Trump Mocks Oscars Ratings: I’m The Only Real Star

The Washington Post reports:

The 90th Academy Awards show was two things: an evening of pointed political statements and a telecast with record-low Oscars viewership. And many on the right have been quick to claim that those things went hand in hand, though the critic-in-chief blamed a lack of star power.

“Sad,” tweeted the conservative actor James Woods. “How can Hollywood stop itself from alienating its audience?” “The American people are no longer interested in Hollywood pontificating about their liberal politics,” pro-Trump radio host Bill Mitchell said.

The dismal ratings for the ABC broadcast were a hot topic on Fox News, discussed at the top of the hour on both Tucker Carlson’s and Sean Hannity’s evening shows Monday, and again on Tuesday’s edition of “Fox & Friends.”

  • Mark

    Just joking? Yeah right.

    • Todd20036

      its no joke, in his opinion

  • Todd20036

    My God. This is the fucking POTUS

    • zhera

      So classy, innit. Star quality.

  • BartmanLA

    Another in this nightmare episode of “LOOK AT ME” from Trump. He just can’t stand not to be in the spot light or when it is pointed at someone else trying to steal it for himself. Pathetic and SAD.

  • clay

    It must be so easy and boring being president, that he has to waste time on this bullshit.

  • Wisterley

    Yeah, whatever. OT. I don’t know if people saw this piece on the epidemic levels of gay loneliness and depression last year when it was first published but I just read it and thought it might be of interest and/or help. Some extremely important, and either under-reported or ignored info.
    http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/gay-loneliness/

    • Longpole

      This is a sad read, but does stop and make you think.
      I don’t see hetros being that much happier or healthier. Most are overweight and have sugar, heart or blood pressure issues. Not to mention the 50% divorce rate since the 1970’s. How can you explain this when they have TOTAL support of the Government-Church complex and reinforced by Hollywood TV shows along their own families and friends support?

  • kareemachan

    Well, they needed *something* to make up for the Nunberg esplosion.

  • IAMBOWLINGGREEN
  • 🐾vorpal🐾

    Here’s what people think of your star, you revolting orange train wreck:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/69a970c0083439c5defed0aa904efee9d33dd69cc0ec73cb09d45e8ba04a0cb1.jpg

    • Karl Dubhe

      Are they repairing that, or replacing it with someone else? 🙂

      • Rambie

        I hope the shit gibbon has to pay for the repairs. Then it’ll never get fixed.

      • Kruhn

        It got repaired.

    • clay

      Wow, terrazo is notoriously difficult to damage.

  • Rebecca Gardner
    • Paula

      I was thinking the Oscar for the best Comedy/Disaster movie goes the Trump presidency.

  • TexasBoy

    I think the problem for the Oscars has been their choice of nominees are not in line with those of the general public. How many people had even heard of this years nominees prior to them being nominated. If Black Panther is nominated for Best Picture, best cinematography and so forth, the audience will increase.

    • lymis

      The Oscars used to be more of an interesting show, too, regardless of the awards. This year, if you didn’t care about the actual awards, there wasn’t anything worth sitting through. Even three out of the four performances for best song were lackluster at best. Even “This Is Me,” while a good performance, was pointless if you enjoyed the movie.

      And the “opening monologue” was boring beyond measure. In the past, you could expect good things from people like Billy Crystal.

  • Oscarlating Wildely
  • liondon#iamnotatraitor

    I only saw” Get out” this year…. none of the other contenders… didn’t have time to watch.

    • Oscarlating Wildely

      Seeing others this week. Some witty dialogue in Three Billboards– and of course, wonderfully effective use of the C word that scares the beejebus out of Americans.

      • tim870

        Color?

        • Wisterley

          Cupcakes.

          • Oscarlating Wildely

            Can’t tell you– it’s censored on this page.

          • Tulle Christensen

            Comey?

      • PickyPecker

        Covfefe.

  • RaygunsGoZap

    I didn’t watch the Oscars for the same reason I don’t watch any awards show: I’m not into watching the rich and famous hob knob and award each other for work that is largely forgettable.

