Still a lot of mysteries left over from Sunday’s Oscar night, many of them raised in questions from EW.com readers. We’ve found a few preliminary answers for you; fuller explanations may be coming later. Watch for an article in this week’s issue of EW that should put as many of these burning questions as possible to rest. Meanwhile, here’s what folks wanted to know more about:
• Why were Brad Renfro (pictured) and two-time Oscar nominee Roy Scheider left out of the "In Memoriam" montage?
• What on earth did Gary Busey think he was doing when he accosted Ryan Seacrest and Jennifer Garner on the red carpet?
• Why was there no footage of Whoopi Goldberg’s four hosting gigs in the montage of memorable Oscar show moments?
• Why was Best Song winner Markéta Irglová invited back to give her acceptance speech when winners of awards from smaller films or smaller categories are routinely cut off by the orchestra and rushed off the stage, never to be heard from again?
• What was behind the strange scheduling of the presentation of the awards — no acting awards at all in the first half hour, Best Actress about halfway through the show, kid-friendly presenter Miley Cyrus held ’til after bedtime? Was sexism behind the early presentation of Best Actress, with Best Actor being held towards the end with the other top categories?
Answers, as best as we can figure, after the jump.
addCredit(“Brad Renfro: L. Cohen/WireImage.com”)
Scheider died after the Jan. 31 cutoff date noted at the beginning of the montage; let’s hope they remember him next year. Leaving out Renfro was an editorial decision made by the Academy, according to spokeswoman, Leslie Unger. "We just can’t include everybody," Unger told the Associated Press. Still, why leave out a star of some major movies, like The Client and Apt Pupil? Was it because he died of a drug overdose? "I can’t speak to what other people are going to think," said Unger. So, not much of an explanation there. Sorry, Renfro fans, but if it’s any consolation, the montage also omitted Vampira, Andy Sidaris, Joey Bishop, and Yes, Giorgio! star Luciano Pavarotti.
The morning after his red-carpet run-in with Seacrest and Garner, Busey called into Seacrest’s radio show to explain himself. You can read a transcript of his remarks here and listen to them here… There, does that make it clearer? Nah, didn’t think so.
Why no Whoopi? Who knows, but Goldberg and her cohosts on The View were certainly miffed about the snub. At least they included footage of her Best Supporting Actress win for Ghost.
Irglová’s reprieve was the result of a mistake by the orchestra, according to Oscar show producer Gil Cates. "She was accidentally played off. No one wanted to play her off," Cates told AP. "I asked her to come back. I asked Jon [Stewart] to please bring her back. It was a very emotional moment." Indeed it was. Still doesn’t explain why other winners haven’t received similar consideration.
As for the baffling placement throughout the show of the awards presentations, there’s been no official explanation. It’s understandable that they’d stagger the acting awards to keep people watching for three and a half hours, but the Supporting Actor or Actress award is usually the first one given, apparently to lull viewers into a false sense of urgency, as if other can’t-miss awards will follow shortly. Also, it’s unusual to present one of the leading-role awards so early; that’s usually considered one of the major awards presented at the tail end of the show. Maybe they staggered that one as well to keep viewer interest from flagging, but wouldn’t it have made more sense to present Best Actor early, since there was no suspense in that race, and leave ’til the end the nail-biter race between Julie Christie, Ellen Page, and eventual winner Marion Cotillard? I can only chalk it up to the short window that Cates and his team had to prepare the show this year, thanks to the writers’ strike. Judging by the backstage report by EW.com’s Adam Vary, the show was much more disorganized than usual this year.
Still have questions about the Oscar show? Let us know, below, and we’ll see what we can find out for you.
I liked the show generally (well I liked Stewart and the winners speeches) but with all these gaffes, obviously Gil Cates needs to stop producing this little affair. And I don’t buy the strike excuse, while the strike was going on, you still could have PLANNED! You don’t need writers to remember to include Whoopi or order the awards in the best way.
I think Marketa Irglova got to come back on because everyone enjoys the best song category. It brings some much needed vibrance to the show. Glen Hansard really didn’t speak for that long and…did you hear the ovation they got? everyone seemed so happy for them. i know i was. plus…i personally thought her speech was fantastic. I’m not saying that they mean less to the moviemaking process, but people would rather hear something from someone recognizable that they saw perform rather than the third person involved in set design.
