I wondered who would post about the Oscars. I thought it would be Pidge. I'm a junkie too, much to DH's disgust, but hey, I've got to deal with his football addictions so turnabout is only fair play.

I must say that the attire has gotten much better in the past couple of years. I guess the fact that most of the attendees now employ stylists have paid off. There are a lot fewer fashion disasters than in past years.

I'll be watching Sunday night & the only perdition I'll make is that the show will run long despite how many times they try to play off a winner with music.

I'll watch but they don't seem to have the same impact as they did when growing up. Mom and I used to sit on the porch swing and play movie stars calling out initials and then trying to guess the stars. Back in the real old days it was only on radio and they made everything so exciting.

I worked on the Oscars once, in l984 I think it was - I still have the program so I could look it up. It's an amazing piece of organization, the logistics of it are kind of mind boggling. My pre-production job was to line all the presenters up to come to rehearse their bits at 10 minute intervals the day before the show - that rehearsal is called the cattle call - the actors sit kibbutzing in the seats then when called they come up on stage are are told where to stand, where to enter from and read the cue cards and go home. Considering the giant egos flying around the co-operation is remarkable ~ doing the Oscars is a big dealfor the presenters.

It was pretty mind boggling for me to be calling up the likes of Shirley Temple Black and Cary Grant directly, having a conference call with Mary Tyler Moor and her agent and so on. You say the words "..calling from the Motion Picture Academy" and it's like Open Sesame - if they're home they talk to you and if they're not they always call back.

During the actual live production my job was in the control room keeping everyone up to date on how we were doing for time and breaking the news as we got further and further behind. At some point it becomes important to be able to know if the show will go past 11 - because all of the local stations have to be alerted that there'll be another station break and they get to run another set of commercials tied into the ceremony and to hold the local news. My job was to know that.

I will watch on Sunday, but it gets to be a bigger and bigger yawn to me each year - I don't think today's movie stars are so much fun as they used to be.

Even though I once worked as secretary for the owner of a large theatre chain (in the early '60s) and later DH designed theatres for United Artists and other chains, (thus we usually had passes), somehow we rarely went to movies. A group of friends used to get together for Oscar night and everyone else had seen most of the films if not all (even driving 100 miles to Atlanta if necessary), but we still enjoyed the party.

I think the last movie I saw at a theatre was "All the President's Men" and then only because I was a Watergate junkie. As the screens grew larger and the sound got louder and theatres smaller, it was not a pleasant experience. I'm in the minority I know...but I don't like looking up a 4" nostril in closeups...LOL

Sheila, thanks for the glimpse behind the scenes. You probably enjoyed the evening more than the "stars".
I'm glad to know the silver screen still has fans...I usually read Pidge's reviews just to know what's going on (and so I can do my crossword puzzles)...LOL I'm lost when the clue is a film or sports figure. josh

Oh rats, I had a whole long response for this thread and poof! off it went. It was probably more than anyone wanted to read anyway, so maybe it's just as well.

Bottom line: Sheila, I know it was "work" for you, but what a glam job. I would probably have swooned. And Marda, I have also watched the Oscars for a lifetime. They are for me what the World Series is for Jim. Sunday is planned around them: brunch instead of dinner to celebrate a birthday, daughter returning early from a weekend trip--all to be ready and waiting at 6 for the red carpet festivities (yes, I also watch the warm-ups, ALL of it).

Personal choices:
Best pic: Babel, though if it's The Departed I will be equally pleased. Both films are excellent: well filmed and directed, beautiful timing, wide range of acting excellence. Letters from Iwo Jima and The Queen are also good films but much as I liked them both, they are just a step below my top two. Little Miss Sunshine, which I bought and watched last night, is utterly hilarious but not of the same caliber as the other nominees.
Best actress: Helen Mirren, hands down, though I think if she were not in the race, Penelope Cruz in Volver would have a shot at it.
Best actor: well, I hope it's Peter O'Toole though I suspect it will again be Forest Whittaker. I loved O'Toole in Venus. Even when he plays an old lech (maybe he actually is an old lech--he was certainly a young one), he is still awesomely charming on-creeen.
Best director: I am rooting for Scorcese here, but he's been nominated so often and gone home empty-handed I have deep forebodings.

I wonder what awful dress Meryl Streep will wear? She is all "actress" and not glamour doll at all--remember the year she was presenting and was fixing her bra straps? No wonder I love her.

