Should the Oscars have a host or is it better with just presenters?

More personalities makes for better laughs, differing points of view, and it doesn’t matter how long the show lasts.

One host moves the show along and provides better entertainment

David

The Oscar ratings have been in a freefall for a long time and no personality is going to change that. The Academy is too old and the show has been a debacle for a long time. Take a look at the audience. The average age had to be 70. No wonder most had no idea who Eminem was. Cut the number of awards given out in the show in half and show more movie highlights. Sorry S. Kaplan but has nothing to do with political speeches.

Stu Schreiber

100%!!!Had Steve Martin and Chris Rock stayed to host, there might have been some entertainment value.This was one of the least viewed Oscars ever, a real wake up call to Hollywood, America is turned off by politics in entertainment, and it might signify, America is repped by CA liberal opinions, the way we may assume it is.Get a host Oscar!

Scott Kaplan

ADMIN

VERIFIED

SUPERADMIN

It felt new and different and for an event like the oscars that is a little stuffy and old i think that is a breath of fresh air that made it more watchable, less forced comedy bits and it was still like 90 hours long so anything they can do to speed it up

Christian Pedersen

This was a great decision the past few years

Lets Watch Something

why not have both. A strong host is essential for events like this but more personalities can definitely help viewership

Chris Rock would have been epic! Plus what was that opening act gibberish song? How high was that lady??

Love seeing a bunch of great appearances from all sorts of different people

Definitely one host, with maybe some guest presenters, but just so much crap and just goes so long. Also, it would actually help if people saw the movie that wins all the awards.