3RD UPDATE: Hugh Jackman just emailed me this statement via his production company: "Thirty years ago when I was in Sydney watching Johnny Carson host the Oscars with my family, I never imagined that I'd one day have the chance to be up on that stage myself! I am very grateful to the Academy for giving me this opportunity. And, excited to be working with Larry and Bill on what I know will be a fun and memorable celebration."
2ND UPDATE: Hugh Jackman will host the 81st Academy Awards® telecast, the show's producer Laurence Mark and executive producer Bill Condon announced today in Beverly Hills. "We kept saying how we were looking for Cary Grant or Clark Gable. And then we realized that Hugh Jackman had hosted the Tony's so successfully," Mark told me exclusively today. This will be Jackman’s first time center stage at the Oscar show, although he has previously been a presenter. “Hugh Jackman is a consummate entertainer and an internationally renowned movie star,” said Mark and Condon in an earlier joint statement. “He also has style, elegance and a sense of occasion. Hugh is the ideal choice to host a celebration of the year’s movies – and to have fun doing it.”
EXCLUSIVE: TOLDJA! I reported yesterday that the Academy Of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences had chosen someone "way outside the box" to host the 81st Oscars on February 22nd. Today, I've learned that the person is not just outside the box but outside this country. The Academy Awards is going international with its emcee choice -- Australian actor Hugh Jackman, star of X-Men and its two sequels, Australia, and the upcoming Wolverine, as well as People Magazine's 2008 "Sexiest Man Alive". But, and it's a BIG but, while the 40-year-old Sydney-born thesp of English parentage has received the AMPAS offer and is very interested, I'm told that he's not yet fully committed. Because there's still a lot of negotiating ahead between his showbiz representatives and AMPAS. I've learned that the people around Jackman want to know exactly what would be expected of him, especially when it comes to opening the Oscar broadcast. One segment of the show which reps for Jackman are objecting to specifically is the joke-telling monologue. "I don't want that for him," an insider told me. "He is an actor with big movies behind him and one coming this summer. He didn't work the last 20 years to suddenly be a stand-up comedian."
In recent years of Oscar telecasts, even going back decades, the ceremony has been emceed by mostly TV or movie comedians -- whether Will Rogers and George Jessel in the 1930s, Bob Hope off and on for the next three decades, Johnny Carson in the 1980s, even David Letterman in 1995. In the 1990s and 2000s, there's been a mix of film funnypeople like Billy Crystal, Whoopi Goldberg, and Steve Martin as well as stand-up comedians and TV personalities like Chris Rock, Ellen DeGeneres and Jon Stewart. But now that producers Larry Mark and Bill Condon plan to get rid of the joke-telling portion of the show this year (as I reported Thursday and thought a smart move: these one-liners are usually understood only by the movie industry and so inside that TV viewers are left bewildered), it opened up the possibility of an actor hosting. "If this is a different version of the Oscars than in previous years, then Hugh would be great. But I have no interest in him being Billy Crystal." a Jackman insider told me.
Only a few thesps have hosted the show by themselves, including first AMPAS president and one of the founders Douglas Fairbanks, then Jimmy Stewart, Robert Montgomery, and Jack Lemmon, when the Oscars consisted of an awards banquet, then a radio show, and ultimately a globally broadcast TV spectacle. As far as I can tell, all of the lone emcees have been Americans. Jackman's selection is the motion picture industry's recognition that, more now than ever before, the success of a movie depends equally if not more so on its international box office than its North American grosses.
As to why Jackman might have been selected over other actors, he's a proven commodity at hosting awards shows. He brilliantly emceed the televised ceremony for the Tony Awards in 2003, 2004 and 2005, and won an Emmy for the latter. As to whether Jackman would be asked to show off his musical talent at the Academy Awards isn't clear. But he did win Broadway's 2004 Tony Award as Best Actor In A Musical for his portrayal of Australian singer/songwriter Peter Allen in The Boy From Oz. The hiring of Mark and Condon, respectively Dreamgirls' producer and director, to co-produce this 81st Academy Awards would seem to indicate the pair might choose to make the most of Jackman's multi-talents. As for the actor, he'd probably love the exposure because his own movie production company, Seed Productions, is behind not only for the recent X-Man: The Last Stand (2006) but also the upcoming X-Men Origins: Wolverine spin-off for 2009. It also could conceivably help the worldwide box office and DVD sales of his current pic Australia, whose domestic grosses have been disappointing, as well as his other film credits The Prestige, Flushed Away, The Fountain, Happy Feet, Van Helsing, Kate & Leopold and Swordfish.