    • Christopher
    • John

      I’m of the same mind with the possible exception of the Tony Awards – big theater queen here – but I did watch the Oscars this year only because “Call Me By Your Name” had several nominations. I’m glad it snagged at least one Oscar – screenwriter. As much as I liked the movie and definitely recommend it, I didn’t think Timothee Chalamet was Best Actor (nominated) quality…this time…but give him a few years IMHO. Considering the other contenders for Best Picture, I would say that just the nomination for Best Picture is to be considered an honor. (Rent or Buy the DVD available from Amazon after March 13.) It’s a really sweet story of first Gay love. I didn’t know this when I saw the film, but Chalamet actually learned to play the guitar and the piano for his role. That alone raises him up a level in my book.

  • CB

    Awards shows have been declining for years. The fragmentation of the media marketplace and changing consumption patterns mean that, among other things, many people don’t feel compelled to run out and see movies in their first run. (Always exceptions: Star Wars, Black Panther fan-based films and others.) But overall awards are less meaningful to the general public. Like many “institutions,” at 90, the Oscars have aged and are less relevant to a large swath of the population. This is demographics, not politics. Though, people love to read into events things that confirm their biases.

    • Stev84

      Also most people realize that it’s really just a show and that awards shouldn’t be taken too seriously

    • Chris Baker

      with the 24 news cycle, and movie stars being everywhere taking about their movies, and being able to watch highlight clips the next day on youTube, the Oscars is no longer a special occasion to see your favorites stars.

      I’ve never really seen the appeal–millionaire actors congratulating themselves on how great they all are. I guess I am an old fuddy duddy. I haven’t been to a movie in years, and most of the ones I have watched were made before 1960. I do love the glamour and idea of old Hollywood.

    • ETownCanuck

      Also, unless you live in a very large city like New York or Los Angeles, the opportunity to see most of the things that are up for awards just doesn’t exist. The documentaries, the shorts, foreign films and animated movies just aren’t easily accessible to all. And really, watching a three hour long show about things you haven’t seen, where people you don’t know or care about, give long winded acceptance speeches thanking other people you also don’t know or care about, isn’t really a lot of fun.

      • Mike__in_Houston

        I am completely lost in any conversation that focuses on modern (i.e., post-1965) movies. I was present for such a conversation the other night, where different folks were making their Oscar predictions. I guess at least some of them were wrong, because the first time I ever heard of The Shape of Water was yesterday morning. Dunkirk, another name new to me, was mentioned quite a few times for the major awards, and that turned out to be wrong also.

        I did make a point of seeing Star Wars VII when it came out (three times, as I did with IV, V and III), but I’m still so bummed out over Carrie Fisher dying (and Harrison Ford getting killed off in VII–I apologize for the spoiler, and I presume everybody knows of that plot development by now), that I didn’t even go to see VIII. I’ll catch it on home video one day.

        I figure if I ever get to a point where I have seen all of the pre-Code films, all of the Joan Crawford and James Cagney films, and at least most films noirs, I’ll go back to making a point of going to see modern movies again, even though I do enjoy the ones I happen to catch on cable now and then (I thought Legally Blonde would be beneath contempt and found it absolutely delightful). Thank God for Film Forum in NYC which I visit at least once every time I go up there, and where I have seen some wonderful films I had never heard of before (e.g., Beat the Devil from 1953 with Bogart) and also one or two real stinkers (Bergman’s The Touch from 1971 with Elliott Gould, on whom I had a major crush at one time, playing a real asshole).

        I don’t know if I’ll ever go back to watching the Oscars, though. I still haven’t forgiven the Academy for not giving the Best Picture Oscar to Brokeback Mountain, especially since some of the members refused even to watch the damned film, and how many years ago was that? Yes, I carry grudges…

    • Uncle Mark

      We also live in an age, where we can catch various highlights online or recapped on TV, without having to watch and sift through the whole ceremony.

      • craigbear

        Exactly. I’m still interested in the “big six” categories, but I don’t feel the need to sit through Best Cinematography and Best Sound Editing to get to them anymore. I can find out by checking Twitter, and if something big happens that I really need to see, like the wrong Best Picture nominee being named or “two words: inclusion rider”, the clip will be all over YouTube within minutes.

        I still care about them, I just don’t feel the need to carve five hours out of my schedule to sit down and watch the whole thing live anymore.

