Note: This article is based on verified reporting about the 97th Academy Awards and is written as original, publication-ready editorial content.
The Oscars have always loved a grand tradition. The red carpet, the golden statues, the emotional speeches, the orchestra politely warning winners that their thank-you list has become a small novelthese are the dependable ingredients of Hollywood’s biggest night. But for 2025, the Academy Awards made a surprising change that had movie fans, musicians, and awards-watchers talking before the first envelope was even opened.
The 97th Academy Awards broke with one of the ceremony’s most familiar customs: the live performances of the Best Original Song nominees were removed from the main telecast format. Instead of watching each nominated song performed onstage, viewers were given a presentation focused more on the songwriters, their creative process, and the stories behind the music. It was a bold shift, especially because Oscar song performances have often produced some of the most memorable moments of the night.
For casual viewers, this may sound like a small programming adjustment. For devoted Oscars fans, however, it was the kind of change that makes group chats light up. The Academy Awards are not just about who wins. They are about spectacle, emotion, glamour, nostalgia, and the occasional musical number that makes everyone in the room sit up straighter. So when the Oscars broke this popular tradition for 2025, the move felt bigger than a scheduling tweak. It became a question about what the modern Oscars should be.
What Tradition Did the Oscars Break in 2025?
The tradition in question was the long-running practice of featuring live performances of the nominated songs in the Best Original Song category. In many Oscar ceremonies, each nominated song gets a moment in the spotlight. Sometimes that means a dramatic ballad under perfect stage lighting. Sometimes it means dancers, elaborate sets, or a celebrity singer making the Dolby Theatre feel like a concert hall. Occasionally, it means a performance that becomes more famous than the award itself.
For the 2025 Oscars, the Academy chose not to stage the five nominated songs as full live performances. The official explanation centered on celebrating songwriters more directly. Rather than treating the category as a mini-concert, the presentation aimed to highlight the creative teams behind the songs and explain the inspiration that shaped the music.
That sounds thoughtful on paper. After all, songwriters are often the people who build the emotional bridge between a film and its audience. But the change also removed a highly visible platform for performers, composers, lyricists, and the songs themselves. In an awards show that already fights to keep viewers engaged, cutting a familiar musical tradition was always going to spark debate.
Why the Change Mattered
The Oscars are a ceremony, but they are also a television show. Every year, producers face the same difficult puzzle: honor cinema, satisfy the industry, keep the runtime under control, entertain millions of viewers, and somehow make it all feel fresh. That is not a simple task. It is like hosting a dinner party where half the guests are legends, the other half are livestreaming, and everyone expects dessert to win Best Picture.
Live Original Song performances have long helped the Oscars feel less like a sequence of speeches and more like an event. They provide rhythm. They give viewers a break from category announcements. They allow music to remind audiences why movies are such emotional machines. A song can carry a film’s heartbreak, hope, humor, or identity in just a few minutes.
Removing those performances changed the texture of the show. Instead of giving each song a theatrical stage moment, the 2025 ceremony leaned into explanation and context. That approach had value, especially for viewers curious about songwriting craft. Still, many fans felt that songs are best understood by being heard, not merely described.
The 2025 Best Original Song Race
The Best Original Song category at the 2025 Oscars had a strong and varied lineup. The nominees included “El Mal” from Emilia Pérez, “Mi Camino” from Emilia Pérez, “The Journey” from The Six Triple Eight, “Like a Bird” from Sing Sing, and “Never Too Late” from Elton John: Never Too Late. Each song represented a different kind of cinematic storytelling.
“El Mal,” which won the Oscar, came from the musical crime drama Emilia Pérez. The film was one of the most discussed titles of the awards season, leading the nominations and placing music at the center of its identity. “Mi Camino,” also from Emilia Pérez, gave the film a second presence in the category. That alone made the absence of live performances feel even more noticeable, because the nominated songs were connected to a movie where music was not decorationit was structure.
Diane Warren’s “The Journey” from The Six Triple Eight also drew attention because Warren is one of the most nominated songwriters in Oscar history. Her continued presence in the category added another layer to the controversy. When a veteran songwriter earns yet another nomination, many viewers naturally expect the song to receive a proper Oscar-night showcase.
Why Fans Were Disappointed
For many viewers, the Best Original Song performances are among the most accessible parts of the Oscars. Not everyone has seen every nominated short film, international feature, or documentary. But a live song performance can instantly communicate emotion, tone, and personality. It gives audiences a reason to connect with a movie they may not have watched yet.
Fans also enjoy the unpredictability. Oscar song performances can be elegant, strange, moving, funny, or spectacularly over-the-top. That variety is part of the charm. One moment may feel like Broadway. Another may feel like a pop concert. Another may feel like a quiet prayer whispered into a microphone. The category brings a different energy to the telecast.
When the Academy removed those performances, some viewers felt the ceremony lost a bit of its sparkle. To them, the Oscars without nominated song performances felt like a birthday cake without candles. The cake may still be delicious, but someone in the room is definitely asking, “Wait, aren’t we singing?”
