Access Atlanta > Entertainment > Radio Talk > Archives > 2008 > February > 25 > Entry
2/25: 2008 Academy Awards ratings drop 20%
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Academy Awards last night hit its lowest ratings numbers in at least 33 years, drawing a preliminary Nielsen estimate of 32 million viewers. (Nielsen has been tracking this show’s ratings since 1974.)
That’s down from 40 million last year and the worst since 2003, when an average of 33 million viewers watched “Chicago” take home the best movie Oscar. Most Academy Awards this decade have drawn around 40 million people, typically the second biggest telecast of the year behind the Super Bowl. But this year, the premiere of “American Idol” drew more viewers.
In Atlanta, the numbers were even more dismal, falling 30 percent year over year, to about 600,000 viewers from nearly 900,000 last year. Of the 55 biggest markets, Atlanta ranked 38th in ratings for the telecast. In fact, “American Idol” in a typical telecast, draws more viewers locally.
People may have been turned off because the best picture nominees (including the winner “No Country For Old Men”) were not huge blockbusters and most of the actors in the big categories were not A list types. In fact, the four major acting categories went to foreigners for the first time in more than four decades. All the montages, interviews and pre-recorded “best” moments from past Oscars (yes, a montage to periscopes and binoculars in film!), clearly set up before the strike helped elongate the show well past three hours.
In other ratings news, people appeared to be hungry for fresh “Saturday Night Live” episodes. This past Saturday, SNL had its best ratings in the major markets in two years, which extrapolated will equal about 10 million viewers nationwide. This was the first post-strike live telecast and featured Tina Fey as host, Steve Martin and Mike Huckabee making surprise guest appearances and Carrie Underwood singing. This Saturday, “Juno” star Ellen Page will host.
USA’s “Monk” also had its best ratings ever this past Friday, the season finale in which he played fugitive and solved how he was framed for murder. “Monk” pulled in 6.9 million viewers. That’s impressive for a show that’s in its seventh season. It helped that none of the regular networks had any fresh scripted shows available Friday night. “Monk” actually beat a repeat of CBS’s “Ghost Whisperer” and an ABC “20/20” and wasn’t far behind a “House” repeat or the new NBC game show “Amnesia.”
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By made2watch
February 25, 2008 5:54 PM | Link to this
The biggies wern’t there. no Russell Crow,Tom Cruise,Julia Roberts,Brad Pitt,Juaquine,Leonardo etc. Denzel looked like a SORE loser during his presentation.
By Oscar-free evening
February 25, 2008 5:59 PM | Link to this
I didn’t see one minute of the Oscars last night, mostly because I just don’t care. The final straw that killed any faith I once had in the awards’ credibility was the year “Memento” wasn’t nominated for anything it deserved — actor, screenplay, director, picture. That was after a long string of ridiculous nominations and winners. Plus, I can live without hearing all the actors’ political statements and without watching a bunch of extremely wealthy people parade around in outfits and jewelry that cost more than a lot of people make in a year. (Don’t even get me started on those million-dollar shoes I heard about!)
Now, if the RAZZIES were on TV… Just kidding!
By Jogger
February 25, 2008 6:15 PM | Link to this
I watched the Oscars. It was not exciting. There was no zag zag zoom. Johnny Depp was not even interviewed-neither was Daniel Day-Lewis.
I knoe it rained and traffic was backed up and some ere not even there in time. I give the reporters kudos for doing their best- especially Ryan Secrest with Gary Bussey.
By Ron
February 25, 2008 6:42 PM | Link to this
Watch the Oscars?Is that all you can think of to do?
By Michael
February 25, 2008 6:55 PM | Link to this
Dull and boring…John Stewart wasn’t even funny for the most part. The glam was lacking…too many tech awards. I doubt I’ll watch next year, unless they spice it up a lot.
