Can the Oscars have repeat success without a host?

The Oscars are fast approaching thanks to a shortened awards season, and the show will be without a host for the second year.

Can it work?

They say lightning never strikes the same place twice. And I have a sinking feeling that’s the case here.

Let’s look at a few factors.

Do hosts help?

The 2019 Oscars were a mad rush to the finish line. After Kevin Hart was announced and unannounced as host, no one jumped at the opportunity to host the biggest awards show of each year.

Fortunately, it worked. Ratings rebounded. But was part of that just to see a potential fail?

The last time the Oscars went host-less before 2019 was 1989. The year of the Snow White/Rob Lowe musical number. Memorable, but it the worst way possible.

The second most-watched awards show is the Grammys, which went without a host for a few years. In 2012, LL Cool J started a five-year hosting streak, which mostly consisted of opening and closing the show and introducing a few musicians here and there. Alicia Keys hosts this year’s show for the second year in a row.

It never seemed necessary to have a Grammys host since it’s more about the performances than the awards (many awards aren’t televised anyway), but the show had viewer increases from 2015-2017 and had increased viewership last year, all years with a host.

And let’s not forget that the 2019 Emmys tried to go host-less since the Oscars did…and it bombed.

What does a host do?

It’s not that a host is needed, per se, but these awards shows need to flow. The Oscars had some success in 2019 for being almost 30 minutes shorter than 2018, a welcome reprieve, especially on an already late Sunday night telecast.

 As long as you can keep a show running smoothly with some laughs or memorable moments, it works. It’s why Amy Poehler and Tina Fey are great hosts. Their dry humor and buddy banter delight audiences without alienating them.

And let’s be real, some hosts don’t work. Remember James Franco and Anne Hathaway? Her costume changes were more exciting than their bits. The Emmys Colin Jost and Michael Che? Snooze.

What about presenters and winners?

Over the last couple years, there seems to be more emphasis on who, besides the host, is part of the awards shows.

Presenters can make or break a moment. A bad bit can sour a show and make viewers turn off the program.

Maya Rudolph, for example, has had great moments.

And not so great moments.

Without a host, you have to hope the presenters entertain the audience. But their time is so quick that it has to be gold or be dust.

And then we have the nominees, which means a chance for colorful, political, motivational, sappy award speeches.

Deliver a good acceptance speech and you’re golden. Regina King? Flawless. Michelle Williams? Giving a voice where she thought appropriate.

There’s a fine line in these political times, but getting that sound bite is priceless. And what the Oscars hope to achieve.

 

With a higher than usual unpredictability in the Best Picture race balancing out what seem to locks for the acting categories, a chance for surprise seems minimal. And without the suspense of how will a host-less Oscars work, it seems unlikely people will care as much as last year.

It’s the last hurrah for some at the 2019 Emmys

The Emmy nominations are here, and it’s time to say goodbye (officially) to so many shows.

Now the question is: Will the awards love continue with wins?

In a word: doubtful.

Let’s look at some of these shows and see what their chances could be.

Games of Thrones

Number of nominations: 32

The fantasy saga has concluded, while the books’ future is TBD.

But this final season was uneven at best, with critics and fans less than happy with the outcome. If it wins for Best Drama, it will be based on the series as a whole, not these last 6 episodes.

For its more technical award nominations, it’s more likely the show will win, especially considering how tough it was to shoot the long episodes.

The Emmys were nice and nominated many of the cast members. Unfortunately, the cast is too big for the number of acting categories.

With the supporting categories half-filled with GoT actors, it’ll split the vote and leave them all empty-handed. Congrats on the pity nominations.

Fleabag

Number of nominations: 11

This little hit snuck its way in, much to critics’ happiness.

With only two short seasons, it’s a quick watch, but the characters reel you in. (There are currently no plans for a third season.).

I don’t know if it has enough traction or presence to win best comedy, but an actress win for Phoebe Waller-Bridge would be the Emmys version of Olivia Coleman winning at the Oscars.

Veep

Number of nominations: 9

This is the rally cry comedy needs.

Veep wasn’t in Emmy contention last year since it was off the air while Julie Louis-Dreyfus took care of her health after being diagnosed with breast cancer.

But it came back strong for its final episodes, even if it didn’t get the buzz GoT did. (It also didn’t get the criticism GoT did, so there’s that.)

The lead actress category is a tough one, but with this well-recieved, multiple-Emmy-winning comedy ending, voters could be inclined to reward it one last time, especially for the beloved actress who conquered cancer.

Schitt’s Creek

Number of nominations: 4

It’s the little engine that could. Or this show is finally paddling with the creek’s current and with a paddle.

While this isn’t a Netflix show, Netflix certainly helped this Canadian comedy get some traction.

And now that the creator Dan Levy has announced the show will end with season six, it seemed to time to finally honor the quirky cult show.

Will it win? Probably not, but like they say, it’s an honor to be nominated.

House of Cards

Number of nominations: 3

Did anyone remember this show aired?

Crowded in controversy after Kevin Spacey’s dismissal, the show’s final season quietly premiered on Netflix.

And then no one cared. 

Robin Wright could sneek in a win just for making it through the last season with grace, but that seems unlikely.

The 71st Primetime Emmy Awards will air Sept. 22 on Fox.

Award shows 2018: Do network shows have a place anymore?

At the Golden Globes this year, only one out of 11 TV award winners was a network TV show representative (Sterling K. Brown won best actor in a drama series for NBC’s “This is Us.”)

Tomorrow’s SAG Awards only have five network TV show nominations among all the categories.

Do network shows even stand a chance anymore?

Now that Netflix consistently pulls out award-winning shows, with Amazon and Hulu reaching their stride in quality shows, is it time to separate out network shows from paid services shows?

The way people watch Netflix shows vs. a show on ABC, Fox, etc. is so different. You can binge a Netflix series in a weekend, while NBC draws out one season of “This is Us” from September to April or so (but maybe that’s so we can all take a sobbing break).

Plus, Hulu and those networks have advantages network shows don’t. On a network like CBS, you can’t swear, show nudity, depict graphic violence and other things. Rules must be followed. On online networks, the rules don’t apply. Anything can happen. And it usually does.

Another big difference is network shows play to commercial breaks. They place cliffhangers and plot points in just the right spot to keep you watching. On Netflix, it seems like most original drama episodes end on cliffhangers so you’ll continue watching. And Netflix doesn’t even ask the pesky question “Are you still watching?” when it’s an original show. It can play out like one long, continuous story, and viewers soak it right up.

Network shows just can’t play the same game online networks can. So is it fair to pit them against each other in award categories?

Plenty of quality shows still exist on ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and the CW. Should they be recognized in a different way? Or does that just further depict the difference in the TV formats?

It may be time to revisit how award shows handle TV shows.