The Academy’s Possible Reasoning
The decision was not random. The Oscars have faced pressure for years to tighten the ceremony and keep the broadcast moving. Long runtimes have become a recurring complaint, especially in a media world where viewers are used to short clips, streaming flexibility, and second-screen scrolling. Producers often look for ways to make the show feel faster without disrespecting the nominees.
By replacing full song performances with songwriter-focused segments, the Academy may have been trying to balance recognition with efficiency. The goal seemed to be giving the category a more intimate storytelling approach while freeing space for other major moments in the show.
The 2025 ceremony also took place after devastating Los Angeles wildfires, and the broadcast included a focus on honoring the city’s resilience and first responders. That larger emotional context may have shaped the producers’ priorities. The show was not only about awards; it also had to acknowledge the community around Hollywood.
Music Was Still Part of the 2025 Oscars
Although the nominated Original Song performances were cut, the 2025 Oscars were not music-free. The ceremony still included major musical moments, including a performance by Wicked stars Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo. That opening helped deliver the kind of theatrical energy many viewers expect from Oscar night.
The show also featured tributes, including musical celebrations connected to Quincy Jones and the James Bond franchise. These moments proved that the Academy was not rejecting music entirely. Instead, it was choosing a different kind of musical programming.
That distinction matters. The controversy was not really about whether the Oscars should include music. Almost everyone agrees music belongs at the Oscars. The argument was about which music deserves the stage. For many songwriters and fans, nominated songs should not be pushed aside while other musical tributes remain.
Why Original Songs Deserve the Spotlight
Original songs are not just promotional extras. In the best cases, they become part of a film’s emotional architecture. Think of how a powerful song can define the final scene, deepen a character’s journey, or stay with the audience long after the credits roll. A great movie song can become cultural shorthand for the entire film.
At the Oscars, live performances give these songs a second life. They introduce them to viewers who may have missed the film. They honor the artists who wrote and performed them. They also remind audiences that filmmaking is collaborative. A movie is not only acting, directing, editing, and cinematography. It is also sound, rhythm, lyrics, melody, silence, and mood.
Cutting the performances risks making the category feel smaller. Even when the Academy’s intention is respectful, visibility matters. Award recognition is valuable, but Oscar-night visibility can turn a nominated song into a widely discussed cultural moment.
A Tradition With an Uneven History
It is worth noting that the Oscars have not always handled Original Song performances consistently. Some years have featured all nominees. Other years have shortened, altered, or skipped parts of the presentation. The Academy has often experimented with format, especially when trying to reduce runtime or refresh the show.
Still, the expectation of live song performances has become strong among modern viewers. In recent decades, many Oscar audiences have looked forward to these numbers as part of the ceremony’s entertainment value. Even people who do not follow awards season closely can enjoy a strong musical performance.
That is why the 2025 change stood out. It touched a tradition that felt familiar, audience-friendly, and emotionally useful. When a show built on tradition changes one of its warmer customs, people notice.
The Backlash From the Music Community
The decision drew criticism from songwriters and music organizations. Many argued that removing the performances diminished the category and reduced recognition for the artists involved. Their concern was simple: if the Academy wants to honor original songs, those songs should be heard on the biggest film stage in the world.
Diane Warren was one of the notable voices expressing disappointment. Her reaction carried weight because she has been nominated many times and understands the importance of the Oscar platform. For songwriters, the ceremony is not merely a glamorous night. It is a rare mainstream moment when their work can reach millions of viewers at once.
The criticism also pointed to a broader industry issue: music creators often feel undervalued compared with actors, directors, and producers. Cutting performances from a category that already fights for attention seemed, to some, like another sign that film music is appreciated in theory but squeezed in practice.
Did the New Format Work?
The answer depends on what viewers wanted from the show. If someone preferred a leaner ceremony with more behind-the-scenes storytelling, the songwriter-focused format may have felt thoughtful. It gave the creative teams a chance to explain their work and place the songs in context.
But if someone watches the Oscars for spectacle, the absence of live nominated song performances likely felt disappointing. The Oscars are not a podcast. They are a live event. Viewers expect images, sound, performance, and surprise. A segment explaining a song can be informative, but it rarely matches the emotional impact of hearing that song performed live.
The better solution may be balance. The Academy could keep performances while trimming elsewhere, shortening introductions, or designing more efficient staging. Oscar producers are talented people. Surely someone can find three minutes for a nominated song without making the show feel like it needs intermission snacks.
What This Says About the Modern Oscars
The 2025 change reflects a larger identity challenge for the Academy Awards. The Oscars want to honor tradition while adapting to a changing audience. They want to appeal to film lovers, younger viewers, international fans, celebrities in the room, and advertisers who quietly pray the ratings behave themselves.
That balancing act often leads to experimentation. Some experiments work beautifully. Others make people nostalgic for the old format. The removal of Best Original Song performances sits somewhere in the middle: understandable from a production standpoint, but emotionally risky from a viewer standpoint.
