' Cinema Romantico: Oscar Madness

Friday, February 24, 2006

Oscar Madness

With the 2006 Academy Awards growing ever closer, we will take time today to re-visit the worst decisions made by the Academy over the past 20 years. These will not be the most obvious or famous choices, however. Everyone knows Tommy Lee Jones had no business taking home the statue for “The Fugitive” over Ralph Fiennes for “Schindler’s List”. And then, of course, there’s the infamous Marisa Tomei victory (the urban legend states presenter Jack Palance read the wrong name and the Academy was too embarrassed to correct the mistake). And entire essays have been devoted to Costner beating Scorcese for Best Director in ’90. But we’re going to do on everyone’s favorite blog today is go over a few of the less obvious robberies. We’ll also address what is thought in many circles to be a robbery but was – in fact – the absolute proper choice.

Nine days and counting............

2000 – Julia Roberts for “Erin Brockovich” over Laura Linney for “You Can Count on Me” for Best Actress. I know, I know, Julia Roberts is a "big star" and deserved this for being a "big star" and blah, blah, blah. But I defy anyone in the world to watch these two movies back-to-back and tell me Julia Roberts was better than Laura Linney. It's not even a contest.

1993 – Dianne Weist for “Bullets Over Broadway” over Uma Thurman for “Pulp Fiction” for Best Supporting Actress. All Uma did was create one of the most indelible characters in cinematic history. Weist created a fun, diverting character in a good movie but come on. A bottle of Coors Light will give you a buzz but you don't say it's better than Sierra Nevada, do you? This was Uma's award and I will seethe until the day I die.

1989 – “Dead Poets Society” over “Do the Right Thing” for Best Original Screenplay. A disgrace to writers everywhere - wretchedly formulaic cuts down daringly innovative.

1998 - "Shakespeare in Love" over "Saving Private Ryan" for Best Picture. Whenever bad Academy decisions are brought up, this one inevitably surfaces. The most common argument is that "Saving Private Ryan" was the more "important" film. But as we all know the award is titled Best Picture not Best Important Picture. "Shakespeare in Love" was, is, and will always be a better film. Deal with it.

2 comments:

Wretched Genius said...

1. Coster vary much deserved that award. "Goodfellas" is a classic, but so is "Dances With Wolves." Both created rich, well-developed worlds filled with individuals instead of just cardboard characters. Watch the movie again and tell me he didn't deserve it.

As a director, that is. Certainly not as an actor.

2. I agree that the '98 Oscars got it right: Spielberg for Director, but not for Best Picture.

3. Coors Light is better than Sierra Nevada.

4. If the Jack Palance rumor is true, that would imply that all of the nominees' names are written inside the winning envelope in addition to being on the teleprompter, which just seems foolish on the part of the Academy.

5. I think the Acedemy should develope a new special lifetime achievment award that honors great filmmakers/actors who have had careers filled with success and great cinematic accomplishments but who have never been honored with an Academy Award. It could be called the Altman Award, and the first one should go to Scorsese.

Rory Larry said...

Gladiator over Traffic for best picture hurts my brain

as does American Beauty over the Insider