Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Drink Driving, Don't Risk It!

The Oscars unveiled

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 20 February 2009
This Sunday's Academy Awards will go on under the shadow of the recession. Will the frocks be any less flashy or the bling any less shiny, asks Alice Wyllie, looking behind the scenes of Hollywood's annual big night of excess
THE MAIN EVENT

WITH all the buzz surrounding the Oscars, it's easy to forget that the purpose of it all is to hand out a few gongs for the best films of 2008.

This year the show has two new producers, Bill Condon and Laurence Mark, the duo behind the film Dreamgirls (a 2007 Oscar-winner).

There are excited rumours of a completely new format; the decision to appoint actor Hugh Jackman, INSET, as host is a major departure, as that job normally goes to a top comedian such as Billy Crystal, Steve Martin or Ellen DeGeneres.

Can the World's Sexiest Actor keep the audience entertained with sparkling banter between five hours of presentations, speeches, film clips and musical numbers? Some industry insiders are predicting that, amid all the doom and gloom, this year's ceremony will take a deliberately upbeat tone, particularly with the already garlanded feel-good film of the year, Slumdog Millionaire, sporting ten nominations. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences president, Sid Ganis, has promised that the show's producers "are going to take some risks, many risks, some bold", and there's been talk that this year's show will be more heavily music-focused.

The cost of staging the Academy Awards is about $30million (£21m), and with only 3,400 seats in Hollywood's Kodak theatre that's about $75,000 (£53,000) per guest. However, television audiences are falling (down to 32 million worldwide in 2008, from 40 million in 2007) and, thanks to the flailing economy, the price of a highly coveted TV advertising slot during the awards has been slashed to attract advertisers, who for the first time this year are being allowed to show ads for films.


THE FROCKS

WILL Hollywood's A-listers opt for pared-back sober elegance on the Oscars red carpet this year, or will they go for all-out glamour? The fashion world remains undecided.

Last year's ensembles were relatively reserved, a nod to the writers' strike, and in previous years dress codes have been adapted to reflect political sensitivity.

During the Second World War, attendees were asked to dress in dark-coloured, semi-formal clothing for a more subdued effect, while in 1967 the wearing of too-informal hippie styles – including colourful love beads and the wildly fashionable miniskirt – was banned.

The general consensus this year is that while over-the-top gowns will be avoided, female stars won't be sacrificing glamour. Subtly sophisticated nude shades, ranging from taupe to peach, may be favoured, as well as metallics and chic silhouettes with little embellishment: think RM by Roland Mouret, or Zac Posen's more simple offerings.

"You would (have to] be beyond ignorant not to acknowledge (the economy]," said celebrity stylist Rachel Zoe, whose clients include Cameron Diaz, pictured right, and Best Actress nominee Anne Hathaway, "(but] my attitude is, let's put a smile on people's faces even if it's just for an hour."

It's an interesting take on the dilemma and one that is shared by at least some stars.

Jennifer Lopez said: "I don't think there's anything wrong with playing dress-up right now… I say do what makes you happy and wear what you want, because the only thing that really matters is if your mother calls you up the next day and says, 'What were you wearing?'"


THE PARTIES

THE Oscars inspires thousands of people in Hollywood to throw a party on the night, from intimate celebrity gatherings to the legendary Vanity Fair bash, which is back on this year after being cancelled in 2008 as a mark of respect to the striking writers, though at a more modest venue than usual, the Sunset Towers hotel restaurant. Most parties this year are going ahead as normal, and the word is that hosts will cut back on quantity, rather than quality, being economical with the invites but not with the vintage champagne.

"The big parties at the Oscars are legendary and very lavish," says Christian Guiltenane, the entertainment editor at OK! magazine. "I don't think they'll be too badly affected by the economy. They're an excuse for flamboyance and, for us, they're an opportunity for a bit of escapism, so I think people will almost be expecting them to be as over-the-top as ever. Having said that, in general there are fewer parties being thrown and many are being scaled right back – they may be a little more modest than usual."