Merle may surprise you since she is up for The Devil Wears Prada. I read she just might glam it up this year.The thing about the Oscars that annoys me sometimes is all the whining about the length of the show. This whole thing is for those who make a movie from technicians to the producers and it's about them,not us. They need the time to honor everyone and have their fun and we are allowed a peek into this production of theirs. For them to change it to suit us, seems to me like us telling the powers who be to change the colors of football uniforms so they will show up more on TV..like maybe stripes and polka dots.

I hate the fact that they now have the winners of some of the "lessor" awards just stand up in their seats to be recognized. They deserve their moment to be on stage too. They're the ones making the picture exciting and/or making the actors look good.

I used to watch back in the good old days.
Elizabeth Taylor was the beauty and Gregory Peck was
the most georgeous man.
It used to be entertaining but not any more. I loved movies
back then, who could forget Spencer Tracy and Katherine H.

I wish I could have the enthusiasm that Pidge has when it
comes to movies, I used to, just not any more.

Sheila, you must have stored up a world of wonderful unique
memories over the years. What fun it would be to sit down
with a nice hot cup of tea on a cold winter's day and just
remember.

I'm totally with you, Marda, on who cares how long the Oscars ceremiony takes. I love every minute of it and watch reruns of bits and pieces of it for days afterward. Football games are supposed to be 60 minutes long but you better set aside three hours if you want to see one. And baseball games and golf matches seem to go on forever--some matches go on until the next day even. So a few hours a year for such a great ceremony seems like a no-brainer to me.

I don't know if Streep even knows how to glam it up. Did you see her practically dowdy dress at the Globes? Part of what makes her so endearing, besides her acting chops of course, is her general disregard for Hollywood trappings. She is the "grande dame" of our day, about as glamorous as QE II. I read somewhere that Helen Mirren had to give serious thought to playing QE II because she couldn't imagine dressing in such awful clothes. Bet she will look great.

Janis, I regret that you don't like movies much anymore. I know that your life is very complicated, so no wonder. I did like the old stars, like Tracy and Hepburn, but the newer crop is equally talented and memorable. At lunch the other day some of my colleagues were bemoaning the loss of the old-timers and I had a hard time trying to convince them that, for example, Milary Swank or Edward Norton are remarkable actors. I'd say it's generational but I'm older than my colleagues--maybe it's really a time warp.

I feel the same Pidge. I could watch Edward Norton all day and even Brad Pitt when he gets to play the off center types, like his character in "12 Monkeys". I grew up watching all the oldies and all i can say is thank God for Brando and his bringing that "school" of acting to films.

I think one of the main differences in films today from those made years ago,and correct me if I'm wrong Sheila,is that then actors were contracted to studios and you didn't have anywhere near the number of films being produced then that you do today. I can see how it would be comfortable to "know" who most of the talented stars were. Today,there are so many of them and the talent is watered down and you have to see a lot of films before knowing who the good ones are.The plots were so much simpler years ago it was easy to buy a ticket,scrunch down into your seat with popcorn and watch a good adventure,a hilarious comedy,a wonderful romance or a great film depicting some historical event. To me it all seemed so pat,with few surprises. Today,I rarely know what I'm getting into unless I read about it first. A film which starts out funny can become dark and twisty within minutes. I guess what I'm trying to say is that back then films were a three course meal and today they are a buffet filled with the good,the bad and ugly and for me it has been a wonderful ride from Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck to Cate Blanchett and George Clooney.

Temporary hijack:
Marda, I think the same is true of literature in terms of how the number of novels available today has mushroomed way beyond the Western canon, mostly white male writers, with which I grew up. Some of the stuff I teach is by writers from parts of the world I couldn't have found on a map a few years ago, and in the US, the expansion of titles from every ethnic group imaginable, including new variations on the white male writers with which I grew up (e.g., gay, mixed race, working class), is nearly impossible to keep track of. There is nothing "pat" about most of these works and expectations are continually denied. Also, the talent seems to be enlarging as possibilities for publication expand for people who are not mainstream and more and more voices pour onto the stage. My brothers are history buffs and one of them tries (unsuccessfully) not to openly mock my love of the novel. I continue to believe, however, that what I learn from fiction is as true (or false) a picture of historical realities as any history book.

Back to films: I think that is the richness of the buffet that I find so appealing about films today and what draws me to the screen week after week. When I was a kid, films stayed in a theater literally for weeks and even months and the menu was thus very limited. The muliplexes have changed all that and if one doesn't see a film in the first few weeks, it's Blockbusters or Netflix.

