Oscar's Greatest Crimes- Page 2

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 2/23/07 at 11:58pm

Amen to Matt Damon not being nominated for THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY. If that's not an Oscar deserving performance, I don't know what is.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 12:07am

I agree with a FEW of them, but really, I think it's a bad list.

2001 might have been more innovative and ground breaking, but OLIVER is a better film, hands down.

People dislike GUMP, but I found it to be better than PULP FICTION.

And regarding Damon, his performance in RIPLEY was deserving a nomination, but at whose expense? You can't say someone was snubbed unless you know who was nominated over him, and if you've seen all of the performances.

He was wonderful, but better than Spacey (AMERICAN BEAUTY), Denzel (HURRICANE), Crowe (INSIDER), Farnsworth (STRAIGHT STORY) or Penn (LOWDOWN)?

No.

[suzycat]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 12:35am

Can we all think back to last year when "it's hard out here for a pimp" won for best song?? Enough said.

[Rose_MacShane]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 1:14am

Good point. That was a big WTF moment.

[mattonstage]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 1:49am

He failed to mention when talking about "The Greatest Show on Earth" winning best picture, that one of the greatest movies of all time was not even nominated for best picture, "Singin' in the Rain"

And I think Matt Damon could easily have taken the place of Sean Penn or Richard Farnsworth, both fine performances (I've seen all the films), but Damon gave such a masterful performance as Ripley.

And as for the Sixth Sense, Osmet and Collette were both terrific, but I was dissappointed with the film as a whole. Being John Malkovich was a much better film, IMHO, and it wasn't nominated.

[RadiGal2]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 3:22am

I'm going to defend the Pimp's.
I love rap. Old school stuff, not this new hip-hop crap that is just a crime. But give me some NWA, Tupac, Biggie -- back when it meant something, back when it was art and poetry, maybe uncomfortable art-- but that's the beauty of it-- it takes one out of their comfort zone. The first time I heard 2Pac it was like getting slapped-- and it felt good. It felt real and painful and anrgy and I liked the way it scared the f*ck out of people. I really did.

Hustle and Flow was brilliant, maybe not best picture brilliant, but Terrance Howard was amazing -- the direction and editing, story construction and character development were all spot on and since it was going to be shut out everywhere else-- they gave it the only award they could. Second the song within the context of the film and the struggle it illustrates suits perfectly-- which was not a mistake by the director...it was intentionally not supposed to be brilliant just heartfelt truth from a guy just struggling to breathe.

One more thing -- how was their sheer joy in achievement a bad thing? For heavens sake-- Jack Palance did one armed push ups on-stage and nobody said he disrespected the "integrity of the Oscars".

[TonyaFanatic]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 8:03am

Can we all think back to last year when "it's hard out here for a pimp" won for best song?? Enough said.

I think that is sad that rap music will never be taken seriously as real music. The academy picks the song that was the best song written specifically for a film, and even where the song is placed in the film it works magnificently. It was the Best Original Song.

I'm not defending Halle's Oscar not once more. People say she didnt deserve it. Fine. I just really don't care anymore. I just don't see what anybody did that year that was that much better than her. Sissy was great and I loved her in that film, but it wasn't all that. Halle really went to a deeper place than she ever has with that performance.

And what is so bad about Marisa's performance? To me it the epitome of what a Best Supporting Actress performance is. Why is it that "real" acting is limited to breathy, internalised reflection and deep stares into the human soul and experience. If acting is the study of people, then why can't she be a Joisey girl and be taken seriously as a real character. Judy Holliday, who was a fabulous actress won an Oscar (a well deserved one) for "Born Yesterday" and she played the same type of character. She was awesome in the movie.

I don know, maybe I just believe that one type of performance isn't always better than another.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 9:23am

I provoke outrage, but I still say, Kevin Spacey's performance in AMERICAN BEAUTY is hardly award-worthy. It was his basic bitchy, ironic, distanced reading, not dissemilar from THE REF or other work. The role's range was exceedingly narrow, and he did not stretch to fill it. But then, I still find Spacey the most overrated actor of the last twenty years -- not untalanted, not unskilled, just not terribly versatile or ever very surprising. And often charmless. That's just me.

In contrast: I also think it's shameful that Dennis Quaid wasn't nominated for FAR FROM HEAVEN. Every moment he's on screen as that tortured man is multi-dimensional and even scary. (Take the party scene. Watch how when drunk he releases the inner gay soul of the conflicted man, and literally "comes out" -- in body language, attitude, vocal power--brilliant.) And he dared not beg for our empathy. Fearless, and though smaller, the role and performance are levels above the cool sneering of Spacey in BEAUTY.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 9:27am

The pimp # will always be in the Pantheon of oscar caliber songs(not)

[best12bars]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 9:30am

I agree with his assessment of Little Miss Sunshine.

