Saturday, April 4, 2009

Oscar mistakes...

I am a movie buff. I have been for as long as I can remember. I love the prestige of the Oscar's in honoring fine cinematic works. What really annoys me is when the Oscar's are not awarded to what I consider to be the best works. For the purposes of this rant, we'll discuss solely the Best Picture category.

While I could go back probably to the 1960's, I think I will just begin at when my love of movies began, around age 12.

In 1989, Driving Miss Daisy won the Oscar, while two more deserving movies did not win. My Left Foot starring Daniel Day Lewis and Dead Poet Society were much better choices.

In 1990, one of the most horrendous travesties of all time occurred when Goodfellas was snubbed in favor of the talentless hack Kevin Costner's directorial debut, Dances With Wolves.

1991 - The Silence of the Lambs. Excellent.

1992 - Unforgiven. Clint, good pick.

1993 - Schindler's List. Got it. Okay.

In 1994, the fan favorite Forrest Gump took the honors. Go back and watch it again. See if you can honestly say that it was a better movie than runners up, Pulp Fiction or (my pick) The Shawshank Redemption.

1995 - Braveheart. Easy choice.

In 1996, a minor upset in my mind when the award went to The English Patient over my pick, Shine, with Geoffrey Rush.

In 1997, Titanic won. Need I say any more? FYI, Boogie Nights wasn't even nominated.

In 1998, again, just a minor upset because I did like winner Shakespeare in Love but I would have went with Life Is Beautiful.

In 1999, my least favorite of the five won. Okay...American Beauty was better than The Cider House Rules but not better than The Sixth Sense, The Green Mile, and definitely not better than The Insider. Was it really so socially progressive to have a middle-aged guy bang a teenager? Really?

2000 - Gladiator. One of my favorite movies of all time.

In 2001, A Beautiful Mind was a great movie but because Moulin Rouge didn't win, they gave Chicago the award a year later in 2002 over two much better flicks in The Pianist and Gangs of New York.

In 2003, while I was happy that the Lord of the Rings trilogy was honored by giving the award to the third and final installment, I felt bad for Mystic River because movie-to-movie, it was better than the individual 3rd movie of the LotR trilogy, but how do you compete against a trilogy?

In 2004, someone ruined the ending of Million Dollar Baby, so I never bothered to watch it...

From 2005 until the present I feel they have been spot on:

2005 - Crash. Awesome movie.

2006 - The Departed. Great gangster flick with superb acting.

2007 - No Country For Old Men - Wonderfully acted movie.

2008 - Slumdog Millionaire - A moving film.

There you have it. Do you agree or disagree?


Nicole Shelby said...

I agree on almost all. C'mon - I think Lord of the Rings should've won every year, in every category, wih a few extras thrown in ti be thorough.

Matt Shelby said...

1989- agree
1990- I couldn't agree more!
1991- I agree
1992- I agree
1993- I agree
1994- Totally disagree! Forrest Gump is a classic. Shawshank was a good movie, don't get me wrong but Pulp Fiction? That was a horrendous movie! Can't believe you like that crap!
1995- I agree
1996- I agree
1997- America has a love affair with Leo. Crap movie, crap soundtrack, crap all together!
1998- No clue to be honest.
1999- I would say Sixth Sense was the most original movie at this time and should have won.
2000- I agree
2001- Disagree....Moulin Rouge sucked. Beautiful Mind was better.
2002- Gangs of New York should have won. Excellent movie.
2003- Disagree. LoR was better. Probably should have won for all 3 movies.
2004- Million Dollar Baby was an excellent movie. Very deserving.
2005- I agree
2006- The Departed is a gangster movie? I thought it was about the CIA in the Middle East. If we're thinking about the same one....awesome film!
2007- I agree
2008- Surprisingly it was a good movie....I have to agree.

Anne said...

Working in the entertainment industry, I've come to learn that Oscar winners aren't always about the best movie, its about which studio had the best PR campaign and buzz to sway the voters. Some years they do pick great winners, other years definitely questionable. Don't even get me started on the Golden Globes and what a joke the "Hollywood foreign press" is.