News of Jackman's selection as the next Oscar host -- no matter if he turns it down, which I do believe is doubtful -- is sure to be cheered in his home country of Australia, where moviegoing is a widespread passion. The choice is also a repudiation of recent hosts like Jon Stewart (twice) who though a household name in this country was barely known to anyone outside the United States. Last year, his emceeing resulted in the worst-rated Oscars since Nielsen started tracking them in 1974. Only 32 million people watched the writers strike-threatened 80th Academy Awards. And the 56 metered markets averaged a 10.7 rating among adults aged 18-49 -- smaller than the 39.9 million drawn by 2007's Ellen DeGeneres, or the 55 million who tuned in for Billy Crystal back in 1998.
But, really, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences only has itself to blame. AMPAS was trying to pander to young audiences. But after last year's kudosfest, several Hollywood power players lobbied AMPAS to do everything it could to change the awards show from top to bottom. What can't be helped is that recent nominations have been dominated by the small independent movies at the expense of the popular studio movies. As a result, last year's crowd-pleasers like 2007's Transformers, The Simpsons Movie, Knocked Up, Harry Potter, The Bourne Supremacy, Spider-Man 3 and Pirates of the Caribbean 3 were barely given much air time.
I'm told the Jackman announcement could come as soon as Tuesday but more likely after the holidays if all the i's are dotted and t's get crossed in time. Jackman was one of the presenters at the 2002 Academy Awards, but said he'd think twice about doing it again because "getting up there in a suit and talking for a little bit is kind of bizarre." Also, he's supposed to be very near-sighted with extremely blurry vision when he isn't wearing contacts, so, reportedly, when he hosted the Tonys and even Saturday Night Live, Jackman memorized almost everything he had to say so he wouldn't have to struggle to read. And then there's just the terror of appearing live before Hollywood and the world. But Jackman once said about his own courage, "I've always felt that if you back down from a fear, the ghost of that fear never goes away. It diminishes people. So I've always said 'yes' to the thing I'm most scared about."


I always wondered why the Oscars host HAD to be a comedian (Whoopi Goldberg, Chris Rock, Steve Martin, David Letterman) and not a actor. I’d love to see Samuel L. Jackson take a shot at it.
EXCELLENT choice! I love Jackman, not only as an actor, but he is always a fun, interesting personality as well. His Tony awards stints were huge successes, and I believe he’ll do well here as well.
While I wasn’t thrilled to hear them getting rid of the jokes, which made me believe it would be bland and dreary, this has renewed my hope.
p.s. Transformers, Spidey 3, etc, get few nominations for a REASON! They weren’t very good.
Are you kidding me? THIS is the change they want? If any portion of the AA needs changing…it’s anything BUT the opening monologue. Maybe a few of the lesser awards on-air. Maybe shorter acceptance speeches? If they thought the ratings were lower last year…just wait until this year.
Hugh is a doll and I would watch him in ANYTHING. I might even watch more than the last fifteen minutes of the Academy Awards if he were host. Much better choice than recent hosts. What a novel idea to have someone host who actually is talented. Have a long and prolific career, Hugh.
So the Academy is just going to give up and admit right up front that they’re not even going to attempt to have an entertaining awards show?
Mister Jackman seems like a nice enough bloke and I am well aware that most comedians’ jokes fall flat on this show, but to just admit up front that it’s going to suck? What up wit dat?
There’s a vast difference between hosting and acting, which is why stand-up comedians so often get the gig; they know how to work a room. Hosting demands a personality, where acting demands suppressing ones personality into the character. Rare actors, such as Tom Hanks, can do both. It has to do with concentration, presence, and stagecraft, which is why the Tony Awards soar and the Oscarcast thuds. And it’s why Jackman, Mark and Condon have a shot at making a real difference, ’cause they have style and daring. And, hey, what’s wrong with being a stand-up comic? It’s one of the toughest jobs in showbiz do do well (like writing an industry blog).
