> Prev
From: Irish Ranger <irishranger317@gmail.com>
Subject: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.107.143.82 with SMTP id r79mr11365093iod.120.1520266089219;
Mon, 05 Mar 2018 08:08:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.157.14.214 with SMTP id 80mr801773otj.9.1520266089134; Mon,
05 Mar 2018 08:08:09 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!e10no1398989itf.0!news-out.google.com!a25ni4137itj.0!nntp.google.com!e10no1398984itf.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 08:08:08 -0800 (PST)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:1700:8310:5270:182:8a3:ee24:dfa5;
posting-account=yzJ81wkAAABoVzzcPbeWzhTmBZInyTUe
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:1700:8310:5270:182:8a3:ee24:dfa5
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
From: Irish Ranger <irishranger317@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 16:08:09 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 4223
X-Received-Body-CRC: 934060403
Lines: 61
Print Article
Forward Article
"Jimmy Kimmel claimed he was keeping this year's Oscars positive, but the ratings were anything but.

The politically charged 2018 Academy Awards were down 15.6 percent compared to the 2017 viewership
with an 18.9 rating in Nielsen’s overnight numbers from 8-11 p.m. ET, according to TheWrap.

Host Jimmy Kimmel speaks at the Oscars on Sunday, March 4, 2018, at the Dolby Theatre in Los
Angeles. 
“We don’t make films like ‘Call Me By Your Name’ for money,” Kimmel quipped at one point.
“We make them to upset Mike Pence.”  

The sharp decline marks what could become the lowest-rated Oscars of all time on a night when Host
Jimmy Kimmel and the crowd of Hollywood elite focused on diversity, feminism and political issues as
much as it focused on the films being honored.

The lack of high-wattage stars in the major categories, and a ho-hum slate of films when it came to
box office receipts, may have also been a factor.

Media Research Center Vice President Dan Gainor told Fox News that people shouldn’t be surprised
that the show turned political and featured “divisive, left-wing politics” throughout the
four-hour event.

“The Tinseltown elite genuinely hate the people they expect will pay to see their movies and watch
their TV shows,” Gainor said. “Why do we support them?”

Sunday night’s awards were politically charged and loaded with mentions of the #MeToo and Time’s
Up movements. Kimmel took jabs at President Trump, Vice President Mike Pence and even Fox News
viewers.

“We don’t make films like ‘Call Me By Your Name’ for money,” Kimmel quipped at one point.
“We make them to upset Mike Pence.”

The Pence joke prompted conservative commentator Ben Shapiro to sarcastically tweet, “I thought
Hollywood wasn’t biased against conservatives and only cares about the bottom line.”

During the show, Kimmel lauded the actual Oscar statue, noting its age of 90 and taking a swipe at
Fox News viewers in the process: "Oscar is 90 years old tonight, which means he’s probably at home
tonight watching Fox News."

Kimmel wasn't the only one getting political throughout the night. Stars Kumail Nanjiani and Nyong'o
took the stage to share a message of support to Dreamers ahead of announcing "Shape of Water" as the
winner of best production design.

A musical performance from Common and Andra Day of “Stand Up for Something” was an ode to
American activism with politically charged lyrics about topics like the NRA, the Parkland shooting,
immigration, feminism and Puerto Rico."

The unique monster movie "The Shape of Water" took home the award for best picture.
Tyler McCarthy contributed to this report. 

Irish Mike 

	
From: bermuda999 <bermuda999@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.36.98.138 with SMTP id d132mr10574183itc.27.1520307341485;
Mon, 05 Mar 2018 19:35:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.157.0.5 with SMTP id 5mr902825ota.0.1520307341252; Mon, 05
Mar 2018 19:35:41 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!w142no1594263ita.0!news-out.google.com!a25ni4774itj.0!nntp.google.com!w142no1594258ita.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 19:35:40 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.103.168.213;
posting-account=_MsbvAkAAAA6N13etSsjeXPJQckxQFUZ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.103.168.213
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <271137ad-ec7a-4bb6-bd62-2c2682909c97@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
From: bermuda999 <bermuda999@aol.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 03:35:41 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 19
Print Article
Forward Article
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 11:08:11 AM UTC-5, Irish Ranger wrote:
> "Jimmy Kimmel claimed he was keeping this year's Oscars positive, but the ratings were anything
but.
> 
> The politically charged 2018 Academy Awards were down 15.6 percent compared to the 2017 viewership
with an 18.9 rating in Nielsen’s overnight numbers from 8-11 p.m. ET, according to TheWrap.

The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 earned a 5.3 rating and 9.3 million viewers on FOX, down 20% in ratings
and 22% in viewership from last year (6.6, 11.9M) and down 20% and 18% respectively from 2016 (6.6,
11.4M). The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 audience was the smallest in the history of the race

"Like NASCAR ratings generally, Daytona 500 ratings have fallen off dramatically from the 2000s.
From 2001-08, the race had at least a 10.0 rating and 17 million viewers in all-but-one year. In the
final year of that run — just ten years ago — it had a 10.2 rating and 17.8 million."

