Comments on: Entertainment Weekly Wants to “Recall The Gold” from Undeserving Oscar Winners

By: Bormomify

Bormomify — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:00:30 +0000

1
2

By: Keenan

Keenan — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 09:52:02 +0000

The Thin Red Line over Saving Private Ryan without question. In fact that year is a good example, Shakespeare in Love I don’t think was even nomination worthy and IMO was the worst to get nominated that year, all the others are much better films.

Forrest Gump over Pulp Fiction is pretty bad but not unexpected.

I also find it amusing that Citizen Kane, No. 1 on the AFI top 100 American films of all time, didn’t win best picture.

Oh and Crash winning Best Picture… I really don’t know what to say.

By: Keenan

Keenan — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 09:46:21 +0000

The Thin Red Line over Saving Private Ryan without question. In fact that year is a good example, Shakespeare in Love I don’t think is even nomination worthy and IMO was the worst to get nominated that year, all the others are much better films.

Forrest Gump over Pulp Fiction is pretty bad but not unexpected.

I also find it amusing that Citizen Kane, No. 1 on the AFI top 100 American films of all time, didn’t win best picture.

By: Deven Science

Deven Science — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:45:43 +0000

To me, Life Is Beautiful was a better movie that year than even Saving Private Ryan. R.B. deserved the Best Actor that he got, and this movie could’ve had the top spot. Perfect casting, funny when you needed relief, sad when it was all said and done.

By: Ashley

Ashley — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:22:47 +0000

I second Liz on Crash. The 2005-06 race made me realize the Oscars really are a popularity contest more than anything else. That year, Brokeback Mountain was clearly the best film, but I would have accepted Good Night and Good Luck, Capote, or even Munich as a winner. It made no sense that they picked Crash just because it was about Los Angeles and because half the Academy are friends with that massive ensemble cast. It was a *terrible* movie!

By: Ryan M.

Ryan M. — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:14:34 +0000

Seconding Chris B…I can’t even watch Shakespeare in Love…now where is our Saving Private Ryan BD (it was shot in HD…why can’t we haz?)

By: Chris B

Chris B — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 03:42:56 +0000

‘Saving Private Ryan’ should have won that year hands down. I enjoyed ‘Shakespeare in Love’ but it wasn’t oscar worthy.

By: Ian

Ian — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 03:04:03 +0000

Well the other side of the story is that then these films can’t be the unappreciated “too good for an Oscar status” and be the inexplicably great films that some claim them to be aside from if they really are or not? You know ’cause it’s objective … right?

By: Liz

Liz — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 02:24:04 +0000

Crash over everything else that year.

By: Joel

Joel — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:49:24 +0000

There’s too many to count, because it’s clear that Oscars are chosen for a variety of reasons besides artistic merit. I’d say for best picture:

1976: ‘Rocky’ over ‘Taxi Driver’, ‘Network’, ‘All the President’s Men’ (three of my favorite movies).

1997: ‘Titanic’ over ‘L.A. Confidential’

1980: The obvious one–‘Ordinary People’ over ‘Raging Bull’ and ‘Elephant Man’.

1993: ‘Schindler’s List’ over ‘The Fugitive’–WTFFFFFF??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also 1930-31: Cineastes can agree with me in saying that ‘Skippy’ was clearly a more accomplished film than ‘Cimarron’.

By: Ian

Ian — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:10:40 +0000

Well since it’s a plurality it seems that often many are hardly that deserving.