Santayana makes some very good points.
Hosting the Oscars has more to do with good old fashioned showmanship than anything else. That goes beyond just playing to the audience in the Kodak Theatre, but to making an emotional connection with the people watching at home as well. Something many recent hosts seem to have forgotten.
During the Golden Age of Hollywood actors had a lot more ability to do that because many of them started out working the raucous and occasionally riotous vaudeville, burlesque, and nightclub circuits. They had to be able to think on their feet, keep the show moving, keep the audience happy, and most of all, acknowledge that it’s not about them, but about the awards and the people who win them.
I wish Jackman good luck if he takes the deal, the whole telecast will have to be revamped from the ground up to make it more than a snooze fest.
He is a great actor, and is actually pretty funny, but is this going to bring ratings? I mean really???? Outside the box thinking would have been a guy like Justin Timberlake. He would bring in an entire new viewership, is funny as hell on SNL, looks good in a tux, and can show a serious side…PLUS he knows how to play to the crowd and could open with a KICK ASS music number. This show will be booooorrrring.
Question: How do you get lower ratings than the year when you had a cable star hosting and independent films as the top 2 contenders?
Answer: Hugh Jackman hosting
I think that having gorgeous Hugh as MC of the Oscars is a wonderful idea. I haven’t watched the televised Oscars for years because they are usually overlong and boring. But Mr. Jackman could breath new life in the tired old show. By all means, get Hugh. He is a proven showman, and marvelously talented–plus drop dead handsome.
Question: How do you get me (and people like me) to watch the Oscars again after I quit watching them several years back?
Answer: Produce them like a stage show instead of an in-bred love-in and have Hugh Jackman host. Then again, I’d pay money to watch Hugh Jackman read the phone book.
Sounds like the Academy has decided to officially scrap any attempt to encourage younger, straight males to watch the Oscars. (Much like television in general these days.) They might as well go all the way and hire the women from The View to host the show. They could present the Thalberg award to Oprah. I think I’ll just wait for the highlights on YouTube.
They just can’t come out and say it that half of this country won’t watch a show that bashes Republicans and the president. It’s getting old and it isn’t funny. It’s hard to believe that a Non-American has never hosted this event, although Bob Hope was born and raised in England. Lastly, the writers for the Academy have sucked for years and getting host who are revered by a select few is the recipe for crap ratings.
Nikki
I don’t remember what year it was (probably in the 70s) David Niven (English) was a very able host of the Academy Awards when a streaker ran across the stage (naked of course) and Niven wryly commented (I paraphrase) “How fascinating that he must strip off and show his shortcomings to get a laugh.” While not a comedian, Niven had a wonderful sense of humor which was far more entertaining than a bunch of one-liners. Perhaps Hugh Jackman is the new Niven.
Real World Person,
What’s more disturbing, your choice of name based on a degrading mtv reality show or your brainwashed love for a Disney performing child puppet-turned personality free, well managed, fake ebonic expert Michael Jackson impersonator from Florida?
Justin Timbertwit isn’t funny, looks like a mall rat with syphillis, would be DOA without Timbaland (who stopped being relevant with Missy) and has died, over and over again, in any appearance that asks him to speak the English language.
Raise those standards, watch what happens…
I’m not in the industry (though I guess I follow it somewhat closely since I read this blog) but I have never thought that there was anything particularly “inside” about any of the jokes in the opening monologue. In fact, most people I know consider it to be the highlight of the show. If there’s anything that needs to be cut it’s the number of awards given out on air, the musical numbers (just have the winner perform), and many of the retrospectives.
No matter how you slice it, and Jackman is a wonderfully talented man, the Oscars this year are putting lipstick on a pig. There have been some good films but very few great ones so far this year.
There are still a few interesting films yet to be released this month, let’s hope they saved the best for last but if the trailers are any indication it doesn’t bode well.
Director Frank Capra was a lone emcee in both ‘36 & ‘39, and he was not born in America.
I resisted saying Frank Capra was not ‘American’, because even though he may have been an immigrant, Frank Capra has become synonymous of ‘America.’
Just floating this boat… Jackman/Chenoweth.
