10 Most Heinous Oscar Snubs
With the Oscar nominations being announced next Tuesday (January 24), I thought I would go a bit negative and look back at some of the worst snubs in Oscar history. The Academy Awards have a rather dubious reputation of rewarding the mediocre over the truly great. Now granted, what one person thinks great another may find mediocre. A good example of this happened just last year when the achingly average film The King’s Speech – not a bad film, just rather bland – beat out films like The Social Network, Black Swan, Winter’s Bone and The Fighter.
I know many people loved The King’s Speech, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say, but in no universe is The King’s Speech the best film of any year. Will it be remembered twenty, thirty, fifty years from now? Probably not. But still, no matter how disappointed I happened to be with last year’s outcome, it is only a minor glitch in an Oscar history of bad calls and out and out mistakes.
Many bad choices have been made. Chariots of Fire beating out Raiders of the Lost Ark. Driving Miss Daisy over Born on the Fourth of July (as well as the non-nominated Do the Right Thing!). Films such as The English Patient, Gandhi and Rain Man taking home Best Picture. Cuba Gooding Jr., Whoopie Goldberg and Sandra Bullock all have Oscars. But still, these are mere matters of taste and opinion, and no matter how ridiculous some of these may very well have been, there are much much worse. Ones that go beyond mere taste and opinion and dig deep into the well of pure cinematic stupidity. Of course this is also just me venting out my own frustrations toward an organization that should already be quite well-known for making bad choices. Oh well, everyone needs to vent once and a while.
So, without further ado, I give you the 10 Most Heinous Oscar Snubs in Academy Award History.
10. Citizen Kane Did Not Win Best Picture!
Granted, the film that did win the Oscar in 1941, John Ford’s How Green Was My Valley, is by no means a bad film. Other than a bit of over-sentimentalism, it is a rather good motion picture. But to see it win over the film that is considered by many to be the greatest film of all-time? Okay, hindsight is 20/20 as they say and Kane was not well-received at first (it began gaining critical speed in the 1950′s) so to see a film like How Green Was My Valley take the Oscar is not really that surprising, or even all that bad. It’s not like Kramer vs. Kramer went back in time and won the award. Still though, kind of silly when one goes back and looks at it. Now on to some much worse Oscar crimes.
9. Judy Garland Never Won An Oscar!?
Yes, they gave her a special Juvenile Oscar in 1939, but the singer/actress was only ever nominated twice in her career and lost both times. I suppose I could have put many other Oscar-less actor or actresses in this spot – Cary Grant, Greta Garbo, James Dean, Deborah Kerr, Richard Burton, Barbara Stanwyck, Peter O’Toole – but to see such a beloved actress, even with her troubles with drugs and alcohol, never get the recognition she well deserved is such a shame. Just watch Meet Me in St. Louis, The Clock, A Star is Born or her supporting turn in The Judgment at Nuremburg, and you would have to agree.
8. Oliver! Wins Best Picture in a Year That Gave Us 2001?
It is bad enough that one of the most audacious, stunning motion pictures ever made (even its detractors must acknowledge its bravura) was not even nominated for Best Picture (Kubrick was just too much for the rather staid Academy – even if A Clockwork Orange would be nominated three years later) but to give the top award to one of the most middling, middle-of-the-road musicals ever made is sheer Oscar ridiculousness.
7. Gwyneth Paltrow’s Parents Win Her An Oscar!!
The Oscars have always been a hotbed of nepotism, but never has it been so blatant as it was in 1998 when Gwyneth Paltrow, daughter of Hollywood’s Blythe Danner and producer Bruce Paltrow, took home Best Actress, beating out Meryl Streep in One True Thing, Emily Watson in Hilary and Jackie and the year’s biggest critical performances, Fernanda Montenegro in Central Station and Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth. Don’t even get me started on Paltrow’s film, Shakespeare in Love beating out Saving Private Ryan, a film that has problems but is certainly head and shoulders above the frothy Shakespearean wannabe rom-com.
6. Kramer vs. Kramer Beats Apocalypse Now!!
One of the most ferocious and daring war films ever made versus a film that makes Chariots of Fire look exciting by contrast. Well, I think we all know where this is going. Oscar has more often than not gone with the safer (read: blander) choice and that was certainly the case in 1979 when this very thing happened big time. Kramer vs. Kramer also beat the radically unconventional All That Jazz as well, but to have this dreadfully boring movie beat out Apocalypse Now!? Crazy!!