Is it all because the NASCAR viewers don't appreciate the liberal slant of NASCAR drivers, sponsors
and fans? 

	
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 22:56:06 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <p7l3gn$tge$1@dont-email.me>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<271137ad-ec7a-4bb6-bd62-2c2682909c97@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 03:56:07 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="173244dccaa45714c02932d6c952b8b9";
logging-data="30222"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/gT6KijV+wYEu5qXAESp49"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
In-Reply-To: <271137ad-ec7a-4bb6-bd62-2c2682909c97@googlegroups.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:nZv6Ceslb3o8ibaKx3vhgpgBpl4=
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/5/2018 10:35 PM, bermuda999 wrote:
> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 11:08:11 AM UTC-5, Irish Ranger wrote:
>> "Jimmy Kimmel claimed he was keeping this year's Oscars positive,
>> but the ratings were anything but.
>> 
>> The politically charged 2018 Academy Awards were down 15.6 percent
>> compared to the 2017 viewership with an 18.9 rating in Nielsen’s
>> overnight numbers from 8-11 p.m. ET, according to TheWrap.
> 
> The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 earned a 5.3 rating and 9.3 million
> viewers on FOX, down 20% in ratings and 22% in viewership from last
> year (6.6, 11.9M) and down 20% and 18% respectively from 2016 (6.6,
> 11.4M). The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 audience was the smallest in the
> history of the race

These two rating drops (Oscars and NASCAR) put in even greater
perspective how amazing it is that the Super Bowl suffered a fairly
small ratings drop.

The ratings for regular broadcast TV shows are looking pretty bleak as
well with double digit ratings drops for most shows.

> "Like NASCAR ratings generally, Daytona 500 ratings have fallen off
> dramatically from the 2000s. From 2001-08, the race had at least a
> 10.0 rating and 17 million viewers in all-but-one year. In the final
> year of that run — just ten years ago — it had a 10.2 rating and 17.8
> million."
> 
> Is it all because the NASCAR viewers don't appreciate the liberal
> slant of NASCAR drivers, sponsors and fans?

Well, they did allow a black guy to drive for the first time since the 
1960s.

....but seriously, I think the retirement of big name drivers and the 
continued tortured changes to the point system are the main reasons that 
people are tuning out. 

	
From: RichA <rander3128@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.107.135.22 with SMTP id j22mr12757255iod.117.1520310377439;
Mon, 05 Mar 2018 20:26:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.157.11.165 with SMTP id 34mr901377oth.7.1520310377169; Mon,
05 Mar 2018 20:26:17 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.unit0.net!peer01.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!e10no1610774itf.0!news-out.google.com!a2ni3880ite.0!nntp.google.com!e10no1610770itf.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 20:26:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <p7l3gn$tge$1@dont-email.me>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.157.72.115;
posting-account=8Vsz_woAAABQPV3Epo66m_rYvK1EHzOV
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.157.72.115
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<271137ad-ec7a-4bb6-bd62-2c2682909c97@googlegroups.com> <p7l3gn$tge$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2d8ac92b-d7e1-4264-992d-0648599e0aac@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
From: RichA <rander3128@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 04:26:17 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2768739938
X-Received-Bytes: 3409
Print Article
Forward Article
On Monday, 5 March 2018 22:56:10 UTC-5, Obveeus  wrote:
> On 3/5/2018 10:35 PM, bermuda999 wrote:
> > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 11:08:11 AM UTC-5, Irish Ranger wrote:
> >> "Jimmy Kimmel claimed he was keeping this year's Oscars positive,
> >> but the ratings were anything but.
> >> 
> >> The politically charged 2018 Academy Awards were down 15.6 percent
> >> compared to the 2017 viewership with an 18.9 rating in Nielsen’s
> >> overnight numbers from 8-11 p.m. ET, according to TheWrap.
> > 
> > The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 earned a 5.3 rating and 9.3 million
> > viewers on FOX, down 20% in ratings and 22% in viewership from last
> > year (6.6, 11.9M) and down 20% and 18% respectively from 2016 (6.6,
> > 11.4M). The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 audience was the smallest in the
> > history of the race
> 
> These two rating drops (Oscars and NASCAR) put in even greater
> perspective how amazing it is that the Super Bowl suffered a fairly
> small ratings drop.
> 
> The ratings for regular broadcast TV shows are looking pretty bleak as
> well with double digit ratings drops for most shows.
> 
> > "Like NASCAR ratings generally, Daytona 500 ratings have fallen off
> > dramatically from the 2000s. From 2001-08, the race had at least a
> > 10.0 rating and 17 million viewers in all-but-one year. In the final
> > year of that run — just ten years ago — it had a 10.2 rating and 17.8
> > million."
> > 
> > Is it all because the NASCAR viewers don't appreciate the liberal
> > slant of NASCAR drivers, sponsors and fans?
> 
> Well, they did allow a black guy to drive for the first time since the 
> 1960s.
> 
> ...but seriously, I think the retirement of big name drivers and the 
> continued tortured changes to the point system are the main reasons that 
> people are tuning out.

