"I'd like to thank all the people who made this "Oscar" possible." You know the drill. If it's not thanking all the "little people" who helped them along the way, it's thanking their agent, their hairdresser, their make up artist, the director, the cast, the producer and before the music begins to swell in the orchestra pit because the director has to get the show on the road the winner finally gets around to thanking their high school drama teacher and family members.
Well, maybe this example is a little extreme but there has been the tendency for some Oscar winners to go a little overboard in their acceptance speeches, either thanking those people who might have helped them win or, taking advantage of the large television audience out there (and an international one at that), to use the speech to voice their opinion on some issue.
After having watched the Oscars on television year after the year for as long as I can remember, I have always thought that a number of the acceptance speeches over the years have gone on for far too long for some of the awards handed out. Granted winning an Oscar is an auspicious honor worthy of some words of gratitude to those who might have been responsible for the award winner having won in the first place, but some winners have gone overboard thanking as many people that they can quickly remember while up on stage. I've always felt sorry for the people, who because other award winners had spoken too long, could hardly get a few thank you's out before the swelling music cut them and their acceptance speech short.
I know if I won an Oscar I would want to thank a lot of people and then hope that I wouldn't forget anyone as I rattled off all these names before I was escorted off stage. Inasmuch as anyone who has ever won an Oscar would want to thank those responsible for them winning the award, I believe that there should be a limit on all speeches just to be fair to all award winners. Everyone gets two-three minutes whether you have won for art direction or best original screenplay.
Likewise, all nominees should have a speech prepared just in case. It gets a little old when someone who has just won an Oscar gets up on stage and then has spend a minute or two explaining that they didn't think they were going to win, so they didn't prepare anything. Nothing more annoying to have to watch someone fight for the words and try to rattle their memory banks to remember names of people who helped them win.
At the same time, some award winners forget their audience when they start rattling off these names of people somehow responsible for their Oscar. Sure, maybe the people in attendance in the auditorium know their agent or some film editor, but for the millions of people watching around the world perhaps they are not that interested. I am not suggesting that winners should not thank certain people, but they should know their audience and keep their show of thanks limited.
On the other hand, there have been some excellent and moving acceptance speeches over the years like the one Tom Hanks gave for winning Best Actor for Philadelphia as well as Al Pacino for Scent of a Woman, and when Martin Scorcese finally won for best director last year that would be kind of hard to cut short. These are the kinds of speeches that people want or expect to hear from their favorite actors or directors but is it fair to give someone like a Tom Hanks more time than another winner for film editing or cinematography? Maybe the only fair way is to establish time limits for all winners.
The acceptance speeches are an integral part of any awards show but they are just a part of the show. Therefore, in order to be fair to all winners as in the case of The Academy Awards, the acceptance speeches should be limited and nominees would be advised to have something written down just in case, when they hear, "and the winner is."