1994 Best Picture Oscar Mistake?

This evening, Mr. Rilch and I rented Chariots of Fire. He had seen it once, I, never. Mr. Rilch said he no longer remembered much, if anything, about it, and had never been motivated to see it again.

We were vastly underwhelmed.

Afterwards, I came up here to check the IMDB, because Mr. Rilch had wondered, “What else was nominated the year this won? Heaven’s Gate, maybe? Had to have been the weakest year in cinema!”

The also-rans were Atlantic City :confused:; On Golden Pond (another Oscar bait); Reds (eh); and Raiders of the Lost Ark. A film whose opening sequence is widely regarded as a perfect, I said perfect, ten-minute movie in itself, and is held up, as SK said, to film classes as an example. That lost to ambiguous wide shots of guys running, posh mumbling that we needed the closed-captioning to understand, pointless second-unit footage, and a lot of singing by the cast to compensate for the weak soundtrack. (Apart from that everlasting theme, which was too grandiose to be taken seriously and became a joke, the rest of the music is wallpaper.)

I like Max Carnage’s suggestion of retroactive Oscars. Yes, I know you weren’t serious, but the measure of a film’s worth is its staying power.

When I saw the thread title, I was sure it was going to be centered on the antics of a drunk Jack Palance.

Talking about underappreciated 90s movies, and nobody’s mentioned LA Confidential losing out to Titanic? Or the fact that my personal favorite, Ronin, wasn’t nominated for nothin’? Feh.

Pulp Fiction. Feh.

Yeah, LA Confidential losing was pretty bad, too…