That's right,I had forgotten all about that. When a film was there for weeks and weeks,you always managed to see it but now some of them are gone in two weeks. Well,if a film was at the drive in,I didn't always manage to see it although I was there. LOL That has to make a huge difference in the way movies are seen today.Hooray for Netflix because I am now finally able to see all the ones I missed.

Thanks Shiela, it is fun to read about what goes on back stage.

i don't know about the number of movies. The studios churned out hundreds of them every year. It's just that the great preponderance of them were unmemorable, & that's probably being charitable. i don't think there are as many B movies anymore - or at least not intentionally.

i remember as a kid going to the movies & there was almost always a double bill. There would be an A feature & then a shorter B movie - usually a genre movie like a western or a murder mystery.

As far as yesterday's movies vs. today's efforts, I've got to say I just love them all. I can just as easily go on a Turner Classic Movies binge on a weekend as catch up on new films.

Yep, I can watch Casablanca one night, the most recent Pride and Prejudice the next (or any of the other P&P versions as well), and Love Actually the night after that and be happy in all cases. Oh, be still my beating heart.

Marda, it has long been changed to accommodate t.v. The Academy gets paid a lot of money for this show. It used to be the crafts were part of the whole and only the technical were separate, but it got too cumbersome for television. The year I did it they were desperate to bring it out on time and I actually researched the previous five years to come up with an "average"time for an acceptance speech. As I recall (and remember this was over twenty years ago) it was something like four minutes. And then you have the songs and the clips and the presenters and special awards and on and on... My year was the first year they began playing music to let the winners know the party was over and visually counting them down on the huge cue card monitor they could see...LOL it hardly made a difference and I can't say I blame anyone, if I'd just won an Oscar I would want savor the moment. Anyway, I gauged we were eight minutes over before we began the ceremonies proper and by the first commercial that had become twelve. We went to about 20 in the end I think.

The master of ceremonies makes such a difference in the whole feeling of the show. I always liked the way Billy Crystal handled it and Ellen is really good too. Can't wait to sit back and watch her do her thing. Thanks for the information.

I can hardly wait. I think Ellen will be fine, though Billy Crystal is my all-time fave M of C.
I couldn't believe that one of my students said he would not watch the Oscars because she is handling the show--I decided not to ask him why because I didn't think he'd tell me the real reason, anyway. Personally, I'm rooting for her.

I was just watching Joan Rivers on the TV GUide channel. I think the last face lift didn't quite do it. Ooohhh, she does NOT look good.

ROTFL!! Already watching the preamble at 2:30 in the afternoon? You are a serious Oscar addict. And BTW, Josn Rivers has had so many face lifts she's starting to resemble a gargoyle.

Whoo-hoo-hoo! Scorcese and The Departed won!!!!! I was thrilled and I was also very pleased that Alan Arkin took the Best Supporting Actor prize for Little Miss Sunshine. Both Mirren and Whittaker made really gracious speeches about their wins, which was a pleasant change from thanking names on a list. Leo DiCaprio has long since grown out of his boyishness and his roles have gotten better and more demanding. While he didn't win last night (I thought he was nominated for the wrong movie, anyway, and thought his role in The Departed was Oscar-worthy), it will happen for him some day. And then maybe not, of course. There was Peter O'Toole in the audience, looking very longing to be recognized and for the eighth time did not get the prize.

Ellen was a delight--warm, witty without guffaws, engaging the audience in ways that delighted them and gave folks like me a chance to get a quick look at "stars" when they were a little off guard and weren't in a "role." And those dancers who looked like Circe de Soleil acrobats and mimed icons of the best pic nominees were mighty clever. When they turned themselves into a VW bus and later a gun, I was laughing out loud. The show had a couple of draggy spots but then it always does, and I just waited past them for the stuff I wanted to see. Overall, set design was simpler than usual and thus more appealing.

Meryl Streep fixed her bra strap (again!) and obviously needs to be better fitted in her undergarments. But she was a total charm when Ann Hathaway and Emily I'm-drawing-a-blank were handing out an award; Streep was obviously happy for them and put on a Miranda face just to heighten the fun. Jadon Smith might be the handsomest little kid around and his dad, Will, is his best audience. Talk about a proud dad.