I think he’d be great. We definitely need some class brought to the Oscars. Look at what happened to the 4 “hosts” at the Emmys.
i have also never understood why people equate the ratings with the host. I would be willing to bet less than 10% of viewers base their viewing on the host. It has FAR more to do with the movies nominated. Look at the years of Titanic and Lord of the Rings. This year is all but guaranteed to be big if The Dark Knight gets nominations, so if it does, don’t go giving TOO much credit to the host or other changes in the program.
Nothing negative to say about this choice.
A proven host (TONYs).
An international audience base.
Leading man.
Ditching the industry jokes.
Can sing and dance.
if Hugh Jackman does host the Oscars, then his first order of business should be NOT to have Bruce Vilanch be the head writer of the show. how can any comedian, actor, or animated figure be expected to be funny when the words Bruce and his team write are not funny?
Choosing Hugh would bring back the old Hollywood feel to the awards. And he was great when he hosted the Tonys.
And back to Bruce, I say Bruce stick to being the center square on the Hollywood Squares.
What happened to Ricky Gervais hosting the Snore-scars? That was a much better choice. As long as Hugh Jackman hosts shirtless, then I’m in agreement.
I’m with you 100%, Nikki. Let’s eliminate the opening monologue to concentrate on the really interesting part of the evening: head-scratching monologues, awkward award presentations, and winners thanking their agents and lawyers. Gonna be GREAT! You’re right, most people outside of Hollywood don’t understand humor at ALL. They’re just so stupid!
And I’m sure the legions of Hugh Jackman fans who only know him from his uber-masculine Wolverine role will love to see his range as a song-and-dance man. Brilliant career move. In the immortal words of Estelle Evert: “I think that having gorgeous Hugh as MC of the Oscars is a wonderful idea.” Can’t argue with that logic!
Hugh Jackman? Bizarre.
The reason the Academy Awards have gone downhill in viewership is that they have become a elitist show. Only the pretentious movies get nominated and the popular movies get snubbed. I haven’t seen any of the films that have won in the last few years and have no intention of ever watching them. IF the AA want better ratings then nominate Dark Knight for Best Picture and Heath Ledger as well. Otherwise it will be the same thing all over again with the pretentious independent movies winning and nobody watching the awards.
The Tonys just aren’t the same without Jackman. He made those shows really, really fun to watch and was an incredibly impressive host. If this proves accurate, this is truly great news. Anyone who thinks a stand-up would do better should watch how he works the audience and the room in those Tony telecasts. He’s an inspired choice.
Maybe he’ll even make up for the lack of inspired films (with a few exceptions)!
How is he “outside the box”? So he’s not a stand-up comic… He hosted the Tony Awards 4 years ago and was absolutely fabulous! I think he’ll be a lot of fun.
Actors are boring, self centered, bloviated hams. Comedians make the award show bearable, fun and have the ability to keep the show moving. Watching Jackman is like watching a soap opera actor trying to be funny. The problem is that these award shows are like watching a graduation commencement. Bring on Jack Black and shake it up a bit. Actors need to brought down to earth and reminded that their over inflated opinions of themselves, need to be deflated. Jack Warner had it right, “Actors are over paid Bums”
Even though it may have been nothing more than a false-slash-wishful (post Emmys) rumor, the foreigner AMPAS should have gone with is Ricky Gervais, not Hugh Jackman. You want the Cheekiest Man Alive, not the Sexiest.
Hugh Jackman? Really? What, was Wall-E not available?
Wolverine: The AA’s Final Cut…
Why would his people have an issue with him doing comedy? Many A-list celebrities do SNL, as I believe he has done in the past. As his only major successes have been actioners, letting him do some comedy may help prevent him from being type-cast. He’s a multi-talented performer who can handle humor; here’s an opportunity to let the public see what else he’s good at.
“Jackman’s selection is the motion picture industry’s recognition that, more now than ever before, the success of a movie depends equally if not more so on its international box office than its North American grosses.”
Or they could just think he’s the right guy for the job. As to the link of host to ratings? I don’t think so. The ratings are low because of the films that have been nominated. If the Academy overlooks The Dark Knight in the major categories and goes the same old route this year, the ratings will stink again, no matter who is hosting.
