EXCLUSIVE: I’m told that Peter Gabriel just pulled out of performing at the Academy Awards show. In a letter to the Academy Of Motion Picture Arts And Sciences, the co-writer and performer of Wall-E‘s “Down To Earth” says he doesn’t think the nominated songs, and their writers and performers, are getting enough respect during this year’s Oscars telecast. That’s because the show’s producers, Larry Mark and Bill Condon, have reduced the song segment to a medley of the three songs nominated for “achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original Song)” — “Down to Earth” from WALL-E (Walt Disney), with music by Gabriel and Thomas Newman and lyric by Gabriel; “Jai Ho” from Slumdog Millionaire (Fox Searchlight) with music by A.R. Rahman nd lyric by Gulzar; and “O Saya” from Slumdog Millionaire (Fox Searchlight) with music and lyric by A.R. Rahman and Maya Arulpragasam. I’m told the producers have slotted 90 seconds in the medley for each song sung by its original performer. But Gabriel said in his letter that he was only being offered 65 seconds for his song. “I don’t feel that is sufficient time to do the song justice, and I have decided to withdraw from performing,” Gabriel informed AMPAS. “I fully respect and look forward to the producers’ right to revamp the show. Even though song writers are small players in the filmmmaking process, they are just as committed and work just as hard as the rest of the team, and I regret that this new version of the ceremony is being created in part at their expense.” I’m told that the medley is the brainchild of the producers in their attempt to get the Oscar show’s running time down to 3 hours — which, frankly, would be a miracle given that it usually runs more than 4 hours. No word yet on whom the producers will choose to sing in place of Gabriel.
UPDATE: Here is the text of Peter Gabriel’s letter:
“I was delighted when “Down to Earth” was nominated for an Oscar. I was also pleased to have been asked to perform the song in the Oscar ceremony. However, in recent discussions with the Producers, it became clear that despite there being only three nominees, only 60-65 seconds was being offered, and that was also in a medley of the three songs. I don’t feel that is sufficient time to do the song justice, and have decided to withdraw from performing.
I fully respect and look forward to the Producers’ right to revamp the show. Even though song writers are small players in the film making process, they are just as committed and work just as hard as the rest of the team and I regret that this new version of the ceremony is being created, in part, at their expense.”
I still very much look forward to attending the ceremony.”
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.







You hear a movie song and you remember exactly what you were feeling when you watched the movie. Songs are indeed a very important part – albeit small – aspect of the movie process. Their power to generate emotions and feelings are sometimes more powerful than the acting.
To disrespect the songs – and songwriters – are an insult. To only have three songs nominated instead of the usual five is also an insult. Good for Peter Gabriel!
I agree on points already made especially by Jessy S. – only televise certain aspects of prizes; the Grammy people know what they’re doing when they do. Also, nobody really cares about opening numbers. Just get the damn award show started.
OK, that does it; I’m producing the show next year. I’ll get this thing down to three hours.
This is tragic! It’s bad enough that we won’t get to listen to (the usual) FIVE nominated songs, but now, it’s only going to be a short medley of the three nominated songs. Sigh. I might not watch now, as the 20-25 minute chunk of song performances were my fave part of the Oscars! Gloria Estefan/NSync’s “Music of the Heart” was my all-time favorite musical performance, BTW!
I can tell you what parts Bill and Larry should omit from the telecast:
1. Sid Ganis’s windbag of a speech. Does anyone really care about what he has to say?
2. the In Memorium tribute. A complete downer and always way way way too long.
3. introducing the CPA’s. Who cares?
Oh yeah, let’s us not forget to mention to not have the unfunniest man in show biz, Bruce Vilanch, be the head writer. His writing drags the show since it’s NEVER FUNNY!!!!
Over the last 25 years, the Awards have topped four hours precisely three times. I don’t think anyone would define that as “usually.”