And how about Al Gore's team winning an Oscar for An Incovenient Truth? While that won't make some of the naysayers on "that other forum" happy, I was sort of wide-eyed when a man who might have been president of the US bounded on to the Oscar stage with the folks who made his film possible. Nice.

Now we're into the film void. Netflix just sent me an e-mail pitching me to rejoin. They know what's going on out there. I might just take them up on the offer, at least until the fall when all this hoopla starts all over again.

LOL Pidge, you'd better join Netflix again because the grown-up movies that will be theatrically released will be scarce on the ground until after Labor Day.

I was so pleased that Martin Scorcese finally won (and actually it should have been his third Oscar. He should have won for Raging Bull & Goodfellas years ago) & obviously the audience thought so too as they all lept to their feet to give him a standing ovation.

And Meryl Streep just doesn't care about what she wears,does she? As soon as I saw her on the red carpet I thought, "Here we are dowdy again!." The other real fasion mistake, IMO, was Kirsten Dunst who showed that even the house of Chanel can come up with a loser of a dress.

I really liked all the film montages that they showed this year, and actually, if they had cut some of those a little short, the show probably would have come in on time.

Some of the "minor" awardss like best costume design for Marie Antoinette will probably mean that some unmemorable films will be dusted off for years to come & shown annually on TCM's 31 Days of Oscar. My only regret wss that after winning several azncillary awards, Pan's Labyrinth didn't take home the prize for best foreign language film.

Oh my, Andie, wasn't Streep a disaster? So much for glamming it up this year. As for Kirsten Dunst, she is not one of my favorite actors, so the fact that she was dressed to look as if she were 12 was a big yawn.

I realized last night that I made a mistake in not seeing Pan's Labyrinth. I've been wanting to see it for weeks, but my movie-buddy daughter couldn't be dragged. Guess I'll have to hit the theater some afternoon this week and see it on my own.

I had a good time watching them this year. I haven't seen Departed so can't comment on that but it sure sounds to me as if any one of those films could have won and it would be ok. As far as clothes,I thought Reese Witherspoon looked the best I've ever seen her. Divorce does wonder's doesn't it? I liked Cate Blanchett's simple dress the best and poor Merle. I guess it just isn't in her to do the glamorous thing but that's ok..I love her. How many women would admit they are a size 14 on national television? She is so incredibly comfortable with herself. I really wanted Peter O'Toole to win. He's a great actor and this is probably the last chance he'll have but I guess the award HAS to go to the best performance,although come to think of it,that isn't always the case. Denzel won for Training Day when Crowe should have gotten it and that was only because they messed up and didn't give it to him for Hurricane the previous year.

I actually watched the Oscars last night but missed the Red
Carpet show.
Of all the movies, I had seen only The Devil Wears Prada
and I had lots of laughs with that movie.
I didn't get to see Meryl's dress except while she was seated.
I do love seeing any woman comfortable in her own skin.
I think she was delightful.

I enjoyed Ellen's interaction with the audience, especially
the photo-op with Eastwood and the bit with the vaccuum
cleaner.

Helen Mirren was a CLASS act but it was what I expected of
her. She surely must have made the British proud last night.

I thought Kidman was stunning in her Red and didn't care
for J-Lo's dress although others were gaga over the jewels
that adorned the dress.

I thought JLo looked a mess in that dress. When my husband asked me if that was her, I said, "No, she'd look a lot better than that." Boy, was I wrong. The empire waist made it look like a maternity dress.

Janis, I love the Red Carpet and thought most of the dresses were wonderful. Even when they are a little off, those women look pretty remarkable. I even look at the men, some of whom look like they were born in a tuxedo--Leo DiCaprio comes to mind, as does George Clooney. Those guys are hot.

An entertaining footnote, I read this in the NY Times this morning...Meryl Streep was wearing Prada! What a wicked sense of humor that woman has:)

LOL, Sheila! I love that--she really is something else. No wonder I like her so much.

OMG! Who would know that Prada would actually make something in a size 14.

And Pidge when you're talking about hot looking guys, don't overlook Clive Owen. He made my heart go pitty-pat last night.

If you haven't seen it yet,get the film Greenfingers,with Clive and Helen Mirren. Any gardener would love this movie. It's about a group of convicts in a London prison who get turned on to gardening and enter the Chelsea Flower Show.Helen plays a Martha Stewart type woman and this is all based on a true story. It's wonderful..funny and poignant at the same time.