      • It Takes a Village, People

        Exactly. The only reason I watched in the past was because it was live. You never knew when Marlon Brando or Vanessa Redgrave would make people boo them. Or when Michael Moore would speak truth to power. Or Bette Milder would throw shade (and her bosom). Or Cher would show up not quite dressed. Plus we didn’t want to miss the loser faces. (Google Sigourney Weaver, Talia Shire and Ellen Burstyn for the best ones)….alas, all those moments are on YouTube within minutes.

        • John

          Speaking of Michael Moore, where is he these days? His commentary and his spot on films are powerful.

          • Kruhn

            His Twitter feed is very active.

    • Nic Peterson

      The magic of DVRs also means we get to watch it when we want to.

      • Keroleen

        Which is what I did this year, since my award show buddy moved recently. DVR’d it so I could watch anything I particularly wanted to see later and looked up the winners online.

  • greenmanTN

    I wonder how much of the ratings thing has to do with the fact that a LOT of people no longer go to see movies in the theater but wait to stream them at home? (I do.) Plus with the various cable series US TV is finally catching up with the Brits so far as interesting quality programming is concerned, telling stories in depth that can’t be told in around 2 hours?

    It seems to me that most of the excitement generated online isn’t for movies (unless it’s superhero stuff) but for long-form dramas from Netflix, Hulu, etc.

    • Tulle Christensen

      Plus with all the remakes why bother?

    • another_steve

      That, plus the majority of movies today are shit.

      Pure, unadulterated shit.

      • Mikey

        the majority of movies have always been “shit”. it has nothing to do with “today”.

      • Mikey

        the majority of movies have always been “shit”. it has nothing to do with “today”.

        • another_steve

          Oh my… I disagree. Do you watch any of the vintage films of the 30s, 40s, and 50s?

          Before CGI and before Hollywood started caving into an “appeal to the lowest common denominator” mentality?

          • clay

            What percent of the films of the ’30s, ’40s, and ’50s actually survived to become “vintage”?

          • another_steve

            Ohmigod… I’ve devoted my entire life to the continuous viewing of Bette Davis’s films, and you say THAT?!?

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/bf9e139c07c08497d4cef54ca465014885c78de6b51a4b0b13082c28944cff6d.jpg

          • clay

            What percent of films in the ’30s, ’40s, and ’50s was Bette Davis in?

          • another_steve

            Ohmigod… Girl has a huge filmography in those decades.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bette_Davis_filmography

          • clay

            What percentage of the total cinema output was hers?

          • another_steve

            Of the true classics, probably 25%.

          • clay

            No, of the total cinematic output of those 30 years, what percent actually became “classics”, Bette Davis or no.

          • another_steve

            Please, clay. I’m drunk, but not that drunk.

            You’re an old fart just like me, clay. You’ve viewed quality films of Hollywood’s golden past.

            Can you honestly not discern a difference there, then and now?

          • clay

            Absolutely, but the higest quality is not in any way a decent proxy for the overall quality of three decades.

          • Mikey

            You are making a major error.
            You cite “vintage films” but fail to realize that there were countless utterly garbage films in those “vintage” years.
            Hollywood has ALWAYS caved to the “lowest common denominator” and this even more so in the very first years of the movie industry.
            You need to study your history of film more closely, rather than only looking at the films that were deemed masterpieces later on.

            Before CGI there was ridiculous stunt work. There was grotesque over-the-top practical effects. There was cheap camera and mirror tricks.

            There is ALWAYS something to complain about in any decade of cinematic history.
            And you cannot say that CGI is absolutely bad, as your comment implies. It has its uses, sometimes subtle, sometimes not so subtle, but it can, and has, been used to great effect and to great artistry.

          • another_steve

            I hate you I hate you I hate you

            You cannot compare any of the great cinematic masterpieces (too numerous to list) with any of the dreck that Hollywood puts out today.

            Are you comparing “The Shape of Water” to, say, “Gone With the Wind” or “Casablanca”?

            Your gay card is hereby revoked.

          • Mikey

            You’re again making a false equivalence error.
            Yes, you can compare any of the great masterpieces of yesteryear with – wait for it – the great masterpieces of now.
            I didn’t say “Shape of Water” was a masterpiece, nor offered any opinion on it (I haven’t seen it yet), and especially did not compare it to any other film.

