Cannes Film Festival 2013

Seth Rogen weighs in on James Franco’s Oscar hosting stint

He asks: Is throwing Jr. in granddad’s suit the best way to run the Oscarcast?

<p>Seth Rogen (left) and James Franco at a screening of "Pineapple Express" in 2008</p>

Seth Rogen (left) and James Franco at a screening of "Pineapple Express" in 2008

Credit: AP Photo/Stuart Ramson

Are you a fan of In Contention?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

Seth Rogen is not interested in hosting the Oscars. Unless and until they “hire some better writers” that is.

The actor made the lighthearted remark during a recent interview with Short List. He’d been asked about his interest in hosting the Oscarcast given his relationship with last year’s co-host James Franco. He made a laughing, affable reply that actually raised some salient (particularly in the face of this year’s shake-ups) points.

“I think when you agree to do something like that, you put a certain amount of faith in the institution, hoping that they’ll take care of you, and I feel like they didn’t [take care of him]...Why hire James Franco and then give him Billy Crystal’s monologue? It was like, ‘Oh, we’ll hire these young hosts and then we’ll just do the same shit we do every fucking year.’ Which to me was really odd. I think they just approached it wrong. They didn’t think it through, and they were way underprepared. I think they hung him out to dry.”

Now, I’ll be honest, whether the material was appropriate or not, Franco’s delivery left something to be desired. And I like him quite a bit as an actor. Anne Hathaway seemed a touch at sea, and perhaps misused, but was making a legitimate effort to engage with the task she was given. He was presented with an odd set of circumstances that were not ideally suited to his strengths, and it didn’t entirely pan out. No one can knock it out of the park every time.

Where I think that Rogen has it right is in the idea that the organization seems far more concerned with saving face than protecting and standing behind the talent that they bring aboard. If an Oscarcast is a success then they reap the accolades, if it is not well received, it is the hosts' doing, or the producers. I would also agree that they seem to be floundering some as they work to keep in step with the times.

Related

Want More...

Academy Awards?
  • Oscar-statues-outside-the-82nd-academy-awards-at-the-kodak-theater-in-hollywood-ca
    Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.

It was surreal, in an uncomfortable way, to watch the awkward attempts to introduce social networking platforms into the proceedings. It was like witnessing a person who does not speak the language attempt a freestyle rap -- or like watching me attempt a freestyle rap. There’s nowhere safe to cast your eyes in that scenario. Additionally, and as we well could have predicted, it was clearly a mistake to have someone double as a nominee and host.

There has been a sense that the Academy was hedging its bets last year, one step toward a new generation of entertainers and one step toward tradition. Balance as a goal makes sense, but what actually occurred was the sort of first date that makes you wish you were getting your teeth cleaned instead. A clear mismatch. The material was stale, the host untried and abandoned without clear guidance. This year they simply seemed to bet on the wrong horse. Though, why they thought Brett Ratner would be anyone other than Brett Ratner we will never know.

In truth, in all likelihood they imagined “Tower Heist” was going to be a box office success. It wasn’t. So the public good will that they imagined Ratner would be enjoying, paired with a renewed interest in the talents of Eddie Murphy, did not manifest. In a sense, the PR disaster provided the AMPAS with an excuse to skirt around another misstep. The back to basics response really does feel like the best move they could have made given the time constraints and need for swift action.

However, had they possessed the imagination and foresight months ago, “Muppet Oscars” really may have offered the harmony of fresh, current and classic the Academy has been seeking. The Muppets are not cutting edge in a way that would undermine the gravitas of the event (we don’t need another MTV movies awards – we have Spike for that) and yet they would infuse a sense of play that would energize the evening.

If this were the year of the youthful host, rather than last, another “Freaks and Geeks” alum would have been the correct choice. Jason Segel is more of the Billy Crystal of our day than either Hathaway or Franco. A Segel/Muppets Oscarcast may have been the ideal answer, albeit a bit of a commercial for the film.