That, and it's a race for pussies with severe restrictions on cars, speed, nothing but new "safety
rules" and in general, more boring races as as whole. 

	
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 20:36:33 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <p7q432$743$1@dont-email.me>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<271137ad-ec7a-4bb6-bd62-2c2682909c97@googlegroups.com>
<p7l3gn$tge$1@dont-email.me>
<2d8ac92b-d7e1-4264-992d-0648599e0aac@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 01:36:34 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="cd6502d291338a53da40233089afe87c";
logging-data="7299"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+m6XBIpJnKG5/SiucF1K1Z"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
In-Reply-To: <2d8ac92b-d7e1-4264-992d-0648599e0aac@googlegroups.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:kuiSvpPVcNN3RBLGXtH92Y0Owyw=
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/5/2018 11:26 PM, RichA wrote:
> On Monday, 5 March 2018 22:56:10 UTC-5, Obveeus  wrote:
>> On 3/5/2018 10:35 PM, bermuda999 wrote:
>>> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 11:08:11 AM UTC-5, Irish Ranger 
>>> wrote:
>>>> "Jimmy Kimmel claimed he was keeping this year's Oscars 
>>>> positive, but the ratings were anything but.
>>>> 
>>>> The politically charged 2018 Academy Awards were down 15.6 
>>>> percent compared to the 2017 viewership with an 18.9 rating in 
>>>> Nielsen’s overnight numbers from 8-11 p.m. ET, according to 
>>>> TheWrap.
>>> 
>>> The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 earned a 5.3 rating and 9.3 million 
>>> viewers on FOX, down 20% in ratings and 22% in viewership from 
>>> last year (6.6, 11.9M) and down 20% and 18% respectively from 
>>> 2016 (6.6, 11.4M). The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 audience was the 
>>> smallest in the history of the race
>> 
>> These two rating drops (Oscars and NASCAR) put in even greater 
>> perspective how amazing it is that the Super Bowl suffered a fairly
>> small ratings drop.
>> 
>> The ratings for regular broadcast TV shows are looking pretty
>> bleak as well with double digit ratings drops for most shows.
>> 
>>> "Like NASCAR ratings generally, Daytona 500 ratings have fallen 
>>> off dramatically from the 2000s. From 2001-08, the race had at 
>>> least a 10.0 rating and 17 million viewers in all-but-one year. 
>>> In the final year of that run — just ten years ago — it had a 
>>> 10.2 rating and 17.8 million."
>>> 
>>> Is it all because the NASCAR viewers don't appreciate the liberal
>>> slant of NASCAR drivers, sponsors and fans?
>> 
>> Well, they did allow a black guy to drive for the first time since 
>> the 1960s.
>> 
>> ...but seriously, I think the retirement of big name drivers and 
>> the continued tortured changes to the point system are the main 
>> reasons that people are tuning out.
> 
> That, and it's a race for pussies with severe restrictions on cars, 
> speed, nothing but new "safety rules" and in general, more boring 
> races as as whole.

Without rules/restrictions on the cars, you end up with a 
non-competitive sport (in terms of driving) because the aerodynamics of 
the car brand or the brand of tires or the brand of brakes determines 
the winner of the race.  F1 racing suffers from that problem as a 
particular engine builder or chassis builder will run away with the 
majority of the races in a given season with very little of it having to 
do with driver talent.  NASCAR had bouts of that kind of non-competitive 
racing years ago and intelligently worked to solve the problem. 
Meanwhile, if what you want is for the teams to have room to 
cheat...well, that still happens in NASCAR, as is evidenced by the team 
that has won 2 of the first three races this season. 

	
From: Lesmond <lesmond@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Lesmond" <lesmond@verizon.net>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 07:33:46 -0500 (EST)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <yrfzbaqirevmbaarg.p59uwa8.pminews@192.168.0.8>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com> <271137ad-ec7a-4bb6-bd62-2c2682909c97@googlegroups.com> <p7l3gn$tge$1@dont-email.me> <2d8ac92b-d7e1-4264-992d-0648599e0aac@googlegroups.com> <p7q432$743$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: "Lesmond" <lesmond@verizon.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="91bbed5166797012368e0b0d4848ac41";
logging-data="23370"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+8aVUIICWSKXdjtmdQjB5C"
User-Agent: Hamster-Pg/1.25.2.0
X-Newsreader: PMINews 2.00.1200 For OS/2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:kI/jRstt27yZCErQyVGmrcRkpiw=
Print Article
Forward Article
On Wed, 7 Mar 2018 20:36:33 -0500, Obveeus wrote:

>
>
>On 3/5/2018 11:26 PM, RichA wrote:
>> On Monday, 5 March 2018 22:56:10 UTC-5, Obveeus  wrote:
>>> On 3/5/2018 10:35 PM, bermuda999 wrote:
>>>> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 11:08:11 AM UTC-5, Irish Ranger 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> "Jimmy Kimmel claimed he was keeping this year's Oscars 
>>>>> positive, but the ratings were anything but.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The politically charged 2018 Academy Awards were down 15.6 
>>>>> percent compared to the 2017 viewership with an 18.9 rating in 
>>>>> Nielsen 