Continue Reading 10 Most Heinous Oscar Snubs >>
Pages: 1 2
72 Comments
Cary Grant never won an Oscar. Neither did Charlie Chaplin. Bleh…
Crazy, ain’t it?
Thinking about recent years, in my opinion Melanie Laurent should have received a Best Actress nom for Inglourious Basterds and won over Sandra Bullock!
I whole-heartedly agree. She was so great in that role. Glad to see I am not alone on this.
Your list has made me angry…. Hulk smash!
Yep, I’d have to agree with just about every one you have here, Kevyn. Hell, I could have lived with ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ winning in the year of ‘Gump’, too. As well, it still irks me no end that ‘The English Patient’ won Best Picture in ’96. I’d have taken any over that one, especially ‘Fargo’! ‘Dances With Wolves’ over ‘Goodfellas’, ‘Kramer vs. Kramer over ‘Apocalypse Now’ and ‘Cabaret over ‘The Godfather’. Criminy! Dont’ get me started with some of what ‘The Academy’ has hoisted upon us. Whew! I feel better now… somewhat.
You’ll get a lot of reactions on this post, my friend. Thanks.
A great list. I was thinking about this the other day! Glad you composed this! I have to add Gary Oldman to this list!
I was most upset that Shawshank Redemption didn’t beat out Forrest Gump.
Gary Oldman may finally get his first, long overdue nomination on Tuesday.
I am very happy about this, it’s so overdue for Gary Oldman!
Great list my man. Reading stuff like this makes me realize just how much of a joke the Oscars really can be sometimes. However, I always keep on coming back.
I was pissed that Charlotte Gainsbourg didn’t get nominated for Antichrist and they gave the award to fucking Sandra Bullock.
The Oscars are a joke. After all, here’s a list of great directors who never won the Best Director Oscar: Ingmar Bergman, Stanley Kubrick, Federico Fellini, Akira Kurosawa, Jim Jarmusch, Michael Powell & Emeric Pressburger, Lars von Trier, Terry Gilliam, Armbar!, Satyajit Ray, Pedro Almodovar, Luis Bunuel, Armbar!, Robert Bresson, Michelangelo Antonioni, Armbar!, Sergio Leone (wasn’t even nominated for an Oscar in his life), Fritz Lang, Armbar!, Andrei Tarkovsky, David Lynch, Wong Kar-Wai, and… Armbar!
Wait… I have more… Mike Leigh, Nicolas Roeg, Armbar!, Aki Kaurismaki, Abbas Kiarostami, Darren Aronofsky, Armbar!, Pasolini, Vittorio de Sica, Roberto Rossellini, Luchino Visconti, Armbar!, Yasujiro Ozu, Mel Brooks, John Landis, Carl Theodor Dreyer, Armbar!, Gaspar Noe, Carlos Saura, Samuel Fuller, Armbar!
Someone will help me here in this clip: http://youtu.be/fUcTHmZ9luY
There are more…Kevin Costner, Mel Gibson, Ron Howard, James Cameron, Tom Hooper…oh wait, I forgot, they all have directing Oscars.
As far as Armbar! goes, not sure I really get that.
Just watch the clip I posted. If you’re a pro wrestling fan, you’d get it unless you’re into “sports entertainment”.
In the case of Bergman, he may not have wanted ithttp://criterioncollection.tumblr.com/post/18392438702/when-wild-strawberries-was-nominated-for-an-oscar
Sorry man, two of your supposed snubs are selections I wholeheartedly agree with.
I won’t deny that Citizen Kane is a great film, but it’s not as great of a film as How Green Was My Valley. Citizen Kane suffers most from the fact that it’s a “been there doe that picture” with just about all of the techniques it’s lauded for introducing into cinema having already been explored by other filmmakers, most notable F.W. Murnau. Once you take away the innovation aspect Citizen Kane is still a great movie, but it doesn’t beat out the sweep, scope, and acting of Valley.
Pulp Fiction is a terrible film, Forrest Gump is a great film. I’ve never understood the appeal of Tarantino, and I’ve really never understood the love for his gimmick movie. Gump is good old fashioned film making with a story that is compelling, great acting, effects, and so on. None of that can be said for Pulp Fiction, a boring, unimaginative, misogynistic, needlessly violent film made by a guy who wants the world to think he’s cool despite the fact he isn’t.
The rest of your list is solid, but those two I see touted often in the category of snubbing and I can’t agree.