Can't say I agree with him much anywhere else, though.

[mattonstage]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 9:41am

I've said this on other threads, but Imelda Staunton should have won the Oscar for Vera Drake. Stunning.

Posted: 2/24/07 at 11:37am

"I'm not defending Halle's Oscar not once more."

You should got to your grave defending her if that's what you believe. It's all subjective. Well, all except Mira Sorvino.

Now Tonya Perkins, that's a Monster's Ball I would love to see.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 4:40pm

Was Dennis Quaid considered for the Best Leading Actor category? I thought Julianne Moore was the only leading role in FAR FROM HEAVEN. Either way, whether he was considered in the leading or the supporting category I thought he not only deserved a nomination, but that he deserved the award over Chris Cooper in ADAPTATION (despite the fact it's one of my favorite films) and Adrien Brody in THE PIANIST. Definitely one of the most underrated performances of recent years.
I feel the same way about Matt Damon's performance, I believe his acting in Mr.Ripley is the best screen work he has done and yes I'd have voted for him over Spacey.

[Kitzarina]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 5:20pm

One of the greatest travisties that I can think of in recent years is Gweneth Paltrow beating the transcendent Cate Blanchet. Shakespeare in Love was a good movie, but pure fluff. Cate became Elizabeth and acted circles around Gweneth's Viola.

In the same vein, who honestly considers Shakespeare in Love to be a better movie than Saving Private Ryan??

[best12bars]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 5:32pm

I would say Matt Damon in "Ripley" and Kathy Bates in "Dolores Claiborne" were probably the biggest Oscar crimes in the past dozen years. They should easily have won the top prize, and yet neither were nominated. Also Judy Parfitt in Dolores Claiborne as Vera. That's a "supporting winner" performance that wasn't nominated. And Dennis Quaid in "Far From Heaven" gave an award-worthy performance that didn't get nominated.

"Singin' in the Rain" failing to get a Best Picture nomination, a crime, but a justifiable one, considering that MGM in particular, and many members of the Academy were SICK of the egotistical Gene Kelly who had let his "American in Paris" upset go to straight to his head the year before. They made SURE it didn't happen again the following year with "Rain." That crime was "murder in the first degree." Definitely pre-planned.

Crimes, all of them!

And I agree that Oliver! SHOULD have won over 2001, and Forrest Gump SHOULD have won over Pulp Fiction. Those weren't remotely "Oscar crimes."

And Hillary Swank is definitely tough to cast, but deserved both her Oscar wins.

I don't even think that Citizen Kane failing to win BP is a crime, considering how incredibly powerful "How Green Was My Valley" is. I would have voted for "Valley" as well. It leaves FAR more of an impact emotionally than Kane, even though Kane is a flawless movie.

[best12bars]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 5:38pm

"In the same vein, who honestly considers Shakespeare in Love to be a better movie than Saving Private Ryan??"

I do. And it isn't even a close race.

Saving Private Ryan was exactly like 300 other war movies made in the '50s and '60s, primarily by MGM, Universal and Warner Bros. It was a well-made retread of many films that had come before it. Some with nearly the same plot, others had the same scenes or characters. It was "war movie in a blender" for me.

Shakespeare In Love is a masterpiece, IMO. One of the best screenplays written in the past 20 years, and I thought Gwyneth, Fiennes, Rush, Afleck, Dench, etc. we're all terrific and deserving of their praise and award recognition.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 6:08pm

Besty, thanks for the insight on SINGIN' IN THE RAIN. It certainly explains a lot.
Glad to see you agree about Damon and Quaid, definitely one of those performances that deserved the top prize and didn't even garner a nomination.
I still feel Blanchett deserved the award over Paltrow in 1999 but I also felt Blanchett didn't deserve her Supporting Actress award in 2004.
I do have a question. What is the general consensus about Judy Holliday winning over Gloria Swanson, Anne Baxter, and Bette Davis in 1950? I haven't seen BORN YESTERDAY so I can't really give an informed opinion but SUNSET BOULEVARD and ALL ABOUT EVE are two of my favorite films and I was wondering what people who have seen the three films thought.

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 6:09pm

Kitzy, I must disagree as well.

I agree almost entirely with Besty's statements, except to add that I think Ryan is a particularly bad and distasteful war movie. The characters were one dimensional and trite, and don't even start on the ridiculous framing device.
Shakespeare in Love was a film crafted well, acted masterfully and played to several levels all at once.

Updated On: 2/24/07 at 06:09 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 6:48pm

ray---The consensus on Judy Holliday's win for "Born Yesterday" over all those other heavy-hitters is a layered one:

1) The votes were just split too many ways... with two Best Actress contenders (Davis and Baxter) from "All About Eve" pitted against each other, plus two triumphant "comeback" performances (Davis and Swanson).