Young men know him as Wolverine. Older people know him as suave and a good stage performer. He was just on the cover of People mag as Sexiest Man Alive. International star. That sounds like broad appeal to me. He is smart, funny, can think on his feet, and really was terrific as Tony host. And to top it off, he’s good looking.
Am I the only one who thinks this choice will bound out with audiences? I mean, I like Hugh Jackman. He’s a splendid actor. But what will happen with the TV audience? Will they stay-tuned if the Oscars takes itself too seriously?
I think the success of Dancing with the Stars might have had something to do with this. The comedians failed to pack in the audiences so now the producers look to be going back to the old song and dances routines.
I could see Hugh opening with a Billy Crystal-esque number. Singing about the year, a few jokes peppered in, maybe with the more elaborate dance number.
After that, he’s got charm and charisma to pull off even the corniest one liner so he should be able to handle that as well.
If there’s one concern, it’s having Jackman singing and dancing and then giving Jerry Lewis a live microphone.
I’m sick of people suggesting there should be fewer awards given at the event. The Academy Awards is there first and foremost to recognise acheivements in the motion picture industry. It is not just a TV show for easily bored idiots to see clips of their favorite movies and watch their favorite actors on stage and the red carpet. It is in danger of becoming the TV equivalent of US Weekly.
I think Hugh Jackman is a great idea. He’s international, talented and charming.
Great choice. A classy, talented, fun guy, and easy on the eyes.
I just saw “AUSTRALIA”. AMPAS would be better off with HJ’s horse as host. Or better yet, if they want someone with personality from “down under” how about Heath Ledger?
To Santayana and all the people with the Monday Morning Quarterbacking in depth analysis of what it takes to host a show…
Do you understand that Jackman is one the world’s premier entertainers? Did you see a live performance of The Boy From Oz? I don’t think any of you have an idea of the range of Hugh Jackman’s talents. Anyone who can inhabit Peter Allen and Wolverine (both convincingly) is the ultimate showman.
I can’t wait for him to make you all eat your words. On the contrary. I think this years will be the first of an example of what’s been missing.
Aussie! Aussie! Aussie!
Oh yeah…he’s hosted the Tony’s several times now and received rave reviews for his hosting abilities. Is a proven track record in successfully hosting a big awards ceremony not enough for all you malcontents?
He can sing so can’t he do the opening type thing that Billy Crystal would do? Where he sang while he showed up in the different nominated movies? That bit was funny. And doesn’t require telling jokes.
His broad appeal must be the reason Australia did so well… oh wait…
@ Baldwin
As if the only reason a movie doesn’t do well is because one of the actor’s appeal wasn’t broad enough. Yes…it’s all Hugh’s fault. What industry do you work in? If you are going to weigh in…get a clue.
@ Mike Baldwin
Don’t think that movie would have done well with anybody in the lead. It’s just not a movie people wanted to see.
Oh, puh-lease, Hugh Jackman? Give me a break. On the back of a movie flop, it’s a bad move by Condon.
To Joseph: re-read what I wrote.
Each time he has hosted the Tonies, the ratings reached a new low. He may be talented and charming on screen, but he has a milquetoast personality live. Chris Rock and Jon Stewart might have had their “uncomfortable” moments, but they added an edge to the show. With Jackman, it’s like a throw-back to the Bob Hope days, but without the sharp comedic timing. Does the Academy want a Yawn Fest for 2009? Apparently so.
If Hugh Jackman is hosting and they’re not doing the unfunny “joke” monologue as they have for eons, that ought to slash the running time a bit. While they’re at it, they ought to drop the performing of the songs and keep the montages to one – the obituary segment. There’s no reason in hell why the show should be longer than two hours.
It’s bizarre.
I love Bill Condon and all his work. Same can be said of Jackman…YET, I am completely unenthused by both of these choices.
I guess what I enjoy before, during and between the accolades is the reflections of the industry through the host’s perspective. Billy Cristal and his Jack Palance riffs, John Stewart, Steve Martin and, dare I say it, Chris Rock.
I’m not celebrating cruel jibes but rather the uncertainty of what will come next.
Hugh is a class act and that seems to be what they are going for. But, generally if you go out for “classy” evening the part you are waiting for is the after-party.
