So shut the fuck up, Donnie!
I agree. That was deplorable.
If anyone wants to bitch about which documentaries got nominated, let me know. My brother has been on the Branch Committee. (He voted against nominating “March of The Penguins”–said he hated the anthropomorphism.)
Jevetta Steele got screwed badly in 1989, when she wasn’t allowed to sing the song “Calling You” from the film Bagdad Cafe (aka Out of Rosenheim), in a year when there were only 3 Best Song nominees. It would have dazzled and mesmerized the audience and everyone watching, but no, the people in charge thought sketches with Rob Lowe and Snow White, and dance numbers with Hollywood kids were a better use of time. The song from Working Girl won, which everybody had heard numerous times, either from the movie or because it was a hit on the radio. Very few people had ever heard “Calling You” because it was from a small indie movie. I have a huge soft spot for the people who nominated it in the first place, and a deep hatred for the people who made the decision that no one else would hear the amazing song and its incredible singer. Fuckers.
Newman was fantastic, but Gandhi and Kingsley won their deserved Oscars. That was a tough year. Why Paul Newman over Peter O’Toole (My Favorite Year), or Jack Lemmon (Missing), or Dustin Hoffman (Tootsie)? They were all great. I imagine those 4 probably cancelled each other out and the most remaining votes went to the new guy, Kingsley (the Adrien Brody of his day). Much the same thing happened with Marisa Tomei winning over 4 experienced, respected actresses. I loved Marisa’s win. She deserved it. They all deserved it, but one has to win, and if I had to choose between Miranda Richardson, Joan Plowright, Vanessa Redgrave and Judy Davis, I’d choose Marisa Tomei too.
Back to Gandhi, I loved ET, but Gandhi still holds up as being a truly epic and great film. “Great” doesn’t have to equal boring. Gandhi is anything but boring to those who are really watching with their brain turned on. Far from being a dry historical movie, it’s interesting, entertaining, amusing and moving, epic and personal at the same time. ET, a fun and moving film which has the nostalgia factor because it was such a big hit, got exactly what it deserved, a nomination. It IS an honor to be nominated.
(and, in a separate rant, to hell with anyone who makes fun of that last phrase. It’s become a cliche but it’s a true statement. Ask all the worthy industry people who weren’t nominated for worthy projects if they’d prefer not being nominated, or being nominated and losing. Most would probably choose being nominated. Nominations are listed in the record books forever, and sometimes can be preferable to winning.).
I was rooting for The Thin Red Line to win BP in 1999 (for 1998 films), and I’m still shocked and pleased that it was nominated, but I was fine with Shakespeare in Love’s win. It’s a very good movie, fun, sparkling, witty, smart, clever, alive. The disgruntled should remember that the movie is all about acting, and the biggest block of AMPAS voters are actors. It’s not surprising SIL won, what’s suprising is that few people predicted it.
GargoyleWB, you might try watching O Brother, Where Art Thou? a few more times. I assure you, it’s a perfect movie and needs no editing or revisions. Every second counts and not a second is filler. It’s my favorite Coen film, so I’m biased, but still. Likewise, Gadarene, you need to watch The Big Lebowski a few more times. It took me about 4 times to finally realize how good it was.
The Coens are very subversive.
Still laughing at BMalion’s post…
A movie with absolutely no wasted moments was Speed. Sorry ,but it was a grabber from beginning to end.
Kingpin gets no respect and Murry was great in it. Oscar worthy.
Not true. He won the Original Score Oscar for Limelight when it was finally released in the States in the 1970s.
I agree.I was bored silly watching it the first time,don’t even remember why I watched it again but certainly a favorite of mine now.
Whoops,sorry to cut your name out Equipoise in my previous posts quote.
Chaplin was also given a special Oscar in 1928 for The Circus (which was likely the Academy’s way of saying, “Your movie is going to clean up in nearly every category this year so, to keep things competitive, we’ll give you and your movie a special Oscar and keep it outside the competition.”)
I cry when I watch home movies of my daughter. Does that make “Jones Xmas 2006” the best movie of 2006?
I saw people crying during “Shakespeare in Love.” Saw them laughing, too. And since when was emotional impact the only measure of a film’s worth, anyway?
But the movie was 170 minutes long, not 20. Of course the Omaha Beach sequence was magnificent, a landmark of cinema; nobody except the most ardent Spielberg-hater doubts that. But the movie also had its weaknesses, most notably in plot and character development, and there is no point denying that. And I say that as a big fan of the movie and a big fan of Spielberg’s work.
- The WWII memorial drive was started before “Saving Private Ryan.” 2. What the hell does that have to do with how good the movie was? “Apollo 13” reinvigorated interest in the Apollo project and space exploration; did that make it a better movie than “Braveheart”? “Top Gun” had a HUGE impact on interest in aviation, and caused a surge in Navy recruiting; does that make it the best movie of 1986?
