Academy Discrepancy
This can also be found as a semi drunk repsonse to a imdb.com board. Another low poitn in my life.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0074958/board/thread/15768182
It's all about what the feeling of a bunch of 15 year olds in their basement and the unemployed over 40 have to say about the great follies of the Motion Picture Academy and their choices. Part of the film student in me always is fighting to quench the cynic in me.
So lets go. I love the Oscars for what they attempt to do (recognize cinematic greatness, perhaps the only media-due to it's immediacy and mass appeal- worthy of having a ceremony of yearly canonization) I hate them for the constant mistakes they make because of H-wood politics - Fuck you, Harvey Weinstein, what makes you think that Chocolat deserves attention?- and sentimenallity.
And such.
Fifteen, huh, I'll add a few, and comment on some more.
1. Lets get the bigs out of the way. Citizen Kane probably should have won, but part of the mythos of that movie is that it didn't win anything big except for screenplay (which many consider an insult especially since he was a co-writer and hated by the academy). Anyway, you all forget that this movie bombed and wasn't seen as genius until the French started to love it 10 years after the release. it's the best film of the year, and one of the top 10 ever, but I have always seen best picture as best for the masses, not for history. Which is why I still think Rocky was worthy, because although Taxi Driver is a better cineast film, I know 100 people personally who would rather watch Rocky. Shawshank should have won for 94, Marty for directing Raging Bull (though picture, maybe (not on quality, but because there are people that liked OP) only now it's a definite because Million Dollar Baby won in 04. Greatest Show on earth should have won nothing, Gable should have won for GWTW, and we should all forget that 1985 ever happened.
2. Saving Private Ryan should have won best picture. I am still angry about this. Hanks should have also won, and he should have won for cast away, but not for Forrest Gump, in which Freeman should have won. And, it's not Denzel or Spacey that should have won in 99, but Crowe in the insider.
3. LA Confidential should be known for the Chinatown rippoff it was, and only keep it's adapted screenplay and give the supporting actress to the field.
4. Orson Welles for The third man (in best supporting), and wins for Picture, and Director.
5. Hitchcock should have won for either North By Northwest or Vertigo, Pyscho is wildly overrated outside of it's genre shifting revelations and has the worst denoument in history.
6. Robert Duvall should have won for the Apostle in 1997, and not Mr. "Hey I'm playing myself with some hand tics" Jack Nicholson.
(if you notice I am keeping to the last 25 years, mainly, because it's a different era, and it's like comparing two different awards shows after they became televised)
7. ET over Ghandi, in every category, and Henry Thomas gets a supporting actor nod.
8. Tom Cruise for Rain Man over Hoffman. It's one thing to play method for a movie, it's another to make an ass sympathetic and watch his redemption against what is essentially a blank acting partner. Watch it now, and which do you find more impressive.
9. On Hoffman, him over Kingsley for his role in Tootsie. Which do you remember now? BTW, lets get rid of all acting awards for people playing celebs. Jamie Foxx, no more for Ray (though maybe for Any Given Sunday), Cate Blanchett for The Aviator, etc. What they are doing is called mimicry, not acting. Are we going to bestow the greatest achievment in cinematic acting for Will Ferrel doing W? Of course not.
10. Should have been at least nominated-acting. Last 15 years.
Walken, Gandolfini, Pitt, Hopper, or Oldman (only one) for True Romance.
Giamatti in Sideways or American Splendor
Scarlett Johanson in Lost In Translation
Angus Macfadyen or Patrick McGoohan in Braveheart, and while were at it, why not Mel Gibson?
At least one of the 7 supporting troops from Private Ryan, either Davies, Ribsi, or Goldberg.
Jim Carrey for Truman show or Eternal Sunshine, but really, some of his best work is in Dumb and Dumber
On comedies, how about Eddie Murhpy in Nutty Professor, Mike Myers in Austin Powers (international man of mystery)- the highlight of 1997 acting outside of Duvall.
Sean Astin or Andy Serkis in ROTK or TTT.
Anyone from the Cast of Heat.
Kevin Heffernan for his role of Favra in Super Troopers.
11. Star Wars over Annie Hall. I love both, but really, which one is going to endure more, a film about the dangers out dating posed against the me decade, or a film that has a timeless feel about it that changed peoples lives (for better or worse). One is a great film about the difficulty of dating in your late twenties and thirties, the other is a work that seems less like a film and more like a world. BTW, the major followups to both flims should have likely won best picture, director, and original scriptthat year (Empire Strikes back and Manhattan)
12. Harrison Ford for either Raiders or Empire. Steve McQueen never won an oscar, Redford only won for directing, Newman won in the autumn of his career, and has similarites with Bogart, Pacino, Denzel Washington, and Grant (I'm actually not too sure if he won anything, actually) all won for lesser performances in weaker movies. We should really pay tribute to those male icons who turn in great, career making turns as basic characters. It's one thing to see an actor on stage captivating the audience, it's another to see his best takes compliled. To me, far more captivating is the moment when you see an actor reach iconic status for nailing the hell out of a arctype (anti hero, hero, villian, likeable villian) I think we would far rather see an actor perfom to this role than play a mentally challenged person.
13. Thats the big one (#12), but really, when is the academy going to recognize comedies? Scorsese, Spielberg, Hitchcock, Lean, nor Welles ever made a decent comedy, and most tried, but yet when people would rather talk about Caddyshack or Super Troopers than Ordinary People or A Beautiful mind, what do you think constiutes a great accomplishment? What would you rather watch with friends, South Park: Bigger Longer and Uncut or American Beauty? If we all agree that the beauty of the cinema is the communal experience, why do we discount laughter?
http://imdb.com/title/tt0074958/board/thread/15768182
It's all about what the feeling of a bunch of 15 year olds in their basement and the unemployed over 40 have to say about the great follies of the Motion Picture Academy and their choices. Part of the film student in me always is fighting to quench the cynic in me.