I know I am not alone when I say I am sick of deserving winners being played off the stage before or during their chance to say anything. THIS IS ONCE IN A LIFETIME, PEOPLE! Cut them some slack. I think the next person asked to host the AA’s needs to accept on the stipulation that people will not be played off. In a time when the academy is worried about slipping ratings, they need to realize that cutting people off puts a bad taste in the viewers’ mouth.
Amy Adams did very well, but why was she alone on that huge stage? Kristen Chenoweth got a bridge and Bavarians, but Amy Adams couldn’t get a broom?
i think it’s perfectly fine that they didn’t include Renfro. They didn’t include everyone. That’s it. End of story. It’s not a sign of disrespect. Yes, it was a more controversial death due to the drugs, but still, it’s their decision. As for whoopi, seems just like a mistake to me. It’s not like they ignored her existence. If it didn’t fit, it didn’t fit.
The presentation schedule was odd. I’ll give you that.
But more than this, the real problem is stuff like Bee Movie placement- not funny, drags the awards out. If they didn’t have crap like that then they wouldn’t be pressed for time and would be able to fit these other things in.
lyn, I agree about amy adams. she was great. and adorable. but i was surprised that she was alone up there. i knew they would do up “that’s how you know” but i thought they would do something with her song.
Carr, i agree completely about the speeches. I’m all for giving people their time in the spotlight. but…if the oscars really are concerned about viewers, cutting people off (to a certain extent) is needed, otherwise the broadcast would be even longer and viewership would drop more.
carr, I have to disagree with you. The only reason Marketa Irglova got asked to come back is because the camera was focused on the stage after Hansard finished and she went to speak and the microphone was turned off. So not only did the audience see she was cut off but also the TV viewers. If you watch when other people get cut off, they pan to a wide shot so you can’t see anyone on the stage and TV viewers don’t know that someone was cut off. Irglova was so obvious they had to ask her back. And why is it so difficult to double the amount of people in the death montage? If you do a split screen of 2 people for 2 seconds a slide, you can fit 120 people in 2 minutes (I love PowerPoint). What’s the problem?
Once again the best answer is this petty people making politically motivated decisions run the Oscars. Explains almost everything – except Gary Busey.
For me, the whole reason to watch the AA is for the acceptance speeches. I’ve either seen the movies or not, a lengthy clip isn’t going to add or detract to the experience. I love music, but show a clip, we don’t need the whole production. Cut the production numbers, cut unnecessary clips, cut most of the jokes and let the winners TALK. The rest we can get elsewhere, not to mention the fact that the moment is perhaps a once in a lifetime for those folks. Give them their five minutes (not literally, but enough with the playoffs and too short time restrictions).
Why not cut the unfunny presenter banter(ie. Steve Carell and Anne Hathaway, Jonah Hill and Seth Rogan)to allow more time for the speeches? Either that or let the Coen Brothers write all the acceptance speeches. They sure know how to keep it short and sweet.
I agree with those who think people should get more time to talk in their acceptance speeches. We didn’t need all those montages and they could’ve had a Best Song medley instead of five full numbers. Do I really care what the Sound Editing winner has to say? No, but I will happily sit through the greatest moment of his/her life and forgo the montage of bees and the painful presenter banter.
I think they could have omitted some of the “agents” and “producers” and included Renfro, and Joey Bishop.
As to the Best Actress award, perhaps it was presented earlier because over the years it has become more of a beauty pageant than an acting award.
Kim: Hear, hear, sister. Forgot about the painful presenter moments. I’d be interested if anyone really enjoys them enough to keep them around. Most of the time, they’re not even funny and I can forego the few funny ones to give some winner his or her moment in the sun. And you’re right, we might not want to hear the sound-editors comments, but I’m sure his/her family is sitting on the edge of their collective seats. Those lesser-known folks get the least amount of back-patting around, they should get their due at the ceremony.
This is the first negative feedback I heard about Marketa Irglova being invited back on stage. I don’t think anyone associates “fairness” with the Oscars, so why is anyone complaining about a nice gesture? I thought it was great.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.