Look, I’m not saying “Shakespeare in Love” was better than “Saving Private Ryan.” But I’m not saying it wasn’t, either. What I AM saying is that crying and weeping and bawling that giving the Oscar to “Shakespeare in Love” was some sort of travesty is just flatly ridiculous. There is a perfectly good argument to be made that either movie was better than the other. One had a greater emotional impact and was in some respects more technically impressive; the other was better written and better acted. Who’s to say one set of strengths outweighs the other?
Movies are, to a large extent, a highly subjective experience. I’ll grant that at the extremes of comparison it’s reasonable to state one movie is better than another; “Saving Private Ryan” is definitely a better movie by any reasonable standard than, say, “The Shaggy Dog.” But you’re going to have a tough time convincing me that it was unquestionably better than a movie of extremely high quality like “Shakespeare in Love,” especially when the two films are very different sorts of films, with different emphasis, different intentions, and consequently different strengths. If you want to argue it was a better movie and present some reasons for that based on what was actually on the screen, by all means go ahead. But don’t tell me that any contrary opinion is an attempt to screw someone.
Thus the origin of the term " frackered" to describe someone/something underserving of a particular award. Ex. The frackered Forrest Gump starred Tom Hanks and was released in 1994.
I think there was a recent thread on it, but Jack Lemmon not even getting nominated for Glengarry Glen Ross was farcial.
Okay, you guys seem to be serious about this Fracker business. Considering this is the Straight Dope, I guess I’m not surprised at people arguing over someone winning a Technical Oscar in 1955. 
I vas not serious. It vas a voosh.
My nomination for most screwed goes to Miranda Richardson, Joan Plowright, Vanessa Redgrave, and Judy Davis, who in 1993 all lost the Best Supporting Actress award to Marisa Tomei for her performance in My Cousin Vinny. This has simply got to be one of the least deserved Oscars ever. I have nothing in particular against Ms. Tomei, but this was a B performance in a B film by an actress whose top credit before this was as Sylvester Stallone’s daughter in the farce Oscar*. But her Oscar for MCV was an even bigger farce!
The award seems to have been a blatant bit of xenophobia to prevent it going to a British or Australian actress. Any one of those other distinguished and immensely talented women would have been ten thousand times more deserving of the award. It was Plowright’s first and only nomination; the first of two for Richardson; the second of two for Davis, and the last of six noms (one of which was a win) for Redgrave. At the time of the nomination, each had a truly substantial body of work, Plowright and Redgrave having worked in film since before Tomei was born! (My personal favorite among Richardson’s performances was her turn as Elizabeth I in Blackadder II.)
In 1993 Tomei had done some television and all of five feature films, in three of which she was little more than an extra. Nor can we claim that the Academy was prescient in recognizing a brilliant new talent. Can you name any big hits she’s been in since? She had the lead in Only You with Robert Downey, Jr., a supporting role in What Women Want, and got another Best Supporting nod for a rather forgettable drama, In the Bedroom. I’ll give the Brass Figligee with Bronze Oak Leaf Palm to anyone who can name another film Marisa worked in without looking it up.
She’s a pretty girl; not painful to watch; but not even close to being an Oscar-caliber talent.
Those four ladies wuz robbed!
- Maybe I shouldn’t admit this, but apparently I’m one of the few people who actually thinks Oscar is a pretty funny film.
Yes. My daughter (6 years old) watches it on a weekly basis. Although this is perhaps supportive of your basic position.
Untamed Heart (my favorite film by her)
Slums of Beverly Hills
The Paper
Welcome to Sarajevo
Marilyn Hotchkiss Ballroom Dancing & Charm School
What Women Want
Keep your leaf palm, thanks anyway.
Yeah, but which one would you have voted for? My theory (is there an echo in here?) is that those 4 cancelled each other out, and there were just enough leftover votes to give the win to Marisa.
The others didn’t deserve to lose, but she didn’t deserve to lose either. That performance is much better than you give it credit for, and comedy is hard. The Oscar is given for a specific performance. It’s not given (or isn’t supposed to be given) for a lifetime of work or how many nominations one has or hasn’t received before. It certainly doesn’t and isn’t supposed to predict future work.
Albert Finney unfortunately possesses the qualities of being non-American and having superb acting talents - thus has never won an oscar.
Yeah, no superb, non-America actors have ever won an Oscar. Bastards.
I liked Buster Keaton a lot more than Chaplin. His “The Genera;” was Oscar worthy. That was 1927, the same year as “Wings”; wasn’t even nominated, was it?
How about “Citizen Kane” losing to “How Green Was My Valley”?
I’ve often heard “Around the World in 80 Days” described as the most undeserving Best Picture winner.