	
From: trotsky <gmsingh@email.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post01.iad!fx29.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<271137ad-ec7a-4bb6-bd62-2c2682909c97@googlegroups.com>
<p7l3gn$tge$1@dont-email.me>
From: trotsky <gmsingh@email.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <p7l3gn$tge$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <PwDnC.51339$iZ2.28324@fx29.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 21:14:23 UTC
Organization: http://www.NewsDemon.com
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 15:14:22 -0600
X-Received-Bytes: 2638
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1241998762
X-Original-Bytes: 2455
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/5/18 9:56 PM, Obveeus wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/5/2018 10:35 PM, bermuda999 wrote:
>> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 11:08:11 AM UTC-5, Irish Ranger wrote:
>>> "Jimmy Kimmel claimed he was keeping this year's Oscars positive,
>>> but the ratings were anything but.
>>>
>>> The politically charged 2018 Academy Awards were down 15.6 percent
>>> compared to the 2017 viewership with an 18.9 rating in Nielsen’s
>>> overnight numbers from 8-11 p.m. ET, according to TheWrap.
>>
>> The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 earned a 5.3 rating and 9.3 million
>> viewers on FOX, down 20% in ratings and 22% in viewership from last
>> year (6.6, 11.9M) and down 20% and 18% respectively from 2016 (6.6,
>> 11.4M). The 2018 NASCAR Daytona 500 audience was the smallest in the
>> history of the race
> 
> These two rating drops (Oscars and NASCAR) put in even greater
> perspective how amazing it is that the Super Bowl suffered a fairly
> small ratings drop.

http://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-oscar-ratings-20...

> The Oscars, hosted for the second consecutive year by ABC late night host Jimmy Kimmel, is not the
only perennial program being hit by the changes in viewing habits. The Grammy Awards on CBS were
down 24% this year to 19.8 million viewers — the lowest audience level in nine years, while NBC's
telecast of Super Bowl LII was off 7% to 103.4 million viewers, the lowest total since 2009.

So we have drops in NASCAR, Grammys, the Super Bowl, in addition to the 
Oscars.  Sounds like a fucking trend to me, and not the Breitbart 
bullshit of the Oscars themselves being fucked. 

	
From: super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 08:41:56 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="74623860d28c81378f4aee0d698995dc";
logging-data="23173"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19vW7dnUYWrlCd0zwjS5DvzVXwc6s2iZmE="
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (PPC Mac OS X)
X-No-Archive: yes
Cancel-Lock: sha1:e/72NJz28I7aF53x19BsTjx/g2U=
Print Article
Forward Article

> "Jimmy Kimmel claimed he was keeping this year's Oscars positive, but the 
> ratings were anything but.
> 
> The politically charged 2018 Academy Awards were down 15.6 percent 
> compared to the 2017 viewership with an 18.9 rating in Nielsen's overnight 
> numbers from 8-11 p.m. ET, according to TheWrap.

I don't think I'm even going to monitor the big moments in real time 
after this last one, jeez it was dull and went on way too long.

Apparently only Jimmy Kimmel (or some other ABC personality) will be 
allowed to host as long as the Oscars are broadcast on that network, 
that's how brutal the cross-marketing has become. NBC and CBS are 
similarly guilty for the awards shows airing on their networks.

> Media Research Center Vice President Dan Gainor told Fox News that people 
> shouldn't be surprised that the show turned political and featured "divisive, 
> left-wing politics" throughout the four-hour event.
> 
> "The Tinseltown elite genuinely hate the people they expect will pay to see 
> their movies and watch their TV shows," Gainor said. "Why do we support 
> them?"

Sounds like "Media Research Center" exists solely to spin for the right, 
like Razzmuzzen. 

	
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 16:36:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="173244dccaa45714c02932d6c952b8b9";
logging-data="20921"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+HhdmVOX+Em/Q046I96ZM4"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
In-Reply-To: <super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:g7Oi4YQRLCfIhZjzGXQaKHbKVYU=
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/6/2018 9:41 AM, super70s wrote:
>> "Jimmy Kimmel claimed he was keeping this year's Oscars positive, but the
>> ratings were anything but.
>>
>> The politically charged 2018 Academy Awards were down 15.6 percent
>> compared to the 2017 viewership with an 18.9 rating in Nielsen's overnight
>> numbers from 8-11 p.m. ET, according to TheWrap.

>> Media Research Center Vice President Dan Gainor told Fox News that people
>> shouldn't be surprised that the show turned political and featured "divisive,
>> left-wing politics" throughout the four-hour event.
>>
>> "The Tinseltown elite genuinely hate the people they expect will pay to see
>> their movies and watch their TV shows," Gainor said. "Why do we support
>> them?"
> 
> Sounds like "Media Research Center" exists solely to spin for the right,
> like Razzmuzzen.

I suppose there might be some people who refused to watch this year's 
awards because they feared that there would be a political 
theme...though if there was going to be any real movement to the awards 
it was always going to be the 'MeToo' thing which isn't exactly 'political'.