I don’t think it will be boring but I doubt we’ll see anything unexpected, either.
Political jabs and mocking the industry IS the Oscar telecast! I like Jackman but the show needs the other more!
Chuck
Why would Jackman want to do it? Seems like a weird career move.
I don’t think US audiences rejected “Australia” because of Hugh Jackman. I think they rejected it because it wasn’t a story they cared about.
I don’t think recent Oscar TV ratings have gone south because of the hosts. I think they went south because the nominees were a bunch of movies, actors and actresses nobody saw / cares about.
I wish Hugh luck.
And Hugh, keep it clean. Families like to watch
Yay, a fellow countryman. Hugh will do great, he’s very talented.
P.S. This site’s attracting some real brainless comments these days
Jackman is perfection…handsome, classy, incredibly talented and, above all else, able to capture the female demographic audience, so important to those cosmetic, hair, clothing, car companies which spend a veritable fortune to advertise during that kudofest…
It’ll be like watching Australia… twice… in a row. Four hours you’ll never get back.
I’m not an industry insider, so I just watch the Oscars for fun, and recently I haven’t really been bothering (unless you count watching the monologue and then watching on fast-forward on the Tivo to see who won). I really haven’t cared about the movies that have been nominated, and compared to the other “normal” people I know, I’m probably the most movie-literate of them. Thus, I would agree with the people who said that the movies nominated are more important (or at least as important) for getting ratings as the host is.
I like Hugh Jackman, but now that I know there is no monologue, unless I really care about movies that are nominated I’m not going to even bother to Tivo it this year. I’ll just check in the next morning to this or another site to see who won. I wonder how many “normal”/non-insider people will be doing the same thing as I will. Just a thought.
David Niven was a presenter and not the host when the streaker bounced across the screen. And what he actually said was this”
“Isn’t it fascinating to think, that probably the only laugh that man will ever get in his life, is by stripping off and showing his shortcomings!”
Lets take a mind numbingly boring self congratulating bore fest, who’s only redeeming feature are the comedy snippets, and cut out the comedy.
Oh yeah, I’m sure this’ll bring the audience flocking back.
Jackman will do well. I might’ve hoped for Tina Fey or Leno, but if the producers are wise about giving the event a true ’sense of occasion’ it will clearly surpass recent years’ offerings. They will need to find a successful method for injecting humor and general lightheartedness if Jackman is not a master of comedic delivery… I don’t know how they might do that, but I’m sure there is a way.
The jack thespian is terrible in the most recent movie Australia! he would be a good hack for the oscars which has become a political sideshow about ‘hate bush!’ Look at rhe demise of the ratings, which will continue, until hollywood gets rid of the radical element it emulates – homosexual love, language, and political leftists!
Great scoop, Nik.
Hate to say, but the ratings can’t get worse. Maybe the Academy finally realized that programming a show with hosts that only appeal to NY/LA isn’t the way to go. So, call it a reboot.
Can’t be any worse than when Stewart did it in ‘06. And I know, ’cause I was there. LOL.
The Academy should go “way out of” the box and pick someone like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. They could open up by telling funny jokes about Obama and end with a ringing endorsement of pro-war movies. Let’s put the conservatives back in charge of Hollywood. Movies generally stink today and the Oscars are predictable garbage. Only the Rushman or loveable Sean H. can save them from themselves. God Bless America
I used to tune into the Oscars for two reasons:
1. I cared about the movies nominated. Last year The Assassination of Jesse James, one of the best films of the year imo, was almost shut out but Michael Clayton got a nod for Best Picture and George Clooney gets a nod for Best Actor. Still shaking my head over that one.
2. to watch Hollywood Royalty. Nowadays we viewers are left with Miley Cyrus, Eva Longoria, Jessica Alba and Jennifer Garner. No thanks
Hugh seems like a nice guy but he’s not enough to get me to spend 3+ hours watching a bunch of B & C list presenters and watch actors and movies win over those more deserving.
Ya know those Drudge report folks do get tedious after awhile.
I’m right centered in some areas and left centered on others but reading some of those drudge folks comment’s gets so repetitive. I mean, we get it okay? You don’t like homosexuals, there is too much sex on tv and in movies, language on tv shows is getting really foul. BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. I don’t disagree on some of your concerns, I just feel you folks need to give it a rest and get a life. Okay?