I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on some things.
this is why I never look to the academy for any form of guidance… only BAFTA if any…
Very commendable list! I’m in agreement with virtually all of these egregious snubs. Scorsese was flat-out robbed in 1980 by the Academy. Raging Bull trumps Ordinary People by such a wide margin, it’s still mind-boggling thirty years later. Kubrick, Hitchcock, and Scorsese-unquestionably, three of the greatest directors of All-Time—share the ignominious, unfair honor of being grossly overlooked and marginalized by the statue they call Oscar. Subjectivity is a dangerous weapon on occasion; this list pinpoints precisely why.
Great post!
At my college, most of my film professors and literature professors–save for the guy who has a blog endorsed by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences–have accepted that the Oscars are no longer legit. I like the BAFTAS and the National Critics Circle, mostly because the majority of Academy voters are people involved in the technical aspects of films, i.e. special effects, sound, editing, etc. Since they have the most voting power, they pick movies that have large technical support usually; it guarantees that movies will continue to need large technical support, and subsequently more jobs for the tech staff.
Also, many people consider The Greatest Show on Earth to be the worst Best Picture winner ever. It’s typical DeMille: largely produced, lavish, big-name actors, no heart or intellect.
Great list. This had pretty much everything I would have mentioned. The Scorsese snubs especially have always baffled me.
hitchcock should certainly have an oscar. Crash is one of my favorite movie so i was delighted when that one (although, yes, brokeback mountian is also a good movie). LOL at paltrow nepotism. marilyn monroe was never a good actress to me (sorry). i like forrest gump, but pulp fiction was PULP FICTION
Many people think of Marilyn as just a blonde bombshell and nothing else, but if you watch her and her comic timing, she is up there with Lucille Ball, Katherine Hepburn in the screwball comedies and Carole Lombard. Her comic timing is pitch perfect. And if one were to watch The Misfits or even some of the more emotional bits in The Prince and the Showgirl or How To Marry A Millionaire, one will see she can do drama as well.
Oh, The Misfits. I do love The Misfits so. All the rebels together.
I’ll always remember Marilyn playing paddle ball in the The Misfits. Great acting, great cinematography!
Great list! Some of the stuff like 2001 not being nominated feels more like a bad decision in hindsight to me. I can imagine tons of people hating that upon release, just as loads of people do now. I love it, but it’s definitely not a film for everyone.
One of the biggest Oscar snubs in my eyes is Driving Miss Daisy winning Best Picture, when Do The Right Thing wasn’t even nominated. Huh?
It’s a Wonderful Life not winning is my biggest Oscar snub for Best Picture in history.
Rocky is an incredible film IMO, while I also love Taxi Driver, I don’t have a problem with the win for Rocky. Oh, and The Shawshank Redemption also deserved Best Picture over Forrest Gump.
Great list!
Over the years I’ve got more and more jaded over the Oscars. They seem to be more and more politically motivated in that if you know the right people and etc etc. To me, they’re never a good indication of great films. The greatest films are the ones that are appreciated and loved by the genuine film loving masses out there, not voted upon by a board of people who have their own self interests at heart.
Casablanca, Gone With the Wind, Rebecca, All About Eve, An American in Paris, On the Waterfront, The Apartment, The Godfathers (1 and 2), Annie Hall, No Country For Old Men. Out of 83, these are the only eleven Best Picture winners I would consider great films.
Judy Garland never get the recognition she well deserved is such a shame.I absolutely agree. the Oscar for A Star Is Born was a robbery. He had to go to her. MGM’s all your fault!She deserved for The Judgment at Nuremburg to! But she is a Legend, she is Miss Show Business, She has 2 stars in the road of fame and after 40 years after his death is still the most talented of Hollywood!
Brilliant list that had me smiling then chuckling then getting angry in out right disgust!!
It is amazing how things go, especially with the OSCARS and the obvious politics behind them|!!
I still get steamed about Shakespeare in Love winning over Saving private Ryan.. GRRRRR!!!!
Didn’t know that actually, just assumed that it won best picture… I mean, it’s a pretty safe assumption!
Great list Kevin, enlightening. I agree with all of your choices except number 5. Granted, I never saw Brokeback Mountain but I thought Crash had good intentions even if it didn’t execute as well as it might have. Thanks for this interesting insight into Oscar’s voting psyche. I think generally the Acamdaemy gets it right but when it gets it wrong, boy does it get it WRONG! I’m amazed that Hitchcock never won but then he was the same generation as Billy Wilder, Frank Capra and David Lean. Great post Kevyn, thanks for this!
