Oscars 2004

Badabing wrote:
> Does anyone know if the Oscars will be shown live on terrestrial this year?
>

and more importantly the Grammys as Sarah mcLachlan performed there.
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

God I hope not! Not yet ANOTHER bloody award ceremony!!!



"steve" <a RemoveThis @a.a> wrote in message news:4037D288.8030204@a.a...
> Badabing wrote:
> > Does anyone know if the Oscars will be shown live on terrestrial this
year?
> >
>
> and more importantly the Grammys as Sarah mcLachlan performed there.
>
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

mick wrote:

> Badabing wrote:
>>Does anyone know if the Oscars will be shown live on terrestrial this
>> year?
>
> Yes. BBC1 0:50 Next Monday morning. It`s on for about 4hrs.

Wonder if it'll have the five-second delay the American broadcaster are
planning to add (and any subsequent censorship), or will it be a 'clean'
feed? I'm assuming the former...
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

"Badabing" <bada.TakeThisOut@boom.com> wrote in message
news:BC5D79FB.6ED84%bada@boom.com...
> Does anyone know if the Oscars will be shown live on terrestrial this
year?
>
On this subject - can anyone try to explain to me what the attraction in
this type of programme is? I put the Brits, the Brats the Baftas The Grammys
etc in the same category. I can just about understand why people want to
watch any special performances on shows like the Grammys but not the rest of
the show but if that were the case it would make sense to just show these in
a highly editted show... for example I've heard lots of discussion of the
"performances" in last weeks Brits but I've heard no mention of the winners
and losers at all.

I'm genuinely baffled - please enlighten.
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

"Dom Robinson" <murphyisamuppet DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message > >
> And will probably switch to BBC2 at about 4am for no good reason, like last
> time.

Did you find it difficult to find the BBC2 button on your remote?

Col
--
I just know that something good is gonna happen.
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

in article 1yYZb.1011$jl.540@newsfe1-gui.server.ntli.net, John W at
news.RemoveThis@dontusethisbithardcafe.co.uk wrote on 22/2/04 7:08 AM:

>
> "Badabing" <bada.RemoveThis@boom.com> wrote in message
> news:BC5D79FB.6ED84%bada@boom.com...
>> Does anyone know if the Oscars will be shown live on terrestrial this
> year?
>>
> On this subject - can anyone try to explain to me what the attraction in
> this type of programme is? I put the Brits, the Brats the Baftas The Grammys
> etc in the same category. I can just about understand why people want to
> watch any special performances on shows like the Grammys but not the rest of
> the show but if that were the case it would make sense to just show these in
> a highly editted show... for example I've heard lots of discussion of the
> "performances" in last weeks Brits but I've heard no mention of the winners
> and losers at all.
>
> I'm genuinely baffled - please enlighten.

Well as a movie fan I want to see what gets the big awards. The ceremony
itself is usually entertaining too - they put a lot of effort into the
presenter's script (the jokes etc.) which Stephen Fry could have done with
at the Baftas. It's a celebration of the movies basically.
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

> >> On this subject - can anyone try to explain to me what the attraction
in
> this type of programme is? I put the Brits, the Brats the Baftas The
Grammys
> etc in the same category. I can just about understand why people want to
> watch any special performances on shows like the Grammys but not the rest
of
> the show but if that were the case it would make sense to just show these
in
> a highly editted show... for example I've heard lots of discussion of the
> "performances" in last weeks Brits but I've heard no mention of the
winners
> and losers at all.
>
> I'm genuinely baffled - please enlighten.

I work in TV production. I also lecture part-time in the subject The
academic department I work in is staffed almost exclusivel by music and
media industry professionals. Most will check the trade papers for award
result in much the same way as most folk will read their horoscope or do the
crossword...

Generally award ceremonys are seen as just a good ol' piss-up. For the
winners it's nice to have some recognition for your work and something to
put on your CV..... (and a good ol' piss-up)......

For my own part, having spent a few months short of 25 years working in TV
I am as baffled as you as to the attraction of these programmes. They seem
to have awards ceremonys for everything these days. A few months ago it was
'politician of the year'..... fully televised! The ceremonys themselves
(especially the minor ones) have become no more than a promotional
opportunity (were they ever anything else???) and the newer ones such as the
Brits are just openly cynical attempts and pumpin the handle.... Even more
established awards such as the BAFTAS have gone this way...

Why DO people watch this stuff??? I've been to the BAFTAS myself several
times, and it's a great night out. But then so was my Sister's New-Year
party and I can't see that being televised anytime soon <g>

At least this particular farce will occupy only those hours generally
inhabited by the unemployed, burglars and night-watchmen.....
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

"Badabing" <bada.RemoveThis@boom.com> wrote in message
news:BC5E397B.6EED1%bada@boom.com...

> Well as a movie fan I want to see what gets the big awards. The ceremony
> itself is usually entertaining too - they put a lot of effort into the
> presenter's script (the jokes etc.) which Stephen Fry could have done with
> at the Baftas. It's a celebration of the movies basically.

Agreed! Billy Crystal is a superb presenter, the clips are good, there's
always a big, showy production - unlike the BAFTAs, which is like the AGM of
a ball-bearing company - and it's just darn exciting!

Ian
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

John W wrote:
> "Badabing" <bada RemoveThis @boom.com> wrote in message
> news:BC5D79FB.6ED84%bada@boom.com...
>
>>Does anyone know if the Oscars will be shown live on terrestrial this
>
> year?
>
> On this subject - can anyone try to explain to me what the attraction in
> this type of programme is? I put the Brits, the Brats the Baftas The Grammys
> etc in the same category. I can just about understand why people want to
> watch any special performances on shows like the Grammys but not the rest of
> the show but if that were the case it would make sense to just show these in
> a highly editted show... for example I've heard lots of discussion of the
> "performances" in last weeks Brits but I've heard no mention of the winners
> and losers at all.
>
> I'm genuinely baffled - please enlighten.

i don't care about the whole shebang i just wanna see Sarah
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

>
> i don't care about the whole shebang i just wanna see Sarah
>

Hmmmmmm................ <g>
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004 

Dom Robinson wrote:
> Beeny?

enough of the Beeny already !
 >> Stay informed about: Oscars 2004