By fL
February 25, 2008 8:16 PM | Link to this
Didn’t watch any of the movies that won the big awards. From the reviews, the winning movies are more violent and off the wall. The cost of movies is way too high. I would think about buying the DVD, but the manufacturers are changing formats to Blu Ray so why spend the money.
By Deirdre
February 25, 2008 8:22 PM | Link to this
Rodney..just my opinion but Jon Stewart is no better at award show hosting than David Letterman was. They’ll save the show and the ratings will go up next year if they can talk Billy Crystal into hosting it again.
Also, almost every one of the actors who won the major awards were relatively unknown..well respected in their field, but unknown to the average American.
I loved No Country For Old Men but it wasn’t a movie that everyone would want to see.
By comp133xi7y
February 25, 2008 8:54 PM | Link to this
The Oscars aren’t supposed to reqard mediocrity…so what if the films weren’t mainstream…so what if the actors weren’t “A-list”.
I’m a cinephile - I appreciate great films being given the recognition the deserve. I don’t care if the “average” American gets them…the “average” American is too stupid to appreciate good art.
Yep - y’all heard me. Most of you are uneducated, uninspired morons who think that reality TV is the end-all and be-all of art. The fewer of you who pollute the Oscars with your “Die Hard’ mentality, the better.
The AVERAGE American has never seen live theatre. The AVERAGE American has never read a book that wasn’t assigned to them in high school. The AVERAGE American is an intellectually retarted idiot.
By Grace
February 25, 2008 9:02 PM | Link to this
That 20% drop was probably blacks. I am black and I don’t know anyone who watched except my white coworkers. When the one black nominated person is 80yrs old, the younger folks are not going to tune in and her generation is probably in bed by 7pm.
By mamaj
February 25, 2008 10:13 PM | Link to this
To comp133xi7y; great films like great beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. It’s sad that you had to stoop to such depths to make sure that we do not confuse you with the “average American”. You sir,(or madam,) appear to be that “retarted ” idiot that you speak of.
By SexyCool
February 25, 2008 11:10 PM | Link to this
I have watched some of the recap shows and I was wondering where the Black stars were. But I guess, since I’m Black, I notice those kinds of things.
By Now that's good stuff
February 25, 2008 11:20 PM | Link to this
comp133xi7y
That’s funny stuff man!
By LD
February 26, 2008 6:54 AM | Link to this
Hey comp133xi7y, if you’re going to make fun of retarded people, at least learn to spell retarded.
By Joyce
February 26, 2008 7:24 AM | Link to this
DIDN’T WATCH THE OSCARS. DON’T KNOW WHO WON; DON’T CARE. NUF SAID.
By Average American
February 26, 2008 7:44 AM | Link to this
comp133xi7y - The “Average American” doesn’t care what artsy little dipsh!ts like you think. Nope, I didn’t see any of the nominated flicks either…..I did see the latest “Diehard” though….entertaining stuff.
Regarding the other subject…doesn’t it seem like the SNL writers could have come up with some funnier stuff this week, seeing as how they had five months off to sit around and come up with ideas? There was a few funny moments, but not many. It’s time to retool SNL again……need to overhaul the cast and get some new writers.
By Darrel
February 26, 2008 7:48 AM | Link to this
I wouldn’t waste my time or the electricity to watch the Oscars. It’s just a group of overpaid, egomaniacs who contribute zilch to this country and congratulate each other for mediocre acts of “acting”. The current generation of actors/actresses is so hugely over-rated. Who, in a right mind, really gives a blue turd about these people?
By lazy les
February 26, 2008 8:25 AM | Link to this
It’s all happening as the garbage Hollywood has fed us— well now it’s coming back to bite them. A lot less of us care about what they are writing and for sure I could care less about their political views. Michael moore is the lead moron of the Hollywood pack of fools.
