|Don't filter or reduce the resolution of the image in any way in deference to the fragile egos of the stars. They are going to be photographed by People and US and Entertainment Weekly with 35mm still cameras anyway, a medium with more resolution than HD. They will have spent time and money looking as good as humanly possible already. [/b]|
|Originally posted by Dan Burgess|
Since ABC is going to do the Super Bowl in HD, it makes complete sense for them to do the Academy Awards show as well, and promotion is critical. 2003 can be a breakout year for HD (Super Bowl, ESPN-HD, Sunday and Monday Night Football games, among others) and ABC can and should promote their programming on SD broadcasts.
|I've posted about this before, but in my opinion, the Oscars will mean more to the popularity of HD than the Super Bowl. Because, while the rest of the world plays a very different kind of football, they all watch Hollywood movies.|
|Originally posted by LarryC|
I couldn't disagree more, Chris.
The Super Bowl is THE highest rated broadcasted television program every year.
It is THE television event of the year.
Even when the game is a "yawner", the rating for the Super Bowl surpass the Academy Award show EVERY year.
If television wants to showcase its "premier" product, then showcase the Super Bowl.
IT is television's premier product, not some boring award show.
|Although I am glad to see ANY additional HD programming, and I will watch the Oscar's this year (at least for a little while.) But the bad show tunes, corny jokes, boring stage numbers, and acceptace speeches that drag on are not, IMO, the best way to "sell" HDTV's.|
Sports is the "killer app" for HD, and the Super Bowl is the Holy Grail.