I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:

1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER WOMAN 
didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my 
desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't get 
nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF WATER, was 
a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under 
$60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box 
office for last year. 

	
From: super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 12:19:58 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <super70s-FE0E57.12195706032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com> <super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org> <p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me>
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="74623860d28c81378f4aee0d698995dc";
logging-data="17275"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+i8H192l3RYBNH6jIw2pfdY9dxV1kxChM="
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (PPC Mac OS X)
X-No-Archive: yes
Cancel-Lock: sha1:35wOATrPDrmbehtla/rbFVkMBdg=
Print Article
Forward Article
In article <p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> 
wrote:

> WONDER WOMAN didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  
> I know my desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK 
> didn't get nominated for Best Picture.

The way they've expanded the nominees list in recent years you'd think 
they would have gone "what the hell let's add them too," WW particularly 
for the women's cause de jour.

If they thought WW was too pedestrian what about the big fuss over LOTR 
a few years back. 

	
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!nntp.comgw.net!peer01.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx33.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
<p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me>
<super70s-FE0E57.12195706032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <super70s-FE0E57.12195706032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <97BnC.233253$qv.231751@fx33.iad>
X-Complaints-To: http://abuse.usenetxs.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 18:30:29 UTC
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 13:30:30 -0500
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3551837925
X-Received-Bytes: 2033
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/6/2018 1:19 PM, super70s wrote:
> In article <p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> WONDER WOMAN didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.
>> I know my desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK
>> didn't get nominated for Best Picture.
> 
> The way they've expanded the nominees list in recent years you'd think
> they would have gone "what the hell let's add them too," WW particularly
> for the women's cause de jour.
> 
> If they thought WW was too pedestrian what about the big fuss over LOTR
> a few years back.

LOTR was a game-changer, WW was just the latest player.  Meanwhile, the 
nominee-list hasn't been expanded indiscriminately, but rather only to 
include all films receiving 5% of #1 votes -- i.e., those movies that, 
from a list shortened to 10 or fewer, could conceivably win B.P.

-- 

- - - - - - - -
   YOUR taste at work...
     http://www.moviepig.com 

	
From: SLGreg <SLGreg@madeitup.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: SLGreg <SLGreg@madeitup.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 11:07:10 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com> <super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org> <p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="644d50cb0da57599d702eb99d04bd591";
logging-data="9046"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18kvBdJDOITdRtEBnN7WdDY"
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:seF0icc5WEUbKSoABtWT/opcw2U=
Print Article
Forward Article
On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:

>I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>
>1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
>2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER WOMAN 
>didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my 
>desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't get 
>nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF WATER, was 
>a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under 
>$60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box 
>office for last year.

THE SHAPE OF WATER wasn't geared at 14 year old boys, who line the box
office tills with all the super hero crap.

I heard DUNKIRK made the most of all BP nominees. Blood, guts, guns
and valor, yanno.
--
 - greg 

	
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 14:55:51 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <p7mroa$1c6$1@dont-email.me>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
<p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me> <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 19:55:55 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="173244dccaa45714c02932d6c952b8b9";
logging-data="1414"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19EMInXUJqlMkVJwQMh8eiA"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
In-Reply-To: <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LX9AGUd2N9imnLe1140ZcbuYnR4=
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/6/2018 2:07 PM, SLGreg wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
> 
>> I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>>
>> 1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
>> 2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER WOMAN
>> didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my
>> desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't get
>> nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF WATER, was
>> a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under
>> $60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box
>> office for last year.
> 
> THE SHAPE OF WATER wasn't geared at 14 year old boys, who line the box
> office tills with all the super hero crap.

True, it was aimed at 40+ women who are lonely.

....and it won apparently because voters heard the gimmick/hook (trying 
to make a film where THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON gets the girl) 
and applauded the successfulness of that goal.

> I heard DUNKIRK made the most of all BP nominees. 

True, but GET OUT was just barely behind at the US Box Office and it, 
like THE SHAPE OF WATER left me perplexed as to why they were even 
nominated. 

	
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.unit0.net!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx43.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
<p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me> <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com>
<p7mroa$1c6$1@dont-email.me>
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <p7mroa$1c6$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <U0DnC.268218$9z2.263142@fx43.iad>
X-Complaints-To: http://abuse.usenetxs.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 20:40:20 UTC
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 15:40:20 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 2615
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2364107406
X-Original-Bytes: 2432
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/6/2018 2:55 PM, Obveeus wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/6/2018 2:07 PM, SLGreg wrote:
>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>>>
>>> 1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
>>> 2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER WOMAN
>>> didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my
>>> desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't get
>>> nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF WATER, was
>>> a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under
>>> $60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box
>>> office for last year.
>>
>> THE SHAPE OF WATER wasn't geared at 14 year old boys, who line the box
>> office tills with all the super hero crap.
> 
> True, it was aimed at 40+ women who are lonely.
> 
> ...and it won apparently because voters heard the gimmick/hook (trying 
> to make a film where THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON gets the girl) 
> and applauded the successfulness of that goal.
> 
>> I heard DUNKIRK made the most of all BP nominees. 
> 
> True, but GET OUT was just barely behind at the US Box Office and it, 
> like THE SHAPE OF WATER left me perplexed as to why they were even 
> nominated.