            If all you want is your old films, you’re welcome to them. But don’t make the mistake – nor insult the hard work and the artistry that so many filmmakers put into their work – of saying that there are no great films now. There are many.
            Whether you want to admit it, or whether they fall into your particular taste in films, is irrelevant.

            And my gay card is safe, I have a lifetime membership :-p

          • another_steve

            No. I speak for White-Robed God in Heaven. He agrees with me. I’m right.

            Today’s cinematic Zeitgeist is different from what it was in Hollywood’s Golden Era. Totally different. The moviegoers of today are a different breed than the moviegoers of, say, the 1940s. The “demand for excellence” was different back then. The definition of what constituted “greatness” in a film was different.

            We can argue whether this is good or bad, but there’s no arguing that it’s true.

          • craigbear

            There were lots of bad films being made back then too, you just don’t remember them because they were bad and haven’t endured the way the classics have.

            And there are lots of good films being made now that compare quite nicely to the vintage ones, you’re just more aware of all the crap you have to wade through to find them because the judgement of history hasn’t sorted the good from the bad for you yet.

          • another_steve

            You’re right about there having been lots of crap back then too. But for anyone who’s immersed themselves in the many many gems of that period, I don’t know how one can possibly compare the sheer quality and glory of it to what Hollywood churns out today. Acting. Writing. Scores. Masterful directors the likes of whom are extremely rare today.

            Plus (a personal gripe of mine), films are almost always too long today. “Call Me By Your Name,” a good example of that.

            A 90-minute film that was extended for reasons unknown into a 2 1/4 hour sleep-fest.

    • Oscarlating Wildely

      Let’s face it: the concept itself is pretty strange. Awards are given for films that are never described in full, only short scenes at best are shown, listen to speeches that, with little exception, are all the same, have skits that make banality look like Shakespeare, and outfits that, although glamorous, remind us of the non-possible or if I really was interested, would just look online– all to give an award for a series of films that, let’s be honest, most of us have not seen.

      It’s not about the films. Yes, some are crap, some are brilliant. Is this awards show about artistic brilliance or just a great PR team? I can’t watch a three hour ad for *anything,* no matter how gorgeous the presenters might be.

      • greenmanTN

        I really don’t watch many movies or TV. I don’t mean that in a “oh I’m above it” sort of way, just stating the truth. In my free time I read, not the “great books,” but mysteries, thrillers, the occasional “horror” novel, dark comedies, whatever. There are even shows I’d LIKE to see but haven’t because I just don’t have the patience or attention span anymore. I can’t sit there and JUST watch TV, I get fidgety and start surfing the Net or draw or something else. With a book you HAVE to pay attention, do that and nothing else.

        • CanuckDon

          I have a difficult time sitting and watching something on tv for more than an hour (more like half an hour). The computer took over my leisure time because it’s more interactive. I’m also one who never really cared about sitting back and being entertained.

          • greenmanTN

            The only time I can watch TV is if I’m doing something else. If I’m drawing or painting I pay half attention to what’s going on in the movie and only really pay full attention when something good is happening. If I miss something I can always rewind.

      • greenmanTN

        In the “golden age of Hollywood” how many films were released in a year? There was no television and later if there was it pretty weak tea. Most everyone went to the movies as entertainment so most people had seen all the movies that were nominated. Celebrity Culture was very different too. There was no paparazzi, fan magazines were churned out to promote the idea that movie stars’s lives fit their image. Not only did Grace Kelly’s shit not stink, but she didn’t shit at all and if she did she coughed it discreetly into a napkin and it smelled vaguely of jasmine.

    • zhera

      I’d guess it’s to do with Hollywood being too white, too male, too rich. I don’t care about what star gets what award, unless it’s for a work that MEANS something. Most of the movies mean nothing.

      But I’ve never cared about awards show anyway.

    • craigbear

      Yep. I haven’t gone out to see a movie since The Force Awakens — I watch my movies at home or at friends’ houses on Netflix or DVD or whatever.

  • Rex

    Trump a star?
    His insecurity is more like a black hole of attention seeking.

    • Wisterley

      To be fir, the same could be said of quite a few actual stars, too.