The biggest mistake the Oscars made was moving it to a Sunday night (when people have other interesting things to watch), and then to February (giving people fewer time to see the movies).
But this is just silly. Some people may not like hearing the Best Song nominations, and since this is the category with the poorest track record in terms of nominees – just ask the brothers Gibb – that’s understandable.
But it’s an accepted, integral part of the show. But then again, I thought showing clips from the Best Picture nominees was also integral. Shows what I know.
There shouldn’t be any singing performances (and not just because 99.9% of songs nominated for an Oscar these days would put an ADHD kid to sleep). It’s the Oscars. Not the fucking Grammys. Get rid of the singing and watch the show’s running time get shortened considerably. And that’s a good thing. Ditch all the montages save for the obituraries too.
Peter Gabriel is a total class act.
If only there were more of him in show biz.
In recent years the musical performances have been the only entertaining part of the show, like last year’s Once performance. Way to cut your own nuts off Condon.
Point of order for Jessy S:
Slumdog did not qualify for the Best Foreign Language Film category as it is not an Indian production (produced by a Brit), its screenplay was not written by an Indian writer (written by a Brit), it was not directed by an Indian filmmaker (directed by a Brit) and the majority of the film is not in India’s official language (2/3 of the film is in English, which is India’s official subsidiary language).
Way to go Peter. . .you haven’t sold out yet. . .why start now! Great song for a great movie. . .you deserve to win. . .again after winning a Grammy for the same! Good luck Peter Gabriel!
I find this debate absurd. Year after year people complain about how long the ceremony is. The ceremony is not long. What makes it long is the huge amount of commercial breaks and how long they are. Simple as that. Why never, ever anybody points out at the obvious. Cutting down seconds from songs or speeches doesn’t do much if one solid hour of the broadcast or more is devoted to commercials.
Is it too late? Please re-approach Peter and beg him to perform the entire song! Think of the production value! WALL-E robot onstage or on top of his piano eyes lit up, digital screen backdrop with some of the endearing WALL-E movie clips. It would be so beautiful! Even the Slumdog Millionaire songs could be sang in terrific Bollywood dance numbers, with the kids from the movie! Don’t cut one of the best parts of the show! Viewers need to have their spirits uplifted during these performances! A short medley is so wrong. Whatever happens Peter deserves every bit of the Oscar trophy.
there is probably more to it than what is being reported. Most likely the Slumdog Millionaire songs, which will probably win anyway, are getting a prominent showcase in the medley and his song is being tacked onto it like an afterthought. No one has ever heard of this Wall-E song anyway. Peter Gabriel should probably get over himself and talk to Springsteen and Eastwood about Oscar song slights.
Bonus points for the Oscar people: “Down to Earth” won a Grammy last weekend.
So, let’s get this right. They’re HIDING fashion from the red-carpet which is why we all tune in early. They’re CUTTING the song medley like annoying DJs on commercial radio stations, denying us the one true form of entertainment. And they’re CRAMMING all this into three hours. Brevity isn’t always the answer. There is change for the better where Barack is concerned but change for change’s sake where these half-wits are concerned. I’m tuning in just to watch the shambles unfold…..
BOO to Condon and Mark. What an inane idea! A salute to Peter Gabriel for standing up to them!
Good for Peter! Good to see him holding onto artistic diginity there — apparently the producers of the Oscars have none.
“No one has ever heard of this Wall-E song anyway.”
Well, a good number of people have seen WALL-E, either on the big screen or on DVD, so they must have heard (of) it, as it was the song at the start of the end credits. That is, if they stuck around for the end credits.
I just want Peter Gabriel to win this Oscar !
So many of his songs already appeared in films in the past (City of Angels, Natural Born Killers, Say Anything and more) – this guy has always been a VISUAL man with all his amazing performances and clips.
I am glad that he has won even 2 awards at the Grammies for Wall.e – also for best “instrumental”.