I haven't seen tSOW, but GET OUT, though entirely watchable, was 
obviously nominated for its racial significance and taboo-breakage.

-- 

- - - - - - - -
   YOUR taste at work...
     http://www.moviepig.com 

	
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Obveeus <Obveeus@aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 16:14:54 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <p7n0cd$4fo$1@dont-email.me>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
<p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me> <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com>
<p7mroa$1c6$1@dont-email.me> <U0DnC.268218$9z2.263142@fx43.iad>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 21:14:53 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="173244dccaa45714c02932d6c952b8b9";
logging-data="4600"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+iXsZa5KVXHF9AtSf03OQd"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
In-Reply-To: <U0DnC.268218$9z2.263142@fx43.iad>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Amn8kElgPK36+AQ487n/sSePSP8=
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/6/2018 3:40 PM, moviePig wrote:
> On 3/6/2018 2:55 PM, Obveeus wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 3/6/2018 2:07 PM, SLGreg wrote:
>>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>>>>
>>>> 1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
>>>> 2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER 
>>>> WOMAN
>>>> didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my
>>>> desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't get
>>>> nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF WATER, 
>>>> was
>>>> a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under
>>>> $60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box
>>>> office for last year.
>>>
>>> THE SHAPE OF WATER wasn't geared at 14 year old boys, who line the box
>>> office tills with all the super hero crap.
>>
>> True, it was aimed at 40+ women who are lonely.
>>
>> ...and it won apparently because voters heard the gimmick/hook (trying 
>> to make a film where THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON gets the girl) 
>> and applauded the successfulness of that goal.
>>
>>> I heard DUNKIRK made the most of all BP nominees. 
>>
>> True, but GET OUT was just barely behind at the US Box Office and it, 
>> like THE SHAPE OF WATER left me perplexed as to why they were even 
>> nominated.
> 
> I haven't seen tSOW, but GET OUT, though entirely watchable, was 
> obviously nominated for its racial significance and taboo-breakage.

MUDBOUND had racial significance.  GET OUT was just a one note gimmick. 

	
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx28.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
<p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me> <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com>
<p7mroa$1c6$1@dont-email.me> <U0DnC.268218$9z2.263142@fx43.iad>
<p7n0cd$4fo$1@dont-email.me>
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <p7n0cd$4fo$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <VCDnC.70430$nY2.46260@fx28.iad>
X-Complaints-To: http://abuse.usenetxs.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 21:20:53 UTC
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 16:20:53 -0500
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3284076611
X-Received-Bytes: 3003
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/6/2018 4:14 PM, Obveeus wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/6/2018 3:40 PM, moviePig wrote:
>> On 3/6/2018 2:55 PM, Obveeus wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/6/2018 2:07 PM, SLGreg wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
>>>>> 2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER 
>>>>> WOMAN
>>>>> didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my
>>>>> desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't 
>>>>> get
>>>>> nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF 
>>>>> WATER, was
>>>>> a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under
>>>>> $60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box
>>>>> office for last year.
>>>>
>>>> THE SHAPE OF WATER wasn't geared at 14 year old boys, who line the box
>>>> office tills with all the super hero crap.
>>>
>>> True, it was aimed at 40+ women who are lonely.
>>>
>>> ...and it won apparently because voters heard the gimmick/hook 
>>> (trying to make a film where THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON gets 
>>> the girl) and applauded the successfulness of that goal.
>>>
>>>> I heard DUNKIRK made the most of all BP nominees. 
>>>
>>> True, but GET OUT was just barely behind at the US Box Office and it, 
>>> like THE SHAPE OF WATER left me perplexed as to why they were even 
>>> nominated.
>>
>> I haven't seen tSOW, but GET OUT, though entirely watchable, was 
>> obviously nominated for its racial significance and taboo-breakage.
> 
> MUDBOUND had racial significance.  GET OUT was just a one note gimmick.

I wrote 'significance' because I though 'vector' might be obscure.