The Oscars are strongest when they remember that cinema is not only an industry. It is a feeling. Music is one of the fastest ways to deliver that feeling. A good Oscar song performance can make a viewer cry, laugh, search for the movie later, or suddenly become very invested in a category they barely understood five minutes earlier.
Specific Examples of Why the Tradition Matters
Oscar history is filled with song performances that became part of the ceremony’s mythology. Big ballads, animated movie anthems, emotional tributes, and unexpected pop moments have all helped shape the show’s personality. These performances give the ceremony a sense of movement and theatrical surprise.
Imagine an Oscars ceremony where a nominated song from a major musical is only discussed instead of performed. The audience may understand its artistic intention, but they miss the rush of hearing it fill the room. That is the difference between reading a menu and eating dinner. Both involve food, but only one makes you loosen your belt.
The 2025 Best Original Song lineup offered several opportunities for memorable staging. Emilia Pérez could have brought dramatic musical energy. Sing Sing could have delivered a soulful, intimate moment. The Six Triple Eight could have provided a stirring performance tied to historical drama. Elton John: Never Too Late could have connected the ceremony to pop music legacy. The ingredients were there. The oven was simply not turned on.
Will the Oscars Bring Back the Tradition?
It would not be surprising if the Academy revisits the decision in future ceremonies. Awards shows often test changes, listen to reactions, and adjust. If enough fans, artists, and industry groups express disappointment, producers may decide that Best Original Song performances are worth restoring.
The Oscars need moments that travel beyond the broadcast. In today’s entertainment landscape, viral clips matter. A great live performance can circulate online the next morning, drawing attention from people who did not watch the full ceremony. Removing those performances may save time during the show, but it can also reduce the number of memorable clips afterward.
For that reason, bringing back the performances would make sense. They are not just tradition for tradition’s sake. They are useful television. They honor nominees, entertain viewers, and create shareable moments. That is a rare triple win in awards-show math.
Experience and Reflection: Watching the Oscars Change in Real Time
For longtime Oscar viewers, changes like this can feel oddly personal. The Academy Awards become part of people’s yearly rhythm. Some viewers plan watch parties. Others fill out prediction ballots with the seriousness of a Supreme Court filing. Some tune in for fashion, some for film history, some for celebrity reactions, and some simply because they enjoy watching famous people pretend not to be nervous.
When a familiar tradition disappears, it changes the viewing experience. The Best Original Song performances often serve as emotional checkpoints during the broadcast. They arrive between awards, speeches, and comedy bits, offering a different kind of energy. Without them, the show can feel more efficient, but also slightly less colorful.
Many viewers discover nominated songs through the Oscars. They may not have watched every film, but a live performance can make them curious. After a strong number, people often search for the song, stream the soundtrack, or add the movie to their watchlist. That is the quiet power of the Oscar stage. It turns a category into a doorway.
From a content and audience perspective, the 2025 change is a fascinating case study. It shows how a single programming decision can reshape public conversation around a major event. The Academy likely wanted to create a respectful and streamlined tribute to songwriters. But audiences do not experience awards shows as production spreadsheets. They experience them as moments. When a beloved type of moment vanishes, even for reasonable reasons, the emotional reaction can be strong.
There is also a lesson here for anyone who creates live entertainment: tradition matters most when people do not realize how much they value it until it is gone. The nominated song performances may not be the reason every viewer watches the Oscars, but they are part of the ceremony’s flavor. Remove them, and the recipe changes.
At the same time, experimentation should not be treated as a crime against cinema. The Oscars must evolve. A ceremony that never changes risks becoming a museum with better jewelry. The challenge is knowing which traditions are flexible and which ones carry emotional weight. In 2025, the Academy tested that boundary.
The smartest path forward may be a hybrid approach. Keep the personal reflections from songwriters, because audiences benefit from understanding how songs are created. But pair those reflections with concise live performances. Let the writers speak, then let the music prove the point. That would honor craft and preserve spectacle.
Ultimately, the 2025 Oscars reminded viewers that awards shows are living organisms. They breathe, stumble, adjust, and occasionally make decisions that send the internet into a dramatic group sigh. Whether one loved or disliked the change, it gave people a reason to discuss the role of music in film. That conversation is valuable. It reminds us that songs are not side dishes in cinema. They are often the emotional seasoning that makes the whole meal unforgettable.
Conclusion
The Oscars breaking a popular tradition for 2025 was more than a simple format change. By removing the live performances of the Best Original Song nominees, the Academy shifted attention from stage spectacle to songwriter storytelling. The intention was understandable, especially in a year when the ceremony also carried the responsibility of honoring Los Angeles and keeping the broadcast focused. Still, the reaction proved how much viewers value music as part of Oscar night.
The Best Original Song category deserves visibility because movie music helps audiences feel what cinema means. A song can capture a character, a theme, or an entire film in a few unforgettable minutes. While personal reflections can deepen appreciation, live performances create the emotional spark that makes the Oscars feel alive. If the Academy wants future ceremonies to feel both modern and magical, bringing back nominated song performances may be one tradition worth restoring.
