At the very end of Vulture's chat with Hugh Jackman, they asked if the multi-faceted star would again host the Oscars this year. His response: "I don't know. I haven't been asked." Which got us thinking: If it's never too early for Best Picture punditry, then it's just as valid to start calling the odds on who'll host an awards show five months away. We've narrowed down the race to seven candidates, broken down in three categories: The Thoroughbreds, The Tantalizing Possibilities, and The Dark Horses.
The Thoroughbreds
1. Hugh Jackman
Why: Producers Laurence Mark and Bill Condon wanted to do something completely different with last year's show, giving the proceedings a classed-up, throwback feel by putting the orchestra on a thrust stage and bathing the audience in Swarovski-crusted opulence. Hugh was the dashing plastic bridegroom atop their wedding cake (and, some might argue, the glowing bride as well), wowing the crowd with his seemingly boundless gifts for song, dance, and making light-funny at only his own expense. And all the while, he managed to stay effortlessly classy, even when hopping into Frank Langella's lap or singing about pubic hair.
He brought in higher ratings, too: 36.3 million viewers, 4.3 million more than the year before.
Why not: His single 2009 output, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, is considered an Oscar frontrunner in all categories, and will therefore turn the evening into an awkward series of hosting stops and acceptance speech starts.
2. Neil Patrick Harris
Why: Why? Did you not watch the Emmys? If he can name every network (save HBO) on key and in one musical breath, just imagine what he could do with the 10 Best Picture nominees. Harris may not have the marquee appeal of Jackman, but he's ably proven his mettle as an extremely likable and talented Podium Penguin, able to roll with whatever burps and punches a four-hour live behemoth like the Oscars might throw his way.
Also, he too juiced the dipping telecast ratings, to the tune of 10%.
Why not: The TV Academy might be ready for an openly gay* host, but the Motion Picture Academy's decrepit electorate, despite what you might hear otherwise, still adheres steadfastly to an outmoded Don't Ask Don't Tell Just Sing and Dance hosting policy. Swing low, a change is gonna come.
*Lesbians, or soft-gays, are acceptable.
The Tantalizing Possibilities
3. Tina Fey and/or Alec Baldwin
Why: Of all the people who could preside over Hollywood's most important night, how many would you genuinely be excited about? 30 Rock is the ruling comedy power, and no one doesn't love its bickering, beneficent King and Queen -- each with enough live TV hours under the belt to have the know-how to keep an antsy, hungry crowd preoccupied until the Big One is announced.
Why not: Taken together, people will keep thinking "TV" when they're supposed to be thinking "movies." (Not that the name Jon Stewart screamed "movies," but his year is generally regarded as forgettable.) Taken separately, outside of the fiefdom of Lorne Michaels -- and even inside it -- Baldwin has a widespread reputation of being huffy, erratic and difficult to work with.
Tina, on the other hand, we're having trouble coming up with negatives for. Her general unease with choreography and singing is a running joke in both 30 Rock and movies like Baby Mama (see her butcher a karaoke rendition of "Girls Just Wanna Have Fun" here).
4. Justin Timberlake
Why: Hey, why not? His very presence seems to energize any stage he's on, he'd bring some much-needed pop hipness to the proceedings (last year's show, as "rebooted" as it was, still felt like something even your Elvis-loving grandma knew was uncool), and we all know he has the comedy, singing and dancing stuff down.
Why not: Because regardless of how much success he has, there's still something underlyingly bratty and boyish about the guy. It might work on SNL, but this is the Oscars we're talking about. Also, movies are the one showbiz threshold he has yet to effectively penetrate. Case in point, this trailer.
The Dark Horses
5. Kristin Chenoweth
Why: Squeaky Emmys acceptance speeches notwithstanding, Chenoweth is a Broadway pro through-and-through. She may be tiny (and too skinny), but what she's great at is filling a massive auditorium like the Kodak with her quirky, sunny disposition and powerful voice. Basically, an evening with Kristin would be like having your kid sister host the Oscars -- entirely counter-intuitive, but capable of producing some seriously memorable moments.
Why not: Just not famous enough, or universally beloved enough, to carry a telecast as heavily hyped as the Oscars. Also, after four hours of hosting duties, runs the risk of giving America a migraine as debilitating as the one she experienced after accepting her Emmy.
6. Kathy Griffin
Why: Who can turn the world on with a smile (and occasional wince)? As the returning host of the Creative Arts Emmys has ably proved, Griffin can make anything -- even below the line TV awards -- funny, controversial, and, most of all, entertaining. Yes, the thought of Griffin, who's been banned from more red carpets than just about anyone, presiding over Hollywood's most exclusive night is nearly unthinkable; but if it's ratings they desperately need, is it completely out of the realm of possibility?
Why not: Yes. Yes it is. She'll be snipered out of existence by the time the Best Supporting Actress roll call comes around.