Crash is one of those films, like The Help, that is made to make people feel guilty about their prejudices, ending up seeming prejudice itself. The film never goes any deeper than the superficial and suffers greatly because of it. Easily one of the worst Best Picture winners ever.
The Oscars have proved time and time again that they get it wrong. It is silly that Scorsese should win for The Departed…one of his finest films, admittedly…but Best Director worthy given Goodfellas, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull were snubbed for wins?
The sad fact is that your list only scratches the tip of the iceberg. For at least half the Best Picture winners, there were at least 2-3 other choices that were significantly better that year. The worst for me are the snubs for Pulp Fiction and Goodfellas. I don’t even mind Dances with Wolves, but it’s not even close to the best film of that year. People will still watch Pulp Fiction and Goodfellas 30 years from now. I doubt that will be the case for Forrest Gump. Good list.
I’m rooting for Gary Oldman to finally be nominated (and I’m shocked he didn’t make the list) but then again, would it be any real surprise if they snubbed him again? But hey, at least we can all sleep at night knowing Oprah got her honorary Oscar, right? Right?
Taxi Driver not only had to go up against Rocky, but the acting threat that was Network. OH how I love Network. Any other year and it would’ve won. That’s how I feel about Shawshank and Pulp Fiction too though.
If there was one big time weak year in the 2000′s it was either the year Slumdog Millionaire or Chicago won. Both are decent films, but not to the caliber of No Country for Old Men or Return of the King. The year Crash won every other film nominated was better than it.
Can I nominate Lauren Bacall not even being allowed to receive her Honorary Oscar on the actual Oscar telecast?
Yes indeed. That was a travesty.
Did you see the pissed-off look on Ms. Bacall’s face when she did not win for the Mirror Has Two Faces?
You know, at the time of Binoche’s Oscar I didn’t want Binoche to win simply because I didn’t like The English Patient, but I also had yet to become familiar with Ms. Bacall’s immense abilities. And if I’d known then what I know now about Her Majesty Lauren, my God, I would have been throwing things at walls.
Interesting list! I will definitely agree that there have been some HUGE snubs over the years, and it’s great to see another film geek point some of them out.
But one I VERY MUCH disagree with – Pulp Fiction being better than Forrest Gump? Can’t say I feel the same way. Pulp Fiction was pulped (sorry, I had to) so full of F-bombs (it was over the top) and random craziness here and there, with no real story line to hold onto, I consider it far overrated. What’s to take away from that film, even from a filmmaking perspective? Forrest Gump, however, seemed like a story worth telling. I mean, the performances were outstanding, and Forrest Gump is a household name today. I couldn’t even tell you any of the character names from Pulp Fiction, because the characters/film had little to no effect on me.
That being said, I think it is crazy having Shawshank Redemption and Four Weddings and a Funeral up against it. I would not want to be trying to make that decision.
My one other quip is about Crash and Brokeback Mountain. I completely agree that Crash winning was such an upset. I really don’t think Brokeback Mountain deserved to win though, either. I’m not sure what I would have picked that year, but I wouldn’t have picked it either.
But Forrest Gump is pure cliche’d filmmaking. A trite story about an idiot. The film is full of pseudo-conservative claptrap that basically says if you are a sinner you will lose your legs or die of Aids but even if you are a moron, as long as you believe in God, everything will work out. To me that is pure pandering and not a story with any real, beyond superficial meaning. Pulp Fiction on the other hand is pure cinema. It is what cinema should be. It is in the historic vein of Godard and Kubrick and Scorsese. Extremely well written dialogue and interesting characters and meant to be over the top. It is what great cinema is all about.
As for Brokeback Mountain – it is one of the most beautiful and most tragic love stories I have ever seen. I cried my eyes out at the end.
Pulp Fiction is none of those things. It’s terribly written, and it’s not pure cinema. It’s a collection of cinematic ideas and tropes that were done before, and done far better. If Tarantino were to do something interesting with the material he borrows I could get all the hype around Pulp Fiction, but he doesn’t. He presents a world that isn’t fleshed out, that is full of cliches and stereotypes, where they spout off badly written dialogue and he has to fall back on the gimmick of non-linear storytelling to hide the fact he has no story to tell.
