DP has just linked me to this article, where writer Meg James introduces the world to "The Marion Cotillard Effect":
Few American moviegoers had heard of the French actress before she won the Academy Award last year for her performance in the art-house film "La Vie en Rose." That year also marked the lowest ratings ever for an Oscar telecast.
COINCIDENCE?
Think again.
It's not as though 2007 had A-List nominees like Johnny Depp or George Clooney in attendance to draw in viewers, or equally as obscure (for lack of a better word) acting winners and nominees like Tilda Swinton and Saoirse Ronan to leave viewers scratching their heads in confusion. No, Marion Cotillard is the reason 2007 had the lowest ratings in Oscar telecast history, and she is the reason the number of viewers has been steadily declining since the late 90s.
Just know that if introducing 10 Best Picture nominees fails to bring in viewers, we'll know why: it all comes down to The Marion Cotillard Effect.
Posts
8 comments:
Snarky! I like it. The article is a joke -- it lacks basic logic. Tom O'Neil, I mean Meg James needs to re-think her theories.
It's just such a silly way to open an article.
I also love how she specifies American moviegoers, as though the Oscars don't broadcast internationally. Or people in other countries have never heard of the Oscars.
Of course it's a joke, Marion cannot be the reason why the number of viewers has been declining since the late 90s !
I hope she did her work properly in PE, even if it was a small job to start with.
I've seen the reviews are not bad for her. Critics have been kind to her. Well.
bah humbug!
lol
sometimes I think it's amazing such poorly written "articles" could be added to such websites as the LA Times...
I would get it as a movie rant on a blog, not on a section of a known news source.
The blog pages of the LA Times are a continued embarrassment to my adopted home town.
Just ridiculous. Between O'Neil and that scabby gossip tramp...Elizabeth Somethingorother...it's a civic joke.
I expect poorly thought out theories based on dubious evidence from bloggers like us, but when you see it spewing out of an actual respectable publication, it just makes me think the whole world really is going to hell.
And don't even get me started on the way they like to work over the corpses of dead celebrities like vultures...
Would it make you feel better to know that two additional LAT staff writers contributed to this article?
To be fair, THE LAT has fantastic fashion coverage...and I used to use them as a source consistently.
But I don't like it when people sling vicious, misguided crap for nothing (especially when it's against someone as classy and talented as Ms. Cotillard).
Just how the hell is this relevant or interesting on any conceivable level?
If that's the best they can do, perhaps they should hire some new writers and editors.
Just a thought...
Post a Comment