Some parties have cut their budget by up to 75 per cent from last year, but most are choosing to scale back on numbers, while retaining the opulence for which the parties are famed. In years past, some of the Hollywood studios would throw parties for 1,000 guests, though this year numbers are more likely to go no higher than 300, much like Paramount's pre-Golden Globe party last month. On Wednesday, hedge-fund billionaire and socialite Nicolas Berggruen downsized his annual pre-Oscars party, at the Chateau Marmont on Sunset Boulevard, from 800 to 600 guests.

Party organisers are also saving money by throwing cocktail soirées instead of sit-down dinners; Swarovski and Dior are both saving money this year by forgoing the food. On Wednesday, Swarovski held a cocktail party for 250 people on the roof garden at the Thompson Beverly Hills hotel, a much more low-key event than last year's runway fashion presentation for 500 guests at the Ace Gallery in Beverly Hills.


THE ROCKS

THE diamonds at the Oscars come a close second to the dresses in terms of creating a buzz among the press.

It's a safe bet that no-one (possibly excepting Elizabeth Taylor) is wearing their own rocks. These are usually loaned for the occasion – and accompanied by security.

Coloured stones are being considered instead of bling diamonds by many designers this year, while jeweller to the stars Fred Leighton predicts celebrities will wear just a single "statement" piece, a more tasteful and recession-appropriate alternative to the matching "suite" of ring, necklace, bracelet and earrings.

Every year since 2002, shoe designer Stuart Weitzman has brought out a pair of Oscars shoes for one lucky actress to wear, festooned with $1 million (about £700,000) worth of diamonds. This year, however, those shoes won't be making an appearance.


THE FREEBIES

AH, the gifting suites. An Oscars tradition as reliable as weepy speeches. In the week running up to the ceremony, companies dish out freebies to attendees, including everything from luxury watches and mobile phones to cars, and the bags for the nominees of the main awards can be worth tens of thousands of dollars. This year, some gifting suites have been cancelled, and many of the more grossly ostentatious offerings, like the "diamond facial" (in which tiny diamond chips are used to exfoliate the skin), won't be making an appearance. Simply giving away products is too uneconomical for many brands. However, the stars need not panic. Today and tomorrow one of the biggest gifting suites, GBK, will be displaying its bounty, including gift certificates for Botox treatments. Silver Spoon is offering goodies including spa treatments and caviar tasting, no less luxurious than last year's offerings, which included jewellery and designer jeans.

BY NUMBERS

5,830
Members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, who vote for the Oscar winners

50
Number of statuettes made for the ceremony

3.85
Weight, in kilos, of an Oscar

281
The number of films eligible for the Oscars this year.

2,701
The number of Oscar statuettes that have been handed out so far.

$40,000
Rumoured value of the goodie bags for this year's nominees

$1.4 million
The cost of a 30-second advertising spot during the Oscars broadcast.

$20 million
Price of the most expensive jewellery ever worn to the Oscars: a Harry Winston 15-carat blue diamond necklace that Gloria Stuart, nominee for best supporting actress for Titanic, wore in 1998.

$7,500
The day rate for a top hairdresser to do an actress's hair for the Oscars.

$5,000
The cost of getting your product into the gift bags that are delivered to nominees.

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 February 2009 8:23 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Film and TV awards
 
1

amandah,

california 20/02/2009 02:53:13
I'd be bummed out if the fun of the Oscars is washed out by the bum-drum of the economy. Not that we should be indulgent, but it's sort of fun to take the night off and be starry-eyed, no? I'm sort of excited about getting in the mood and putting a little red carpet in to my outfit before heading to a friend's party. http://www.pikkee.com/outfit_tasks/gallery/3?page=7
Is that so wrong?
2

Ewan Oosami,

22/02/2009 18:54:43
The oscars are indulgent, boring and unecessary. The only people who are interested in this twaddle are the luvvies themselves. Their mutual backslapping and pathetic dramatic speeches are the best emetic on the market. To spend 4 years of my pension on a goody bag beggars belief.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.