So, in “taking the pulse” the Academy may want to look for hosts that are young, well liked, and also writers, so that they can take a bit more ownership of the material rather than throwing talent at a wall and hoping for a Jackson Pollock.

For year-round entertainment news and commentary follow @JRothC on Twitter.

Sign up for Instant Alerts from In Contention!

Roth-cornet-sm
Roth Cornet
Contributor

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    SJG

    As much as I was on the Muppets-hosting-the-Oscars bandwagon as everyone else, in the end I think it was a good idea not to have them if only for the fact that if the movie stands to receive any nominations (as it almost certainly does in the song category anyway) then it might have looked a bit like 'playing favorites' with a certain film, or even with certain studios.

    Frankly, having ABC, a Disney-owned company, televising the Oscars with the Muppets, Disney-owned characters, in a year when The Help, a Disney-produced film, is poised to do well with the Academy would probably look partisan, or biased, or something like that. It wouldn't be, obviously, but for an institution that cares so much about avoiding controversy and saving face, I think it would probably come across as a bit crass to have something so promotional of a film whose studio is so invested in the outcome of the ceremony.

    Maybe I'm just reading too much into things, but this is what crosses my mind. The Ratner/Murphy thing was pretty promotional of a certain film as well, but it at least was a film that didn't scream "synergy" for a specific studio...

    November 29, 2011 at 11:58PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Roth Cornet You make a good point in terms of the potential for a best song nomination. The thing about Disney is that it operates like a series of states within a nation, but the states have individual rights and responsibilities. So licensing actually may have been more complex than it would seem on the surface. But I see what you are saying!

      November 30, 2011 at 2:44AM EST
  • Big_dan_drinking_a_cosmo_talkback_profile

    bigdan

    Great last line!

    November 30, 2011 at 12:12AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      PS I second that.

      November 30, 2011 at 1:00AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Roth Cornet Thank you!

      November 30, 2011 at 2:42AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      HoustonRufus Yes, I agree! Love the Jackson Pollock reference.

      November 30, 2011 at 11:06AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Guest Guesto

    Yes... that's what hurt James Franco. The fact that his monologues writers were unprepared. Poor host... he wasn't even put in the position where he could be a good host. Riiiiiiiiight.

    November 30, 2011 at 1:24AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      briguyx How true! We'll never know if anyone ever told James to up the energy, but the mumbling and looking like he was out of it was all him. Do you really think pros like Hugh Jackman or NPH wouldn't give their all under any circumstances?

      And the Muppets were never going to host the show. It's still the Oscars and the Academy still wants it to be a classy event (not that Kermit doesn't look classy in a bow tie...)!

      November 30, 2011 at 2:29AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Roth Cornet I agree, as I said, the performance left something to be desire. And Kermit does indeed look classy in a tie! I think where they misstep is finding that balance between maintaining the integrity and infusing some new energy.

      November 30, 2011 at 2:41AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      HoustonRufus Rogan's perspective is interesting, but I don't have much sympathy for Franco. I totoally agree the Academy needs to seek out younger writers. But this is not an organization that changes quickly. And regardless of the material, if you accept the offer, bring your best or don't bother. Jokes that fall flat reflect on the writers, but only if the host is a good sport and game. Franco was a bad sport about it and ended up with egg on his face along with the writers. Welcome to showbiz.

      November 30, 2011 at 11:13AM EST

Get Instant Alerts on In Contention

2012-2013 OSCAR PREDICTIONS

oscarside.jpg

Best Picture

Best Director

Best Actor

Best Actress

Best Supporting Actor

Best Supporting Actress

Best Adapted Screenplay

Best Original Screenplay

Best Cinematography

Best Costume Design

Best Film Editing

Best Makeup And Hairstyling

Best Original Score

Best Original Song

Best Production Design

Best Sound Editing

Best Sound Mixing

Best Visual Effects

Best Animated Feature Film

Best Documentary Feature

Best Foreign Language Film

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook