La 96ª Entrega Anual de los Premios de la Academia

Jimmy Kimmel hosted the awards and he is regarded as a safe pair of hand. As long as he did not make jokes about Robert Downey Jr. They all bombed.

Kimmel later redeemed himself with his response to an online review by a former president.

Oppenheimer was the big winner of the night. It took all the major honours. Poor Thing was the poor thing but it still won four. Barbie's Oscar went for a song.

Once again a Martin Scorsese film leaved empty handed. Like The Irishman, lots of nominations but no wins.

Here is a hint Marty. Next time make a shorter film! Actually Kimmel noted how long some of the contenders were. Did anyone think of my bladder.

Some of the victory speeches were still cloying. Seeing Twins Arnie and Danny DeVito take on Michael Keaton's Batman was fun.

A slick show but once again they messed up the In Memoriam section. I want to see the people who passed on. Not the singers, dancers or the orchestra.

As for the Best Picture presenter. Give up on getting the actor who was in that hit movie fifty years ago. It's way past their bedtime.

First of all, the only nominated movies that I'd seen from all categories were "The After", "American Symphony", "Barbie", "Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny", "Killers of the Flower Moon", "Maestro", "Nai Nai & Wai Po", "Napoleon", "Oppenheimer", "Rustin" and "The Wonderful World of Henry Sugar".

Jimmy Kimmel referenced Katie Britt's cringey response to Biden's State of the Union address, and later made fun of a negative comment from Donald Trump.

There had been the question of whether or not it was acceptable to hold the ceremony with terrible things going on in Ukraine and Gaza, but I guess that they felt like they had to anyway. I understand that protesters outside had caused the ceremony to delay a few minutes. However, when Jonathan Glazer won for "The Zone of Interest", he denounced the hijacking of the Holocaust as an excuse for a war against Gaza. Inevitably, some people tried to claim that he refuted his Jewishness, conveniently ignoring what he said.

Also important was when Cillian Murphy noted that, for better or worse, we live in Robert Oppenheimer's world, and he dedicated his win to the peacemakers.

As for the rest of the show, I liked it when Sean Lennon came up to the stage when a short based on a song by his parents won. John Cena's gag was a surprise, but he pulled it off. I hope that there's eventually an award for stunts.

The obviously cringey part was the In Memoriam segment; I could barely see the tributes to the deceased people over the dancers. I hope that they get that right next year.

Overall, I liked it. And remember, watch "Oppenheimer" before "Barbie"; after all, the physicist brought about the modern world, and the doll lives in it.

Jimmy Kimmel's performance was disgusting. Al Pacino should have read the nominees for best picture before opening the envelope. They should have shown a clip of the actors' performances before awarding them. I wish they would show more clips of the nominees. I loved the nominations for Zone of Interest. I thought it was in poor taste for the actors and actresses to talk about the acting nominees. They should show excerpts from the performances.

I didn't like seeing so many celebrities presenting the awards. It would be better to have more intelligent artists instead of socialite actors and actresses. They should show longer clips of the nominated international films. There should be more gays and people from other countries presenting the awards.

Jimmy Kimmel's performance as the host of the 96th Academy Awards left much to be desired. While he managed to avoid any major controversies or mishaps, his overall presence felt disappointingly bland. Here's why: 1. Lack of Energy: Kimmel's opening monologue lacked the spark and wit we've come to expect from Oscar hosts. It felt like he was going through the motions, ticking off the usual jokes without any genuine enthusiasm.

2. Predictable Humor: Kimmel's attempts at humor were safe and predictable. There were no daring punchlines or memorable zingers. It was as if he was afraid to take risks, resulting in a forgettable comedic experience.

3. Emotionless Delivery: Whether introducing presenters or interacting with nominees, Kimmel's delivery remained flat. He failed to inject any emotion or excitement into the proceedings, making it hard for the audience to stay engaged.

4. Missed Opportunities: The Oscars are a platform for celebrating the magic of cinema, but Kimmel missed several opportunities to elevate the show. Instead of embracing the uniqueness of films like "Everything Everywhere All at Once," he played it safe with generic banter.

In summary, Jimmy Kimmel's hosting was like a lukewarm cup of tea-neither scalding nor refreshing. While it wasn't a disaster, it certainly didn't leave a lasting impression. Here's hoping for a more dynamic and enjoyable host next year!

. . . a representative of the original Americans a few years back, the Academy revoked this recognition of such individuals' unheralded knack of putting on a brave face, and erased Marvin's attempt to spotlight an overlooked cohort of actors as if he were just a kooky visiting Martian who did not fully understand Earthling politics. However, the build-up to Tinsel Town's "Big Night" this year promised that the one sure winner would reinstate Marvin's effort to finally right the wrongs of the Twentieth Century. Shockingly, like Lucy yet again pulling the football away before Charlie Brown can kick it, this promised restitution was shifted at the last moment to an infamous harlot in a self-proclaimed broken dress. Talk about Hollywood's Walk of Shame!