So lets go. I love the Oscars for what they attempt to do (recognize cinematic greatness, perhaps the only media-due to it's immediacy and mass appeal- worthy of having a ceremony of yearly canonization) I hate them for the constant mistakes they make because of H-wood politics - Fuck you, Harvey Weinstein, what makes you think that Chocolat deserves attention?- and sentimenallity.
And such.
Fifteen, huh, I'll add a few, and comment on some more.
1. Lets get the bigs out of the way. Citizen Kane probably should have won, but part of the mythos of that movie is that it didn't win anything big except for screenplay (which many consider an insult especially since he was a co-writer and hated by the academy). Anyway, you all forget that this movie bombed and wasn't seen as genius until the French started to love it 10 years after the release. it's the best film of the year, and one of the top 10 ever, but I have always seen best picture as best for the masses, not for history. Which is why I still think Rocky was worthy, because although Taxi Driver is a better cineast film, I know 100 people personally who would rather watch Rocky. Shawshank should have won for 94, Marty for directing Raging Bull (though picture, maybe (not on quality, but because there are people that liked OP) only now it's a definite because Million Dollar Baby won in 04. Greatest Show on earth should have won nothing, Gable should have won for GWTW, and we should all forget that 1985 ever happened.
2. Saving Private Ryan should have won best picture. I am still angry about this. Hanks should have also won, and he should have won for cast away, but not for Forrest Gump, in which Freeman should have won. And, it's not Denzel or Spacey that should have won in 99, but Crowe in the insider.
3. LA Confidential should be known for the Chinatown rippoff it was, and only keep it's adapted screenplay and give the supporting actress to the field.
4. Orson Welles for The third man (in best supporting), and wins for Picture, and Director.
5. Hitchcock should have won for either North By Northwest or Vertigo, Pyscho is wildly overrated outside of it's genre shifting revelations and has the worst denoument in history.
6. Robert Duvall should have won for the Apostle in 1997, and not Mr. "Hey I'm playing myself with some hand tics" Jack Nicholson.
(if you notice I am keeping to the last 25 years, mainly, because it's a different era, and it's like comparing two different awards shows after they became televised)
7. ET over Ghandi, in every category, and Henry Thomas gets a supporting actor nod.
8. Tom Cruise for Rain Man over Hoffman. It's one thing to play method for a movie, it's another to make an ass sympathetic and watch his redemption against what is essentially a blank acting partner. Watch it now, and which do you find more impressive.
9. On Hoffman, him over Kingsley for his role in Tootsie. Which do you remember now? BTW, lets get rid of all acting awards for people playing celebs. Jamie Foxx, no more for Ray (though maybe for Any Given Sunday), Cate Blanchett for The Aviator, etc. What they are doing is called mimicry, not acting. Are we going to bestow the greatest achievment in cinematic acting for Will Ferrel doing W? Of course not.
10. Should have been at least nominated-acting. Last 15 years.
Walken, Gandolfini, Pitt, Hopper, or Oldman (only one) for True Romance.
Giamatti in Sideways or American Splendor
Scarlett Johanson in Lost In Translation
Angus Macfadyen or Patrick McGoohan in Braveheart, and while were at it, why not Mel Gibson?
At least one of the 7 supporting troops from Private Ryan, either Davies, Ribsi, or Goldberg.
Jim Carrey for Truman show or Eternal Sunshine, but really, some of his best work is in Dumb and Dumber
On comedies, how about Eddie Murhpy in Nutty Professor, Mike Myers in Austin Powers (international man of mystery)- the highlight of 1997 acting outside of Duvall.
Sean Astin or Andy Serkis in ROTK or TTT.
Anyone from the Cast of Heat.
Kevin Heffernan for his role of Favra in Super Troopers.
11. Star Wars over Annie Hall. I love both, but really, which one is going to endure more, a film about the dangers out dating posed against the me decade, or a film that has a timeless feel about it that changed peoples lives (for better or worse). One is a great film about the difficulty of dating in your late twenties and thirties, the other is a work that seems less like a film and more like a world. BTW, the major followups to both flims should have likely won best picture, director, and original scriptthat year (Empire Strikes back and Manhattan)
12. Harrison Ford for either Raiders or Empire. Steve McQueen never won an oscar, Redford only won for directing, Newman won in the autumn of his career, and has similarites with Bogart, Pacino, Denzel Washington, and Grant (I'm actually not too sure if he won anything, actually) all won for lesser performances in weaker movies. We should really pay tribute to those male icons who turn in great, career making turns as basic characters. It's one thing to see an actor on stage captivating the audience, it's another to see his best takes compliled. To me, far more captivating is the moment when you see an actor reach iconic status for nailing the hell out of a arctype (anti hero, hero, villian, likeable villian) I think we would far rather see an actor perfom to this role than play a mentally challenged person.
13. Thats the big one (#12), but really, when is the academy going to recognize comedies? Scorsese, Spielberg, Hitchcock, Lean, nor Welles ever made a decent comedy, and most tried, but yet when people would rather talk about Caddyshack or Super Troopers than Ordinary People or A Beautiful mind, what do you think constiutes a great accomplishment? What would you rather watch with friends, South Park: Bigger Longer and Uncut or American Beauty? If we all agree that the beauty of the cinema is the communal experience, why do we discount laughter?
posted by Indiana at
2:50 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home