If you think Hollywood’s not going to get people going to films because of all the crap out there then go make films YOU LIKE and then all of you go and watch them. No seriously, why don’t you all pool your Sunday church contributions and start your own studio. Make only religious based movies and make sure you support them to the hilt.
But complaining here isn’t going to make a difference. Really. Oh, and by the way, I recently heard a report that over 70% of the country is supposedly enjoying pornography. So if, as you drudge people say, 50% of the country is pure right so that means that 50% is pure left (and other) then where are those extra 20% coming from who are enjoying porn? (BTW – I’m not one of them – think porn is stupid and degrading to women).
But who are those extra 20%? Oops, perhaps the guy sitting next to you in church smiling and pontificating about the joys of marriage and living clean lives just might not by telling you the truth. Ya think?
As to the award shows. The reason I rarely watch is the LONG WINDED BORING ACCEPTANCE SPEECHES by the winners and the INANE BANTER/JOKES amongst the presenters.
I’m with the Tivo guy – record it and watch later, once they announce a winner I wait till they open their mouths and when they start thanking the guy that stretches their shoes, I speed past them and go on to the next one.
Hugh Jackman sounds like a really good choice. Oh, and don’t let the guys with the little weenies fool you. Australia is a really lovely film. Go see it – the young boy will blow you away, the chemistry between Hugh and Nicole is great and the cinematography is something you need to see on the big screen.
Hugh Jackman will be fabulous as the AA host. As far as I’m concerned, he should reprise the fantastic opening number he did at the Tony Awards with the Rockettes and various Brodway musical casts from the nominated shows.It was “One Night Only” from Dreamgirls. Of course it would have to be adapted for the AA’s. He’s got the best high-kick I’ve seen in the business other than Tommy Tune when he was still active on Broadway. This man can light up a stage like few others can do. Check out you-tube. Clips of all his performance material on the various Tony award shows are there. His other great musical moments there are interacting with Sara Jessica Parker in character ad libbing as Peter Allen. Hilarious! Even better were his pelvic thrusts in those gold lame pants, with a camera at floor level pointed up at him on stage. No wonder she was a nervous wreck! Hey, do that lame thing at the AA’s too! Whoo-hoo! I saw him twice on Broadway playing Peter Allen in “The Boy From Oz” and he was extraordinary. One of his Tony numbers was “I Am Not the Boy Next Door” from “Oz” and it brought down the house. All those hardened showbiz types went bonkers for his performance. Another was a pastiche of a great number of songs from movie/stage musicals while he tries his damndest “not” to dance because he would be filming an upcoming Wolverine movie, and the insurance blokes would be uhhappy if he broke something. That was a great showcase of his charismatic style.
By the way, AUSTRALIA IS A WONDERFUL MOVIE! Adventure/action/comedy/romance/tragedy/history/two charismatic leads/spectacular cinematography of various/exotic parts of Australia, and Hugh Jackman in a clinch doing the smoochy thing. It doesn’t get better than this! He is hot stuff as Wolverine, and even more so here. The grungy, outback “stockman”/drover aka a cowboy in our parlance, cleans up nicely in that white dinner jacket tux in the ballroom scene. I STILL THINK HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN JAMES BOND, NOT THAT SINGULARLY UNPHOTOGENIC WHATZISNAME! I’m boycotting Bond flicks till that other guy wears out his contract. I’ll be seeing Australia again…and again! I’m really tired of my fellow Americans who are know-nothings on cinema history, let alone anyone else’s history, and therefore just don’t “get” what this movie was doing, as well as not having even a fig of a notion about a place such as Australia, which has quite a good deal in common with our country, making uninformed comments about a film that is frankly over their heads. At last a movie designed for grown-ups, not 12-19 year old males!!! Lastly,to the poster who said she’d watch Hugh read the phone book, DITTO for me too! That has been a fond refrain of mine re HJ. The only other actor I’ve ever made that comment about was Richard Burton! LOL!
HRH QUEEN MARY III
Chapter Queen, Royal Order Dames of the Red Hat, a chapter of the Red Hat Society
–They named two ocean liners for me…I must be doing something right!