-- 

- - - - - - - -
   YOUR taste at work...
     http://www.moviepig.com 

	
From: luisbunuel <luisbunuel@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.107.198.65 with SMTP id w62mr2449220iof.105.1520743112915;
Sat, 10 Mar 2018 20:38:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.157.95.23 with SMTP id f23mr203584oti.12.1520743112493; Sat,
10 Mar 2018 20:38:32 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!r195no840959itc.0!news-out.google.com!a2-v6ni2575ite.0!nntp.google.com!r195no840955itc.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2018 20:38:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <p7n0cd$4fo$1@dont-email.me>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=100.15.215.74;
posting-account=pu2peAoAAABnpDYaJJw1TIw02-Nt0pg_
NNTP-Posting-Host: 100.15.215.74
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
<p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me> <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com>
<p7mroa$1c6$1@dont-email.me> <U0DnC.268218$9z2.263142@fx43.iad> <p7n0cd$4fo$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <94de6cc7-00bf-4358-9260-4dbd5fab3baa@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
From: luisbunuel@aol.com
Injection-Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2018 04:38:32 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 62
Print Article
Forward Article
On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 4:14:55 PM UTC-5, Obveeus wrote:
> On 3/6/2018 3:40 PM, moviePig wrote:
> > On 3/6/2018 2:55 PM, Obveeus wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 3/6/2018 2:07 PM, SLGreg wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
> >>>> 2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER 
> >>>> WOMAN
> >>>> didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my
> >>>> desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't get
> >>>> nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF WATER, 
> >>>> was
> >>>> a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under
> >>>> $60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box
> >>>> office for last year.
> >>>
> >>> THE SHAPE OF WATER wasn't geared at 14 year old boys, who line the box
> >>> office tills with all the super hero crap.
> >>
> >> True, it was aimed at 40+ women who are lonely.
> >>
> >> ...and it won apparently because voters heard the gimmick/hook (trying 
> >> to make a film where THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON gets the girl) 
> >> and applauded the successfulness of that goal.
> >>
> >>> I heard DUNKIRK made the most of all BP nominees. 
> >>
> >> True, but GET OUT was just barely behind at the US Box Office and it, 
> >> like THE SHAPE OF WATER left me perplexed as to why they were even 
> >> nominated.
> > 
> > I haven't seen tSOW, but GET OUT, though entirely watchable, was 
> > obviously nominated for its racial significance and taboo-breakage.
> 
> MUDBOUND had racial significance.  GET OUT was just a one note gimmick.

spoilers

I love Get Out. Just love it. Love the acting, love the ending, love Caleb Landry Jones, love the
chutzpah, love the down-and-dirty filmmaking and plotting, love Chris running upstairs and everybody
in the party downstairs suddenly going quiet, love the TSA guy (Lil Rel Howery) as the friend
shouting the truth but being too overbearing to be taken seriously, and absolutely love the great
"Rose, give me the keys!" scene, where she finds them and says, "You know I can't give you keys,
right, babe?"

For me, the Oscars were a ratings bomb because the host Kimmel is absolutely awful (last year too)
along with no worthwhile production numbers. I wonder whether Judd Apatow, one of the producers, may
be the reason. 

	
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post01.iad!fx19.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: shawn <nanoflower@notformailgmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Message-ID: <nn1aad90dlilagaib3k0do4q5n5mo1mq6s@4ax.com>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com> <super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org> <p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me> <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com> <p7mroa$1c6$1@dont-email.me> <U0DnC.268218$9z2.263142@fx43.iad>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 44
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2018 06:39:45 -0400
X-Received-Body-CRC: 896495094
X-Received-Bytes: 3061
Print Article
Forward Article
On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 15:40:20 -0500, moviePig<pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>On 3/6/2018 2:55 PM, Obveeus wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 3/6/2018 2:07 PM, SLGreg wrote:
>>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>>>>
>>>> 1. 

	
From: SLGreg <SLGreg@madeitup.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin1!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.cs.hut.fi!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: SLGreg <SLGreg@madeitup.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2018 05:29:24 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <958aad9cr5ardb76178leiaddlgegdppqp@4ax.com>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com> <super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org> <p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me> <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com> <p7mroa$1c6$1@dont-email.me> <U0DnC.268218$9z2.263142@fx43.iad> <nn1aad90dlilagaib3k0do4q5n5mo1mq6s@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2eb091b75a350eb0468f833ab2916abd";
logging-data="21571"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/ziIanWzNvPZ447yGdZOOH"
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:F4eAXLkaBtEX3bh6LW0fMn9WroQ=
Print Article
Forward Article
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 06:39:45 -0400, shawn<nanoflower@notformailgmail.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 15:40:20 -0500, moviePig<pwallace@moviepig.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On 3/6/2018 2:55 PM, Obveeus wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 3/6/2018 2:07 PM, SLGreg wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. 