  • mikeinftl

    The sun really does revolve around this guy doesn’t it?

    • another_steve

      Abnormal Psychology textbooks will have to be revised to include entire chapters on Donald Trump.

    • thatotherjean

      He thinks it shines out of his rear end.

  • Harveyrabbit
  • clay

    The Oscars had their lowest ratings, except when measured against all other broadcast TV that night. Over half of all broadcast eyes were watching the Oscars. It’s that more and more eyes are tuning to non-broadcast video (cable, netflix, etc.).

  • Proud MOFO Beaner (bkb)

    Overlooked yesterday because of the Nunberg meltdown

    https://twitter.com/CharlesMBlow/status/970642832485769217

    • Oscarlating Wildely

      The president of the United States is happy about creating and not being able to reign in chaos. Think about that fact for a second.

      We have become the laughing stock of the globe.

      • Wisterley

        I’ve always thought he was Nero. Without the culture or the five good years. Instead we just got bonkers politics, purges, and chaos.

  • joe ho

    Bragging about his 35% approval rating again?

    • Oscarlating Wildely

      Thought it shrank again. He just hasn’t been able to keep it up lately.

      Meanwhile, looks like Kim Jong-Il’s button is doing just fine.

    • John

      I read – somewhere – that he’s now at 30%. When, oh when, will the villagers storm the castle with their torches and pitchforks????

  • FAEN

    Hey BLOTUS-You lost the popular vote by millions, your inauguration numbers were pitiful. You will never eclipse President Obama where it matters. You also make W seem like a member of Mensa.

    Loser.

  • We’ve know this for years: Oscar ratings are dependent on the popularity of the movies most likely to win best picture. This was a year without one of those films. It has nothing to do with stars or politics.

  • justme
    • Keroleen

      While the resemblance is there, and apparently comparing Ms. Sarandon to Yzma is a thing, the pedant in me is driven to point out she was actually voiced by the late, great Eartha Kitt. Rowrrr

      • justme

        Eartha Kitt is still respected..

  • Michael R
  • blackstar
    • Oscarlating Wildely

      Naval historians will know more than I but weren’t the blocks supposed to go behind the wheels to make sure that the cannon didn’t propel backward? Without them, the cannon is loose– and meanwhile everything else goes backward.

      • greenmanTN

        A loose cannon pretty well describes Trump.

      • lymis

        Not a naval historian, and while I was in the navy, we didn’t have cannons.

        But on board a ship, guns needed to be blocked in both directions. You didn’t want them slamming into things on a recoil, but you didn’t want them rolling around loose in either direction. Ships pitch and roll, and a cannon that wasn’t blocked forward could crash through the side of the ship.

      • evanedwards

        http://www.thepirateking.com/images/cannon_us_9inch.jpg

        The rear of the cannon usually rested on wooden blocking and had a small wheel attached to a lever to manually lift the rear end to allow it to be run in for reloading.

      • Halou

        That’s not history per se, it’s basic Newtonian physics.

  • pj

    did you think we forgot you were there? you dont need to remind us ok?

  • Ragnar Lothbrok
  • Rex

    I imagine if Obama had dissed the Oscars and proclaimed he was the real star it would have gone over just fine on Fox News.

  • EdA

    I’m not sure because I haven’t watched the Miss Universe broadcast for decades. But if I’m not mistaken, last year this landmark [sic] program, owned by Don the Con until a couple of years, came in third, way behind NFL football and 60 Minutes. Even straight guys weren’t that interested.

    https://www.thewrap.com/miss-universe-fox-nbc-football-ratings/

  • Makoto

    Ratings, ratings, ratings, all he cares (or rants about) is ratings.
    No wonder he thinks shooting off a missile attack is “after dinner entertainment”. He doesn’t care about the cost of the missiles, the damage, or even possible loss of life. He cares only about how much others talk about him. It’s all that ever counted.

  • RobynWatts
  • Devon Rodriguez

    Nearly every intelligent person I know is anti-Trump and anti-Republican, not because of some tribal bias, but because Republican policy has become literally insane. The film industry is hardly in step on many issues, but most of them are savvy enough to recognize the Trump threat and stand against it–unlike, say, the banking and oil industries.