Forrest Gump on the other hand is a tale of Americana. I’ve never gotten the conservative interpretation that so many others speak of. Jenny isn’t punished for her sins, she meets her fate simply as a result of the times she lives in. Besides, the real character who is constantly pushed is Forrest himself, but he marches forward and I like that. Gump is well written, and well shot, and it manages to say something interesting with its material, which is the polar opposite of Pulp Fiction, or the entire body of Tarantino’s work.
But doesn’t so much of Forrest Gump feel like a gimmick? Yes, it covers the history of America, but it does so by putting him into these moments with silly tricks. I didn’t hate Forrest Gump and think it’s a solid movie, but I don’t think it’s saying much at all. It’s decent entertainment but is really forgettable, especially in its directing style.
I don’t mind the decision to put Gump into those historical moments or places because the movie is about charting a certain progression of time in American history. In that sense his inclusion works because it helps to show that despite what we may like to think we are small compared to the events happening in our country (whatever that country may be).
But that’s just it – Tarantino does do interesting things with the ideas he takes from film history. Anyone can copy the past, but QT takes that past, meshes it together and brings out a unique perspective on it all.
I don’t believe he does that at all. I’ve yet to be interested by any of the ideas Tarantino borrows, in some cases I was interested in them in their original form but all Tarantino does is copy and paste them into his film. Not to mention he is terribly misogynistic with his idea of a strong female character being a woman who acts like a man. Someone like Jee-woon Kim is an example of a great director who borrows ideas and does interesting things with said ideas. Tarantino takes ideas wholesale and does not a thing with them, and not only does that bore me but it’s the sign of hack direction.
Again, I would disagree. I think the conclusions you drew from seeing Forrest Gump aren’t the same that many viewers have. Like beauty in everything else, beauty found in film is in the eye of the beholder. Clearly, I didn’t take away any idea of pure cinema or extremely well-written dialogue that you did from Pulp Fiction. I found it entertaining in parts, but altogether it felt very disjointed, with scenes sharing little connection mashed together to make a movie. In regards to Forrest Gump, I just sat down and was moved and entertained by fleshed-out characters, fantastic performances, and a compelling story. Obviously, you didn’t take away any of those things from Forrest Gump.
When it’s all said and done, we can both at least say that we’re talking about movies both considered iconic and great, even if I don’t consider Pulp Fiction great and you don’t consider Forrest Gump great. Guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree
It would not be a very fun world if we all agreed on everything. Viva la différence!!
Bravo, Kevyn! Forrest Gump was pure crap. Thank you.
P.S. Never go full tard.
Thanx for the back-up Mr. Muth.
Foorest Gump is a delight of a movie that takes you on for a great ride, even if it is cliche, it worked for me. I just rewatched Pulp Fiction(5th time?) after not seeing it in quite a few years and to be honest it did not hold up as well as I would have hoped. It was to me one the greatest film ever when i first saw it when it came out. But I am afraid a lot of the attraction came from being new and innovative for the time. Shawshank should have won that year!
But was actually going to say tha your priase on Brokeback convinced me to give another try. It is one of the films in my lifethat i actually turned of half way. At the time it just came across as slow and boring and i always suspected it to be so popular due to the subjectmatter and the fact that the US is still largely “homophobic”for lack of a better word , why else would a story about 2 guys who can’t be together be so interisting. Nevermind i will give it another try.
And to be clear I STILL LOVE QT and everything he makes. Reservoir Dogs made me the movielover i am today!
The Academy has made a lot of poor decisions over the years, and your list really put these in perspective. I found #5 to be particularly grating — Crash was such a poor movie that it should not have even been nominated, let alone declared a winner!
Wow. Some people really do not like Quentin Tarantino. Some even call him a hack director while touting someone like Robert Zemeckis. Interesting outlook I suppose. Ah well, to each their own I suppose. To each their own.
Crash is one of the worst best pictures of all-time. I can’t believe racism SO on the nose was at all revelatory to anyone watching it. I’m not denying racism exists, but to the degree that the film potrays?! Ha ha! It was like a high school “don’t be racist!” advert.
The Crash choice was pretty egregious of course. I remember Jack Nicholson’s face when he read it off the card.
Shakespeare in Love was equally head-scratching.
But that is what campaigning and throwing dollars behind a film no matter how deserving or undeserving.
How about “Driving Miss Daisy” winning the Academy Award in 1989? “Do the Right Thing?” wasn’t even nominated.