	
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!peer01.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx37.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com>
<super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org>
<p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me> <khpt9dpd5ksrcc0r1dpndjnc96sd4dtik7@4ax.com>
<p7mroa$1c6$1@dont-email.me> <U0DnC.268218$9z2.263142@fx43.iad>
<nn1aad90dlilagaib3k0do4q5n5mo1mq6s@4ax.com>
<958aad9cr5ardb76178leiaddlgegdppqp@4ax.com>
From: moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <958aad9cr5ardb76178leiaddlgegdppqp@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <0BapC.213219$d03.11380@fx37.iad>
X-Complaints-To: http://abuse.usenetxs.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2018 13:57:16 UTC
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2018 09:57:15 -0400
X-Received-Body-CRC: 4101730678
X-Received-Bytes: 3736
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/11/2018 8:29 AM, SLGreg wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 06:39:45 -0400, shawn
><nanoflower@notformailgmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 15:40:20 -0500, moviePig<pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/6/2018 2:55 PM, Obveeus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/6/2018 2:07 PM, SLGreg wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
>>>>>> 2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER WOMAN
>>>>>> didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my
>>>>>> desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't get
>>>>>> nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF WATER, was
>>>>>> a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under
>>>>>> $60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box
>>>>>> office for last year.
>>>>>
>>>>> THE SHAPE OF WATER wasn't geared at 14 year old boys, who line the box
>>>>> office tills with all the super hero crap.
>>>>
>>>> True, it was aimed at 40+ women who are lonely.
>>>>
>>>> ...and it won apparently because voters heard the gimmick/hook (trying
>>>> to make a film where THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON gets the girl)
>>>> and applauded the successfulness of that goal.
>>>>
>>>>> I heard DUNKIRK made the most of all BP nominees.
>>>>
>>>> True, but GET OUT was just barely behind at the US Box Office and it,
>>>> like THE SHAPE OF WATER left me perplexed as to why they were even
>>>> nominated.
>>>
>>> I haven't seen tSOW, but GET OUT, though entirely watchable, was
>>> obviously nominated for its racial significance and taboo-breakage.
>>
>> Which is something I don't get. It's great to have movies that have
>> some significance or break new ground, but does that qualify them to
>> be in the running for Best Picture? Perhaps we need another category
>> like "Most Significant Benefit to Modern Culture" or some such
>> meaningless arrangement of words for pictures that aren't truly great
>> but do have some role in breaking new ground.
> 
> Maybe the Academy needs a "Best Action Film" category since they seem
> to dominate the box office numbers now.

Maybe "Best Franchise Film".  That'd cover lots of movies whose 
principle weakness for me is their corny. predetermined outcome.

-- 

- - - - - - - -
   YOUR taste at work...
     http://www.moviepig.com 

	
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx19.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: shawn <nanoflower@notformailgmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Message-ID: <4g1aadpq5l4ibfqaidtd54ul5ptdld47bj@4ax.com>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com> <super70s-40AFE2.08415606032018@reader02.eternal-september.org> <p7mg2n$kdp$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 28
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2018 06:37:15 -0400
X-Received-Body-CRC: 4074193126
X-Received-Bytes: 2384
Print Article
Forward Article
On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:

>
>

>I suppose there might be some people who refused to watch this year's 
>awards because they feared that there would be a political 
>theme...though if there was going to be any real movement to the awards 
>it was always going to be the 'MeToo' thing which isn't exactly 'political'.
>
>I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>
>1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
>2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER WOMAN 
>didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my 
>desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't get 
>nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF WATER, was 
>a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under 
>$60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box 
>office for last year.

If they were really concerned about the ratings for the Oscars (and I
doubt anyone but the network is) then they should make room for more
popular movies to have a shot at winning. Sure, they may not want to
see a "Wonder Woman", "Justice League" or "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol
2" winning a major award like Best Picture, but without those movies
most of the potential viewers don't care about watching the Oscars.
It's enough to check up on who won the next day, if they care at all. 

	
Next <
From: Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Oscar ratings crash - maybe the lowest of all time
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 09:49:03 +1300
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <p844nt$1tqi$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <0494d643-d4d1-417a-a198-846bf23d89bc@googlegroups.com> <4g1aadpq5l4ibfqaidtd54ul5ptdld47bj@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 87ho02iehsbKnnQSgv/+vQ.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3
Print Article
Forward Article
On 2018-03-11 10:37:15 +0000, shawn said:
> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:36:37 -0500, Obveeus<Obveeus@aol.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I suppose there might be some people who refused to watch this year's
>> awards because they feared that there would be a political
>> theme...though if there was going to be any real movement to the awards
>> it was always going to be the 'MeToo' thing which isn't exactly 'political'.
>> 
>> I think the main reason that ratings dropped are:
>> 
>> 1.  ratings for everything are dropping.
>> 2.  this year's lineup of nominated movies was lackluster.  WONDER WOMAN
>> didn't get nominated to pull in the popular film crowd.  I know my
>> desire to even watch went from low to zero when THE BIG SICK didn't get
>> nominated for Best Picture.  This year's winner, THE SHAPE OF WATER, was
>> a box office champ by Oscar winner standards, but still took in under
>> $60million at the box office and barely made the Top50 films in box
>> office for last year.
> 
> If they were really concerned about the ratings for the Oscars (and I
> doubt anyone but the network is) then they should make room for more
> popular movies to have a shot at winning. Sure, they may not want to
> see a "Wonder Woman", "Justice League" or "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol
> 2" winning a major award like Best Picture, but without those movies
> most of the potential viewers don't care about watching the Oscars.
> It's enough to check up on who won the next day, if they care at all.

All these awards shows are boring crap. They're simply a load of 
over-egoed industry morons congratulating thamselves on "earning" 
obscene amounts of money and making long-winded speeches where they 
"thank" everyone (and their pet hamster) they've ever met ... and 
that's even before you get to the, usually arty-farty, garbage movies 
that get nominated and win.

Nobody with more than half a braincell would even *want* to watch a 
couple of hours of this rubbish (both the winning movies or the awards 
shows), let alone think the awards actually mean anything useful.