Friday, March 1, 2013

WILL BEN STEIN MAKE AN APPEARANCE? Seth MacFarlane has already said that he won't come back, and Tina Fey has said she's not interested, so who'll host next year's Oscars?  Apparently, ABC is strongly pushing for Jimmy Kimmel, after vetoing a proposal that Lorne Michaels produce a Fallon-hosted show.  Frankly, this just seems like a lower-risk version of MacFarlane, without MacFarlane's open love for "old time Hollywood" and a little less misogyny, but YMMV.

15 comments:

  1. Tosy and Cosh9:56 AM

    Fey may not be game, but has anyone asked Poehler?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Adam B.10:15 AM

    No interest in Kimmel. Let Clooney and Bullock co-host.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Poehler would be good fun, but she's not a big enough name to do it on her own, I think. (And would also run into issues with NBC/ABC conflict and her availability.)

    ReplyDelete
  4. KCosmo's neighbor10:30 AM

    Justin Timberlake! He can sing, dance, and be funny--and they can throw Jimmy Fallon on for a segment or two. Or, how about Seth Meyers and Amy Poehler? But again, that's probably too NBC-ish. I like Bullock and Clooney--they would play off of each other very well.

    ReplyDelete
  5. We're going to have to wait for HIMYM to end before NPH finally gets the hosting gig, right?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Only "a little less misogyny"? Kimmel's humor has never struck me as having the mean streak that MacFarlane's does.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Kimmel once co-hosted a show that ended each episode with "and, now, girls jumping on trampolines!"

    ReplyDelete
  8. Excellent point. I was only considering what he's been up to since his ABC show.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Nigel from Cameroon11:48 AM

    Whomever hosts...the show will generally suck

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous12:05 PM

    Greetings from Florida! I'm bored to death at work so I decided to browse your website on my iphone during lunch break. I enjoy the info you provide here and can't
    wait to take a look when I get home. I'm amazed at how quick your blog loaded on my phone .. I'm not even using WIFI,
    just 3G .. Anyhow, very good blog!

    Look at my page: Similar Sites Popular Searches - Hot Sites
    My website :: home equity loan rates

    ReplyDelete
  11. Fred App1:02 PM

    Why have a host at all? Go host-less. Make it like an open mic night -- just have people come up and tell jokes when they feel like it. The Oscars are a giant exercise in self-congratulation, anyway; this would just eliminate the middleman.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Tom Hanks.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hell, Colin Hanks. No, seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  14. isaac_spaceman5:51 PM

    Would Clooney even do it? He'd probably be a great host (assuming decent writers, but Clooney could definitely attract decent writers) who would appeal both to the TV audience and to the egos in the room, and who could handle those two audiences' differing agendas with a light touch and a soft-edged humor. But these days movies seem to be something Clooney does only because they enable him to do the other things he enjoys more -- charity, politics, parties, yachts, superfancy Italian lakes, serial monogamy with models and starlets. A host has to do work; he risks mild offense from his friends and potential business partners; he forfeits the opportunity to grill up lunch with some friends and slip into a tux in the mid-afternoon, to swing by the stylist's place to pick up Stacey on the way, to roll up a few minutes before they dim the lights, flash a smile at the cameras, to leave his seat only for a few minutes to read a Vilanch joke off a cue card, and to leave the moment they strike the orchestra so that he can hit the VF party or whichever he'll grace with his presence. Clooney hosting makes a lot more sense to me than it likely does to Clooney.


    Incidentally, my opinion on Oscar hosts is utterly without value, since I usually end up not watching the Oscars.

    ReplyDelete