A nice list! I remember being particularly shocked and upset when Crash beat Brokeback, although I think I’ve calmed down about it after all these years. Most of the time, if there is something new or daring versus something safe, the safe one is going to win out. Part of it has to do with the consensus ballot strategy that gets used. I’ve always wondered how these might be different if they just took the film with the highest number of votes, instead of the weighted ballots and such.
Totally agree w/ most of these, Kevyn, especially Gwyneth beating out all those nominees… especially Cate Blanchett who should’ve won for Elizabeth.
EVERYONE IS FORGETTING, THE GREATEST OF THEM ALL, GRETA GARBO NEVER WON A COMPETITIVE OSCAR, SHE NEVER PLAYED THE HOLLYWOOD GAME AND THAT IS WHY, SHE WAS THE ONLY ACTRESS NOMINATED FOR 2 DIFFERENT FILMS IN ONE YEAR: ANNA CHRISTIE (HER FIRST TALKIE) AND ROMANCE IN 1930 – SHE WAS NOMINATED AGAIN FOR CAMILLE (ACKNOWLEDGED BY MANY CRITICS AS THE GREATEST PERFORMANCE ON THE SILVER SCREEN AND AGAIN FOR HER FIRST COMEDY: NINOTCHKA…..SHE WAS VERY HURT IT HAS BEEN SAID OVER CAMILLE.
Just wanted to add that I COMPLETELY AGREE that Shakespeare in Love NEVER should have beaten Saving Private Ryan! Unbelievable!!!
Our host should admit these decisions are totally subjective.
I don’t agree with any of his outrages. How Green was My Valley is better than Citizen Kane. Kane is overblown and self-important. It is a great movie but it is certainly not tight. The Third Man and Touch of Evil are better made movies IMHO. Anyone who follows film knows that the dramatic camera angles in Kane Welles borrowed from John Ford’s Stage Coach. It’s only appropriate that Ford beat Orson’s arrogant butt for the Oscar.
Is Kevyn an “expert” for parroting Boomer conventional wisdom? Apocalypse Now sucks. It’s a libelous smear on Joseph Conrad to say this manure was based on Heart of Darkness. Totally phony and unrealistic nonsense; and The Doors? Weak. I have friends who were LRRPs. It embarrasses me to see this now. You couldn’t pay me to watch it. Kevyn’s description, “ferocious”; candy ass BS is more like it. Hacking up tapirs? Are you kidding me? Where were you in 1969? We Were Soldiers is 10X the movie.
Judy Garland? You must be gay. A pill popping has been by the time she was 35. Her emotional connection was only due to the suspense of whether she was going to melt down totally before the performance ended. Decent people didn’t want her in the house even on TV. Haven’t we gotten over junkies as victims yet? Her best stuff was when she was still cute and innocent; not heavy enough for an Oscar. Look at the picture you posted. Sadness and pain. That’s not acting.
I do agree on 2001. Still, it is understandable that it got snubbed. It was inscrutable to the majority of the population.
Aren’t all film related lists subjective by nature, or am i the only one that assumes that?
Of course this list is subjective. Every list anyone makes is subjective. How could they not be?
I harbour no ill feelings because you disagree with my very subjective choices, though putting the word expert in quotes the way you did I do hold a bit of a grudge against. I am certainly not to the filmic expertise of someone like Jim Hoberman or Dave Kehr or Jonathan Rosenbaum, but after decades of delving into cinema and writing multitudes of film reviews and essays, I think I may have at least a little expertise, however subjective it may be.
As for the gay assumption at my love of the incredible talented Judy Garland – wow, what a stereotype you toss out there. It is almost as if we straights have no right to like Judy. Oh well, que sera sera.
Seriously though, I would not expect total agreement on anything I write, and to be honest I would not even want such a thing.
Oh, and the camerawork Welles and Toland used for Kane were actually inspired by the German Expressionist cinema of Weimer era Germany.
Crash is a terrible film and only won because it was the first film in history where the studio (Lionsgate) sent out DVD screeners over 100,000 of them to every single Academy and Screen Actors Guild member.
The fact that Deborah Kerr never won an Oscar is really unbelievable. Also, she
wasn’t even nominated for Hannah Jelkes, one of the best performances I have ever
seen. Someone mentioned BAFTA being more honest in the appraisal of acting performances and I agree. So many great and deserving films and performances have
not been recongized by the Hollwood establishment would consists of scraping, bowing and money to get the nomination and certainly for winning.
Trackbacks