By Jess
February 26, 2008 8:58 AM | Link to this
I guess all of you would have watched if another pile of crap like Crash was nominated again. Most of the films this year were actually artistic endeavors, clearly above most of your heads. Have you guys ever read Upton Sinclair or Cormack McCarthy? I agree there should be more diversity in film but that doesn’t mean that the films that are available aren’t worth watching. If you think there should be more black films or better roles for blacks, then go out and make something. Otherwise, stop complaining about it. Geesh.
By simon
February 26, 2008 9:35 AM | Link to this
Cormac McCarthy is a hack. I read No Country for Old Men (just ok) then I read The Road—what a p.o.s.! The story is done after 10 pages, then the next 200 are “I’m cold papa. I’m hungry. Can we stop here?” “No, we have to keep moving.” Complete crap from the most overrated writer since Thomas Pynchon.
By Movie Star
February 26, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this
The funniest thing here is some faux film-snob touting the Oscars as a barometer of elite quality. If you had any semblance of historical perspective, you would know that, dating back to the nadir of the career of David Wark Griffith and the founding of the Oscars, you would know that the Academy Awards are not an indication of quality. They never have been. They are now so irrelevant that ordinary people don’t even get worked up over them anymore.
By Dustin
February 26, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this
Norbit made over $150 million. The top 20 grossing films of 2007 included Die Hard 4, Transformers, Rush Hour 3, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Wild Hogs and National Treasure 2.
I’m sure the Oscars would love to nominate more popular films but the fact is people love terrible movies. People go to the movies to turn their brains off and unfortunately mind numbing, formulaic, and unoriginal aren’t award worthy categories.
By Thrash
February 26, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this
Hey comp133xi7y,
You’re one L337 “retarted” moron. Go somewhere else to make an @$$ of yourself.
By AI
February 26, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this
I only saw parts of the last 30 minutes. I only hope the first 3 hours were better. When Chris Rock hosted they tried to say ratings were down that year because of him, I say that was one of the best years to watch. I only wanted to see Ruby Dee win her award this year, but the Oscars cheated her, Shame on you!
By Katie
February 26, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this
I wonder if the internet has anything to do with the decline in Oscars ratings. I’ve always been curious about who wins which awards, but I’ve never been all that interested in actually watching the show. Thanks to the internet, I can wake up Monday morning and look at a list of all the winners and save myself three hours of boredom.
By Bud
February 26, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this
Brevity is the soul of wit…I don’t want to watch a 3 hour MOVIE let alone a 3 hour award show. You can click on a web page to list the winners (3.5 seconds) and then go to YouTube and watch any clips that might be interesting (30 to 90 seconds) and move on. Award shows suck.
By gttim
February 26, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this
Monk gets better every year! I like a lot of the cable channels’ original shows much better than what the networks feed us. I think the only network shows I even watch anymore would be House and the two L&O’s still on networks.
I can’t be bothered with The Academy Awards.
By Fortress
February 27, 2008 1:44 AM | Link to this
Its simple. Carrie Underwood was not performing at the Oscars. You see what happened on SNL. Everything she touches turns to gold.
By adrain_andrews
March 5, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this
we will have a national blakout if the superdeloegates do not make the right choice we are the people of the united state and our votes must count if who ever is in the lead at the end of the contest they should be able to run for the persedient America ALL RACE IF THEY TAKE OUR VOTE THERE WILL BE NO MORE DEMORCRATE PARTY
SPREAD THE WORD IF THEY TAKE OUR VOTES WE WILL HAVE A BLACKOUT WITH PRESEDENT ELECTION WE WILL VOTE FOR A INDENPENDENT.
By adrain_andrews
March 5, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this
we will have a national blakout if the superdeloegates do not make the right choice we are the people of the united state and our votes must count if who ever is in the lead at the end of the contest they should be able to run for the persedient America ALL RACE IF THEY TAKE OUR VOTE THERE WILL BE NO MORE DEMORCRATE PARTY
SPREAD THE WORD IF THEY TAKE OUR VOTES WE WILL HAVE A BLACKOUT WITH PRESEDENT ELECTION WE WILL VOTE FOR A INDENPENDENT.