Hugh Jackman will be a great draw and the changes to the show won’t stop there. I imagine that he will have some creative ideas of how to freshen the Academy Awards up.
Noone really cares about the Academy Awards anymore. It, like newpapers, like newspapers have become dinosaurs. People are more concerned about their pocketbook. Hugh Jackman is cool and great as the Wolverine, but this evening of self importance is T-O-A-S-T.
The best way to get back AA ratings is for a battle between Iron Man and The Dark Knight for top Oscar categories. Endless viewer generated publicity.
He’s got a great look, a great demeanor, and as long as he don’t go “I’m a hollywood liberal….aren’t I funny” the he’d be a blessing to the Academy.
No comedy monologue doesn’t mean no comedy. As someone pointed out, Billy Crystal’s number was really funny, and Jackman did something similar – and equally funny – in his “I Won’t Dance” number at the Tonys.
Didn’t you people see when he broke from the script and dragged Sarah Jessica Parker out of the audience for a long improv bit? She was a deer in the headlights – he was in his element, complete with on the spot one-liners.
Besides, the written stuff is NEVER the funniest part. The most entertaining moments are always when someone comes out with a memorable, impropmtu remark or reaction. A good host is able to do that, and pave the way for others to as well.
He may not be the most popular choice here in the US, but he goes for the unexpected, he can pick up a gag and run with it, he can be funny, and he can appeal to the billions from a global audience.
If you’ve only met Wolverine, or know him from a film that didn’t interest you, you’re missing why they picked him. He’s as much entertainer as actor.
I’m male, not gay, not a particular booster of Jackman’s, but I think he’ll do fine. Now all they need is some decent writing, not like the dull, leaden garbage they called jokes in the past.
Anyway, NOTHING could be a bigger bomb than the Reality Show Quartet was. My God, what a disaster.
And ITA, audience interest is probably driven more by the nominations than the host.
Note the positive reviews are from women. Women LOVE Hugh Jackman. My wife has said for years that he is the sexiest man alive. So, the Academy is picking someone who will have a lot of appeal to women, gays and foreigners. Straight American men do not watch the Oscars as much as those groups anyway. To get them, the Academy would have to get a sexy woman to host or otherwise butch up the show. So, Hugh is as good a choice as they could have made.
The remaining 5 straight men that watch the awards just tuned out. Haha.
Besides Billy Crystal, who is a scream, the next funniest host was Whoopie Goldberg, when she came out in that Queen get-up. THAT was funny. But you are all right on the money. These awards shows are BO-RING. A waste of time. An in-bred love-fest indeed. The fashions are not even good anymore. yawn…..We won’t even talk about the lame films they are putting out these days.
Hugh Jackman ‘outside the box’ — which box are we talking about?
Won’t matter who hosts the Oscars anymore. The days of Johnny Carson and Bob Hope are gone. Hollywood tries to shove their political views down our throats. Hollywood used to cater to middle America and try to at least pretend to have middle American values. Now Hollywood expects decent middle America to accept their loose morals and far left wing political views.
I used to watch the Oscars every year. I stopped a few years ago. They used to be entertaining. Now it is boring and full of political propaganda. No thanks.
Let’s face it. The reason the ratings are so low, going lower year after year, is the “inside the beltway of Hollywood” thinking. Washington has theirs (think, oh the bailout! What a good idea!) Hollywood is the same with their liberal politics. Because they find it funny to poke fun of the President of the United States year after year, they think everybody else does too. Well, that’s why their ratings are so low. People are sick of Hollywood and their liberal thinking. Most people want to see really good movies awarded. But we find more and more that the obscure President hating, military despising movies are the ones that get the awards. THAT’S why people are turning off the Oscars!
Hugh Jackman? Handsome, charming, and maybe, just maybe, he will be an improvement over the last few years. I’d say go for it!
Bloody Drudge readers. Go blog somewhere else if you don’t give a shit about the industry.
‘Jackman singing and dancing ” what??? I don’t want to watch musical:)the guy isn’t funny at all!:) and that stupid “sexiest man alive”??? Do I want to see how “sexy” he is??? he is sexiest??? for whom? for stupid magazine? are you guys on a dope or something? give it to Jon Stewart or David Letterman!