    • lymis

      Even if the only consideration for the film industry is money, they can’t keep making movies if billionaires are the only ones who can afford to watch them.

  • No More GOP.

    OK, kids, pathological narcissist being pathologically narcissistic. Nothing to see here. Move along and focus on fixing what the he and the GOP have broken.

  • Jefe5084

    You’re a Death Star. Asswipe.

  • Christopher
  • Rex

    And, we all know that when you’re a star, you can do anything, right Donnie?

  • Rex

    “I’m still big – it’s my hands that got smaller” – Norma Trump

  • Rex

    “I’m still big – it’s my hands that got smaller” – Norma Trump

  • Rex

    “I’m still big – it’s my hands that got smaller” – Norma Trump

  • Rex

    “I’m still big – it’s my hands that got smaller” – Norma Trump

  • evanedwards

    If by star you mean a mammoth ball of hot gas, then yes.

  • Uncle Mark

    As predicted by almost everyone here last night after the Nunberg meltdown, someone is having a twit-storm…talking about everything & anything, except Nunberg, Russia, or Mueller. https://twitter.com/mroller17u/status/971036637403770880

    • lymis

      Just because you weren’t paying attention, Donnie, it doesn’t mean that people weren’t making serious efforts in previous administrations.

  • lymis

    Donald, the only reason people talk about you now is because you’re in office and what you do affects our lives. It’s not because we like you.

    People who don’t like the Oscars don’t need to bother to pay attention to them. You can fuck up our lives. We can’t afford to ignore you.

    Here’s an idea. Resign. Then we can talk about how many people pay attention to you.

    • Treant

      ^^This. I ignored the Oscars because…well, there are no consequences and I didn’t care about it.

      One ignores this yutz at one’s own peril.

  • Oh, Parker

    Abnorma Desmond.

  • Bambino
    • RoFaWh

      When Trump says “just kidding”, get a tight grip on your wallet.

  • Dave F.

    45’s a black hole. Immensely dense, dangerous to anything near him, appetite for destruction, sucks everything around him into himself (since everything is about him anyway).

  • Dayglo

    The entire admistration is staffed with bastard people.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ILPbQvh8ol4

  • Matt

    The Oscar ratings are down because the popular films don’t get nominated. Put more stuff people actually went to see and ratings will improve.

    • Reality.Bites

      Oscar ratings are down because all ratings are down.

  • Jeffrey Robert

    Look on the bright side – he used the correct form of “your”.

  • It Takes a Village, People

    Problem is actually lack of interest in broadcast television. Literally hundreds of competitors are burying them.

  • Halou

    I’ve seen some of Trump’s cameos on various TV shows and movies, nothing of any value is added by his presence there. The only one I think has any ‘merit’ is his appearance in Home Alone 2, and that is not for any plot point but because they wanted to do a scene in his building and that was what he asked for in return.

  • DaveMiller135

    I forget who said, “If you want to be a Star, never be seen doing anything less than really well.”

  • Halou
    • Jonathan Smith

      i assume it’sin a box for the cement filling?

      • GanymedeRenard

        It’s his wall paid for by Mexico.

  • Jonathan Smith

    really? I NEED to post this?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHPE_BrctCo

  • RoFaWh

    As usual: he’s nuts.

  • teedofftaxpayer

    I think quite of few people stop watching the Oscars because with all the award ceremonies before them all have the same winners so it’s pretty much a foregone conclusion who is going to win. There is really no mystery anymore.

  • JWC

    Me me me me the only person saying this more is a practicing opera performer

  • Gerry Fisher

    Reality doesn’t matter. Only ratings. Oy!

  • M Jackson
    • Lowest rated POTUS in History! Problem is we, don’t have Statesmen anymore – including our “president” (not kidding of course!)

  • GanymedeRenard

    No, you fool; if anything, you’re an APPRENTICE of a star – not kidding.

  • Gianni

    Trump is a star, that’s true. He stars in his own daily show. Unfortunately for all of us, it’s not about anything remotely positive or uplifting.

  • Trump’s Triple Chin

    It wasn’t about liberal Hollywood. It was about a dull as dishwater show.
    I say bring back Hugh Jackman or Neil Patrick Harris and give us some song and dance, and not Jimmy Kimmel crashing a movie premier with Gal Gadot.