If it is an “insult” to the songwriters/performers not to allow them to sign the entire song, could it not be argued that it is an equal insult to a film’s producers, director, and actors not to show the entire film, rather than a short clip?
The Oscar producers do not seem to like British acts like Peter Gabriel (remember Phil Collins years back with Against all Odds). So we need some of those new pop-corn rockers to perform their junk-food music, that is currently riding high in the charts – that is actually what this Oscar-show deserves !
“No one has ever heard of this Wall-E song anyway.”
WALL-E had the best ending credit sequence in theaters this year, and you don’t think anyone’s heard it? Grossing over $500 million, and no one’s heard it? It’s the best movie of the year! If not for the glass ceiling of the “Best Animated” category, WALL-E would be in the top 5! The Reader?! What a joke!
“I would break it down to three divisions: Best Dramatic Picture, Best Comedtic Picture, Best Action Picture.”
And create ANOTHER glass ceiling? More categories are the last thing we need. Voters who can’t get past animation, genre, and subject matter biases are another. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Best Picture? Ha! That’s almost as ridiculous as The Reader. But it gets the most noms because it’s Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchet and special effects.
The five song performances are the most entertaining part of the show! I can’t believe how much the songwriters got screwed over this year; Bruce Springsteen missed his nomination, and now they won’t even give Gabriel his full 5 minutes? Cut the speeches! Have them post press releases! I want music, not thanks for whoever did Kate Winslet’s makeup in Revolutionary Road. They’ve gone past shooting themselves in the foot and just went straight for the kill. This is insulting.
Who do they think they are, these Oscar-producers ?
The music was always the only highlight in this show. My rock-hero Bruce even got no nomination and now this – I was looking forward to see at least a great performance by Peter Gabriel, who is also another big favourite musician of mine – and then only 65 seconds to “honour” this man ?
Dear Mr. Peter Gabriel ! I want You to kick their asses, go get the Oscar ! My little daughter loves your Walle-song !
Down to Earth was maybe my favorite song of 2008 – I was listening to it a couple of hours ago, it’s on my own personal heavy rotation.
A better solution than a medley would be to show a clip from the movie with the song playing, similar in length to any other award. That may also encourage voters to nominate songs that are in the actual movie as opposed to over the end credits.
That being said, the credits for Wall-E were great and continued the story.
Cutting the red carpet is by far the bigger mistake and they will regret that decision as soon as the ratings come in.
Many factors contribute to the decline in the Oscar ratings: a move from March to February, more viewing options with the breakthrough of cable and satellite TV, and a shift in coverage making “fashion” almost as important as the awards themselves.
But the biggest change is in the way the general public views movies, and pop-culture, in today’s world. Most people now think that the year’s most popular films should be the ones nominated. Sadly, art has little to do with popularity, although sometimes they do mix. The Academy Awards is based on honoring quality in filmmaking, not popularity with audiences.
Also, the media attention on “stars” has greatly increased on a daily basis, so the public is already saturated with Hollywood. We do not need the Oscars to give us a glimpse at how people are looking, or who they are dating. The allure of seeing “stars” as themselves is totally gone from the awards now.
So despite what ABC is trying to do, the Oscars will never be the ratings powerhouse it once was when there was only a handful of TV stations, and the public had a higher curiosity for seeing “stars” parade on TV (which “stars” didn’t do very frequently, much less guest-star or do TV shows!)
The telecast should honor film. Period. It should look at the best of the year, and on occasion, reflect the role of film in society. The presenter pairings should also pay tribute to past honored (or favorite) films> Like, how about pairing Robert Redford with Barbra Streisand and introduce them as stars from “The Way We Were,” a very beloved classic. Or bring together the stars of Star Wars or Ghandi or Silence of the Lambs as paired presenters? Also, don’t forget about the older stars. I hate just seeing today’s overexposed crowd. And for God’s sake, make sure the presenter of the final award is a surprise heavyweight!