So the reviews are coming in from last night, and they are vastly mixed going from praises to pans, and so I would have to say, the overall vibe is somewhere in between:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... the-critic

That article from NPR sums it up nicely, meanwhile one of the comments from that page explains it best. I'll paraphrase: If you liked Seth MacFarlane before the Oscars you liked his hosting, if not, then you didn't. Pretty cut and dry.

Doesn't match my reaction - - so perhaps it's uncut and wet?

I'm on your side, I thought he was very good and think he should return.

Overall, decent. Didn't like most of the opening minus a few jokes, but he got better throughout. I don't think he should host again, but this is no James Franco/Anne Hathaway.

I thought he was surprisingly likeable, considering how much I hate Family Guy.

He's an upgrade over, like, Ryan Seacrest.

If they were going to go this route they should have gotten Joel McHale. His tweets from last night were consistently hilarious.

omg, yes. Joel McHale. Incredibly funny and incredibly hot.

Not that Seth is bad looking. I actually thought he did a better job than a lot of people are giving him credit for.

Ratings are in, and they are better than previous years

I guess the people like MacFarlane

Or the movies nominated were more popular than last year's lineup.

Same here.

While he wasnt all that funny or controversial, he was decent as a straight up no nonsense host which was the opposite of what i expected.

But the cringeworthy jokey presenter banter schtick (ie. Rudd/McCarthy) needs to end.

I think he did great. I would complain more about the production, especially the musical focus that took too much time and dragged.

Yep. Not by much but they did well in the demo. Since none of the nominees skewed young, they can thank MacFarlane for the boost.

He'll be back sometime within the next five years and he deserves it. He was good.

The producers should get axed though. The musicals tribute was a gigantic was of time. And when you factor in that one of the producers also produced Chicago, you realize the entire tribute was pretty much a circle jerk.

I didn't see it, but he couldn't have been worse than Billy Crystal.

I thought he was terrible. There were a few mildly funny bits, but overall he was crap.

Perhaps he's better in character.

He can be funny. I loved Ted and thought it was one of the funnier movies of last year but that doesn't change that he was simply awful last night. The only time I laughed was because of how shocked I was (the John Wilkes Booth joke). That being said, you're probably right. My boyfriend is usually a fan but he agreed he was terrible and said if he isn't sticking to a script, he usually sucks.

This is a bit of an overly glib explanation. With more viewers comes a higher demo rating, generally. The films nominated this year were more popular with the public than the ones from last year. That plays a much bigger part than who they got to host, I think. Plus, I think SLP and Django (at least) probably skewed younger (in appealing to the 18-49 set) than any of the films from last year.

Yep.

2013: 40.3 million 13.0 18-49
2012: 39.3 million 11.7 18-49

This year's film made over $315 million more than last year. The total viewership increased by only a million viewers though.

The demos though...

The 18-49 demo increased by 11%
The 18-34 demo increased by 20% (11.3 rating) (Six year high...even before Avatar)
The Oscars were up 34% among men 18-34
The Oscars were up 16% among men 18-49

As good as SLP and Django (especially Django) are, they're not why more men watched. I'm guessing it's because of the creator/star of the most popular comedy of the summer (which made $30 million more than the highest grossing Oscar film) and the creator/star of Family Guy.

They also made up for the people who were turned off by MacFarlane hosting (which explains why the viewers number only saw a slight increase). Either that or the older Oscar viewers are dying off.

Hmm, that more specific demo data makes a more compelling case for MacFarlane, particularly the fact that men 18-34 were up higher than the increase in 18-34 viewership overall.

So the 18-34 demo was at its highest since the year The Departed won? I do believe the popularity of the contenders does play a part in determining the size and makeup of the viewing audience, though. Doesn't have to necessarily be either/or.

I think people expected him to be as harsh as Gervais, or even as biting as Fey/Poehler, but this is a different room. He did a great job, and honestly did a fantastic job considering he's A. not a regular on-stage performer, B. not a true comedian and C. basically been only a writer for ten years until he directed a movie and hosted SNL.

Gervais at the Oscars would fucking rule.

It was meh.