The host-less Oscars actually went really well

The Oscars seemed like it might be headed for disaster when the Academy decided to go ahead without a host. But Sunday's show was anything but.

The first host-less Oscars in three decades went surprisingly well, with the show moving along at a far quicker pace than in recent years, getting along just fine with a line-up of presenters. The ceremony notably didn't have the kinds of drawn-out, lame comedy bits that typically come with a host, such as Jimmy Kimmel crashing a showing of A Wrinkle in Time or Ellen DeGeneres handing out pizza to audience members.

In fact, Sunday's show went so unexpectedly smoothly that many began to ask if the Oscars even needs a host at all.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Of course, the Academy stumbled into this format by complete accident. Kevin Hart was originally set to host, but he stepped down in December after old homophobic jokes and tweets of his resurfaced. The Academy never found a fill-in, with producers recently telling The New York Times they saw this as an opportunity to reduce the show's length.

It worked, resulting in the shortest Oscars in seven years; it clocked in at about 3 hours and 20 minutes. The road to this ceremony was a complete disaster — who could have guessed the format would actually leave viewers asking for a repeat next year? Brendan Morrow