Now that the Emmys are over, is it too early to begin collectively fretting over the Oscars?
The quality (or lack thereof) of the Academy’s annual kudocast becomes a preoccupation well before the event is held in late February. The anxiety gets more tiresome with every passing year, but maybe the 2016 Emmys can help steer us away from the inevitable nail-biting.
The TV industry’s biggest night was strong this year, largely due to Jimmy Kimmel, who truly shined as host. So howzabout we avoid the agita over who is going to be brave enough to host the next Oscars and just give the gig to Kimmel?
That would certainly be in the best interest of ABC, which recently signed to keep the Oscars on its airwaves through 2028. What better promotional platform could the network have than to install its own late-night host as Oscar emcee? And not just for 2016 — let’s just give Kimmel the kind of multi-year deal that locks him up to host for as long as he’s willing to take on the assignment.
He really was that good at the Emmys. It wasn’t just that he was funny or provocative or kept what can often be an interminable night humming along. What was great about Kimmel was how he projects such a casual, effortless vibe, in stark contrast to hosts like Jimmy Fallon or Neil Patrick Harris, who have their charms but always seem to be trying so hard onstage that they risk projectile flop sweat.
A vote for Kimmel isn’t just a vote for a good host — it’s a vote for doing away with the annual multi-month blood sport that is Oscar-host selection. Let’s put an end to the ceaseless speculation, second-guessing, and carping, because this sideshow is a big part of the problem. We’re always disappointed with the Oscar host because we all make too big deal about it. But if there’s a solid choice to bank on year in and year out, perhaps the focus will stay where it belongs: on the movies and the people who make them.