Vanity Fair Oscar party cancelled

By Alexandra Heilbron on February 6, 2008 | 16 Comments

Vanity Fair has canceled its annual Oscar party. The magazine has been hosting the glitzy post-awards event since 1993, but because of the Writers Guild strike, Editor-in-Chief Graydon Carter has pulled the plug. “After much consideration, and in support of the writers and everyone else affected by this strike, we have decided that this is not the appropriate year to hold our annual Oscar party,” Vanity Fair said in a statement. “We want to congratulate all of this year’s nominees and we look forward to hosting our 15th Oscar party next year.” If the strike hasn’t ended by February 15th, this year’s television season will not be revived and new shows for next season will be in limbo.

1. Fitzgibbons • February 6, 2008 @ 3:32 PM

   “this is not the appropriate year to hold our annual Oscar party,�� Vanity Fair said in a statement.”

   How can it not be an “appropriate” year to hold an “annual” party???

2. tributegirl • February 6, 2008 @ 4:06 PM

   If you’d have bothered to read the article, Double, you would have seen that this decision was made in support of the writers and everyone else affected by the strike. It has been cancelled for a very good reason.
   I hope the strike ends soon, or who knows what we will be watching next season.

3. Nancy • February 6, 2008 @ 5:24 PM

   I hope it ends soon too. I guess we will see after their talk on Saturday.

4. tributegirl • February 7, 2008 @ 5:08 AM

   tributegirl on February 6, 2008 4:06 pm

   “If you��d have bothered to read the article, Double, you would have seen that this decision was made in support of the writers and everyone else affected by the strike. It has been cancelled for a very good reason.”

   That was not me. Fitzgibbons makes a very good point; if it’s an annual party, how can it be an inappropriate year…?

5. tributegirl • February 7, 2008 @ 8:01 AM

   It is an inappropriate year BECAUSE OF THE WRITERS STRIKE. Yes, so far they have held this party annually, however they have decided to cancel it this year. What is so hard to understand? And why don’t you just use the name Double instead of using other people’s names?

6. tributegirl • February 7, 2008 @ 9:06 AM

   tributegirl on February 7, 2008 8:01 am

   That wasn’t me. You’re not fooling anyone, so cut it out.

7. tributegirl • February 7, 2008 @ 10:39 AM

   Nice try, double. Hey, does it hurt being so dumb?

8. Arnold • February 7, 2008 @ 6:29 PM

   maybe I do, maybe I don’t, who’s asking?

9. The Golden Martian • February 7, 2008 @ 10:58 PM

   I used to find tributegirl’s schtick mildly amusing, but now it’s just annoying.

10. Anonymous • February 8, 2008 @ 1:45 AM

    hey, it’s not fair. after all, it’s my party and i’ll cry if i want to.

    maybe they’re cancelling it because it’s a leap year, they figure they can just ‘skip’ over it!

11. tributegirl • February 8, 2008 @ 9:05 AM

    So, Golden Martian, do you mean the real me, or do you mean the double?
    Uh, someDude, no I’m not from New Brunswick, why do you ask? Is there going to be a Vanity Fair party there or something? Were you going to ask me to go?

12. The Golden Martian • February 8, 2008 @ 9:21 AM

    People talking about “doubles” — it’s a cry for attention, nothing more.

13. tributegirl • February 8, 2008 @ 9:59 AM

    Yeah, I just wish he/she would use their real name, maybe we could give them some attention!

14. Anonymous • February 8, 2008 @ 4:53 PM

    to paraphrase: double double, toil and trouble.
    he needs a life far far away from this site.

    nancy should hunt him down like the dirty dog he is and curse him with numerous ailments!

15. Nancy • February 8, 2008 @ 5:57 PM

    I am not so sure ‘double’ is a HE!!!

16. theoriginalkaren • February 9, 2008 @ 3:31 AM

    It was a pretty lousy year for movies anyway.