Titanic (the movie) question..

[theaterlover45]

Posted: 7/5/06 at 11:35pm

WHY THE HEC WASN'T Leonardo DiCaprio (spelling?) NOMINATED FOR AN OSCAR? I Thought he was great, but thats just my opinion.
What are your thoughts?

[Over_the_Moon]

Posted: 7/5/06 at 11:42pm

Little slow on the uptake?

[theaterlover45]

Posted: 7/5/06 at 11:44pm

Well I just got finished watching it and never thought about it until I was curious how many oscars it won and found out that he wasnt even nominated.So thats why.

[cturtle]

Posted: 7/5/06 at 11:45pm

it's all because of that spitting scene.

Updated On: 7/5/06 at 11:45 PM

[SallyBrown]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 12:35am

Leonardo was good I thought, but when he was doing scenes with Kate Winslet I thought he just paled in comparison to the presence she brought. I dunno, I don't know who else was nominated for leading male actor for that year but I'm not surprised he didn't recieve a nomination because there were probably better performances out there.

But then again I'm really not a huge fan of DiCaprio at all so this is a bit biased..

[CapnHook]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 12:42am

He got mixed responses from critics. Plus, look who this young kid was up against:

As Good as It Gets (1997) - Jack Nicholson (winner)
Apostle, The (1997) - Robert Duvall
Good Will Hunting (1997) - Matt Damon
Ulee's Gold (1997) - Peter Fonda
Wag the Dog (1997) - Dustin Hoffman

Looks like he got beat by the other young kid...Matt Damon...

Makes sense, though. GOOD WILL HUNTING was VERY well received. Titanic was generally positive but had its share of criticism. DiCaprio's performance, I thought, suited the film well but was too about his looks and not enough letting himself go.

[wishinguweresomehow]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 12:45am

He was definitely up against some great actors that year...however, if it makes you happy, I believe he was nominated for a Golden Globe.

[jlc6314]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 12:50am

He was nominated for a Golden Globe. I remember, in my DiCaprio induced fan-girlness, boycotting the Oscars that year because he wasn't nominated. Heh.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 12:55am

He should have been nominated for it.

[zzannahk]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 1:00am

wasn't he also snubbed for gilbert grape? IMO that is his only oscar worthy performace.

[jlc6314]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 1:10am

He was nominated for Gilbert Grape:

Best Actor in a Supporting Role

Winner:
Fugitive, The (1993) - Tommy Lee Jones

Other Nominees:
In the Line of Fire (1993) - John Malkovich
In the Name of the Father (1993) - Pete Postlethwaite
Schindler's List (1993) - Ralph Fiennes
What's Eating Gilbert Grape (1993) - Leonardo DiCaprio

Updated On: 7/6/06 at 01:10 AM

[cturtle]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 1:11am

he WAS nominated for GILBERT GRAPE in 93.

[DG]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 1:36am

Wow - that was a pretty packed group, as well. I think I would have voted for Fiennes - one of the most skin-crawlingly real performances I've seen (even though it took me three times to make it through that film!)

[StageManager2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 6:19am

I remember a "Siskel & Ebert" show, in which Siskel ranted on about Leo's nomination snub. That said, I read somewhere that Kate Winslet attributed the snub to a story she gave Rolling Stone about Leo farting freely on the set of TITANIC, but that was said tongue-in-cheek.

[jimnysf]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 6:47am

One of my favorite Leo movies:

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 9:39am

"Titanic" got VERY mixed reviews. You'd be hard-pressed to find ANY film critic who gave it a rave. I have several friends out here who are film critics and they had all attended advance screenings of this (highly anticipated) film. Not ONE of them liked it. They all told me it was going to BOMB. That it wouldn't get any Oscar nominations, except for maybe the effects and "the old lady." That was it.

I walked into the theatre on opening day with the LOWEST of low expectations. I thought I was going to watch a train wreck of a film. And I was swept away, and completely overwhelmed with its power.

I never understood (and sometimes STILL don't understand) the growing separation between elitist film critics and the film-going audiences. Modern film critics increasingly seem to be reviewing movies in a vacuum... or some alternate universe of cinema that doesn't speak to, or for, their intended audiences.

That said... it wasn't surprising to me that Leo was snubbed. Rather, it was surprising to me that among these MANY sour reviews of the film, it managed to pull in a recording-tying 14 nominations, and ultimately a record-tying 11 wins. But the Academy is not comprised of any film critics. It is a "peer" award given by select industry members, and that's why it is regarded as THE award to be won for film.

[peach]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 10:08am

Ditto Best12Bars. Good points!

I for one, went into this movie not expecting much at all. Much to my pleasant surprise, I absolutely loved this movie. Leonardo DiCaprio should have gotten a nom. He probably would not have won considering who he was up against, but I think his performance was Oscar-worthy.

[broadway86]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 1:22pm

I think he is - along with the screenplay - the weakest element in the movie. On top of that, who would you have taken out of that lineup?

[peach]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 1:24pm

Well, good point. With that lineup, he doesn't compare. If the movie had come out in a different year, things may have been different!

[MTVMANN]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 2:26pm

He should have been nominated, but water under the bridge now.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 2:28pm

Who would I have taken out of that line up?

Wag the Dog (1997) - Dustin Hoffman

...since you asked.