is getting paid because Greta's sure to be granted an even bigger (much bigger, in all likelihood) budget.

[dudalb]

16 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Barbie 1 was hardly an awards juggernaut, the currently-unannounced-but-entirely-inevitable (the payday for everyone is gonna be way too good for any of them to say "no") Barbie 2 will face major hurdles to overcome to repeat its success. That said, once it's announced, I hope they report the breakdown as to how much everyone is getting paid because Greta's sure to be granted an even bigger (much bigger, in all likelihood) budget.

Gerwig can take her time; her share of the take from "Barbie" has made her rich. She never has to do a paycheck movie again.

[Kalo]

9 hours ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

Honestly, that's all on Emma Stone.

 

  Hide contents

When she's walking like a child the first two acts of the film, it's hard to convince people she's not a child in every other way.

 

In the sense that she took the role. I suppose. But she was directed and he liked the direction she was taking it in. I don't know. It's one of those very rare films that I think was very well made. But I have to many moral dilemmas to say I liked it. I'm not a very big fan of Yargos and he seems kind of like a creep to me tbh. I really have a hard time seeing it as a feminist film. When there is so much female exploitation taking place in the film. 

[dudalb]

I see that Jonathan Nolan, CHristopher's Kid Brother, is a writer and showrunner on the upcoming Amazpn Prime "Fallout" mini series. I guess the Nolans have some genetic attraction to movies involving nukes.....

[grim22]

On 3/11/2024 at 6:50 AM, filmlover said:

We can rest easy knowing we only have another 12 months until we have to watch Diane Warren turn a movie that barely exists into an Oscar nominee all over again.

Speaking of Diane Warren

 

 

Post by @popbase

View on Threads

[Eric Prime]

 

[Spidey Freak]

30 minutes ago, grim22 said:

Speaking of Diane Warren

 

 

 

Diane Warren even has the I'm speaking to your manager haircut

Edited March 12 by Spidey Freak

[Spidey Freak]

16 hours ago, JimmyB said:

Thought the ratings would get a bigger boost with two huge movies leading the awards.  At least viewership was up a little.

 

The telecast also was at a 3.8 demo rating, compared with last year’s 4.0 — down, but not by much.

 

Margot and Greta were snubbed so a lot of the Barbie crowd didn't tune in

[titanic2187]

16 hours ago, JimmyB said:

Thought the ratings would get a bigger boost with two huge movies leading the awards.  At least viewership was up a little.

 

The telecast also was at a 3.8 demo rating, compared with last year’s 4.0 — down, but not by much.

This expectation for the boost doesn't make sense since last year we had two even bigger movies in the mix, in fact Elvis will still be the third biggest film for 2023 line up.  

 

I feel like the one hour earlier and shorter runtime probably help the older demo to turn in more.

[Spidey Freak]

18 hours ago, dudalb said:

I thnk the Gladstone, though excellent...had really a supporting role in terms of the story, and Poor Things was built around Stone's charecter was decisive. I think  they threw away a almost certain win for Gladstone by not puhing her for the supporting actress category.

 

They threw away an almost certain Lead win for Gladstone by not giving her character more screentime and POV scenes. KotFM wouldn't have gained all the goodwill and clout if it was more honest about decentralizing the Osage in their own story so ofc they couldn't put Lily in Supporting.