2) The mentality of "let's give it to the newcomer." This was one of Holliday's earliest pictures, after an impressive scene-stealing turn in Adam's Rib, the year before. Davis already had two Oscars, Baxter had one, and Swanson had been nominated twice previously, was a huge silent film star, and had come out of retirement to play the part.

3) Holliday's was the "different" performance in that category. When you have all these powerful, brilliant, well-crafted dramatic performances... go for the letter-perfect comedic one instead (that's my theory on why Marissa Tomei won as well).

4) The leading actress Oscar usually goes to a "sacrificing" role... meaning the character usually gives up something of herself for the greater good of herself, her loved ones, her nation, or the world (or all of the above). It's a noble performance on some level. This isn't always the case, but nine times out of ten, you'll find this to be true. Billie Dawn sacrificed her "dumb self" and her comfy life as a gangster's moll, to improve her mind, her self worth, her morals and ultimately turned her fiance in for his crimes. Norma Desmond, Eve Harrington and Margo Channing are ANYTHING but noble, self-sacrificing characters. That's a major handicap in the leading actress category.

Updated On: 2/25/07 at 06:48 PM

[PJ]

Posted: 2/24/07 at 11:50pm

I happen to adore Shakespeare in Love. I liked Saving Private Ryan, but I haven't seen that one since it was originally released. However, I do believe it deserved it's Oscars. For years, I listened to people say how Paltrow stole that Oscar from Blanchett. I recently re-watched Shakespeare in Love and Elizabeth, and I'm glad Gwyneth won. She was positively radiant and delivered a find performance. Blanchett got her chance several years, and undoubtedly, has a few more in the future.

Oh, and Swank most definitely deserved her two Best Actress trophies. Words cannot describe her performance in Boys Don't Cry, and she broke your heart in Million Dollar Baby.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/25/07 at 12:30am

"But then, I still find Spacey the most overrated actor of the last twenty years -- not untalanted, not unskilled, just not terribly versatile or ever very surprising. And often charmless."

I agree. I don't think I've ever seen him in anything that another actor couldn't have done just as well if not better.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 2/25/07 at 9:43am

My list of Oscar's Greatest Crimes, in no particular order:

Best Director to Robert Redford for ORDINARY PEOPLE over Martin Scorsese for RAGING BULL.

Oscars for Best Director to Ron Howard, John G. Avildsen and Clint Eastwood (twice!!). No Oscars for Best Director to: Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kubrick, Orson Welles, Robert Altman, Sidney Lumet, Martin Scorsese (until tonight, it seems).

Oscar nominations for Best Actor to: Clint Eastwood (twice!!)

Best Picture awards to: THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH, AMERICAN BEAUTY, MILLION DOLLAR BABY, A BEAUTIFUL MIND, UNFORGIVEN, CRASH, and to my pick for the worst American film ever released: CHICAGO.

Updated On: 2/25/07 at 09:43 AM

[RadiGal2]

Posted: 2/26/07 at 3:38pm

So I am a day late and a dollar short, but I just recalled Oscar's biggest crime---

John Hodge who wrote Trainspotting got beat by Billy Bob Thornton for Slingbade -- Best Adapted Screenplay. I literally cried over that; for days. Not to mention the film nor Ewan McGregor even receiving nominations-- may I remind you that Matt Damon got nominated for Good Will Hunting (how? why?) and Dustin Hoffman for Wag the Dog. Seriously.

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/26/07 at 3:50pm

That was a really good year for sripts, RadiGal, though as a huge fan of SLINGBLADE, I don't agree with your assessment...I also thought THE CRUCIBLE's adaptation was great.

OLIVER! vs. 2001 is what's wrong with the Oscars: do you choose the well-crafted hamburger or the slightly off-tasting foie gras terrine? Yes, OLIVER is far more accessible and enjoyable than 2001, but OLIVER doesn't really have alot to say about the origins of man and his need for god. It's fun, but it's not much more than that. Whereas, 2001 isn't much fun, but there's ALOT to it.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 2/26/07 at 4:11pm

I think Berry deserved her oscar, as did Tomei. The year they were nominated, they had fine performances which were competitive with the other 4 actresses nominated. I thought Spacek was fine, but not better than Berry...and as I recall, the race was mostly between them.

I think the 1950 Best Actress race had another complication you dont mention twelvy...all 5 actresses gave great performances. Any winner would've been satisfying...(although Baxter overacts...she'd have been a real shocker.) Holliday was stupefyingly good, imo. Ray...rent that dvd!


The oscar I'd like given back is still Kim Basinger's. She needs to deliver it to Julianne Moore and apologize.