- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The greatest Oscar snub of all-time
Posted on 3/20/25 at 9:51 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 3/20/25 at 9:51 pm to RollTide1987
How Green was my Valley over Citizen Kane
Charlie Chaplin, Alfred Hitchcock, and Stanley Kubrick never winning one.
SIL over SPR
Pam Grier not getting any nomination for Jackie Brown
Cher winning for Moonstruck over Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction
Out of Africa winning over The Color Purple
Dances with Wolves over Goodfellas
Nicholson in the very average "as good as it gets" over Robert Duvall as The Apostle (Duvall's best performance IMO)
Charlie Chaplin, Alfred Hitchcock, and Stanley Kubrick never winning one.
SIL over SPR
Pam Grier not getting any nomination for Jackie Brown
Cher winning for Moonstruck over Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction
Out of Africa winning over The Color Purple
Dances with Wolves over Goodfellas
Nicholson in the very average "as good as it gets" over Robert Duvall as The Apostle (Duvall's best performance IMO)
1
Posted on 3/20/25 at 10:44 pm to Lakeboy7
Posted on 3/21/25 at 7:13 am to SCLSUMuddogs
Not really. It’s better than Pulp Fiction & appeals to a far broader audience. Shawshank has a good argument though.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 8:35 am to alajones
quote:
It’s a common trope because it’s true. Weinstein openly campaigned for the movie and Spielberg refused to.
they always campaigned for awards. The trope is blaming that. If it was just because of the campaign then why was SIL on most critics top 10 list? Those come out well before the nominations are announced. But I think you actually hit on the biggest reason…. quote:
SPR also suffered from the Academy’s habit of not choosing Blockbusters two years in a row. Titanic’s insanity the year earlier pretty much sealed SPRs loss of Best Picture before it was even released.
SPR was also released in the summer so it wasn’t as “fresh”. But a blockbuster based on an historical event 2 years in a row, really there was a string of them, The English Patient is centered around WWII. And Braveheart another based (loosely, very loosely
) on history and of course Schindler’s List and maybe some voters just wanted to vote for something else. quote:
Is it the Biggest Snub ever? That’s subjective, but there’s a reason it always comes up and is on multiple lists.
Most of it would argue is because of what SPR is about i saw a comment on this topic one time on a TCM page and someone said it was an insult to the veterans on DDay and WWII. Come on it’s just a movie and a silly award. The AFI 10th anniversary top 100 had SPR 71, SIL not ranked. SPR will always be a more well regarded movie even without the Best Picture Oscar.
This post was edited on 3/21/25 at 1:16 pm
Posted on 3/21/25 at 3:52 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:I mean, you can chuckle, but I did present evidence. I don’t think the campaign would have really started until after the lists were released.
they always campaigned for awards
quote:
SPR was also released in the summer so it wasn’t as “fresh”. But a blockbuster based on an historical event 2 years in a row, really there was a string of them, The English Patient is centered around WWII. And Braveheart another based (loosely, very loosely ) on history and of course Schindler’s List and maybe some voters just wanted to vote for something else.
I’m really not sure what point you’re making here. The only movie that list that can compare to Titanic and SPR is Braveheart.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 4:01 pm to alajones
Pretty obvious one for me but still pissed about fricking Titanic beating out LA Confidential! The Spanish Prisoner came out that year too.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 4:33 pm to RollTide1987
The OSCARS are littered with things like this. Here are the nominees for the Best Score from 1980
Tess – Philippe Sarde
Fame – Michael Gore
Altered States – John Corigliano
The Elephant Man – John Morris
The Empire Strikes Back – John Williams
What won for BEST SCORE?
Fame. There are at least 2 masterpieces on that list and neither is the SCORE to FAME.
The Academy gets it dead wrong sometimes. In this case I think people liked the songs and ASSUMED they were done by Gore. Yes, even the Academy doesn't understand how music works in film. That, and it is often said that members for on the categories they know and care about then give the ballots to their assistants, secretaries and family members to vote on the rest.
I also think that at times there is the split vote scenario. You might have two or three nominees that are truly deserving and they split the vote between them (especially if one person is nominated twice as has happened for Williams on a few occasions). This can allow for a distant third or fourth to eek out the win. Remember, it's just the nominee with the most votes, no majority is needed. So with 5 nominees, you could have a winner with 21% of the vote. (And with 10 nominees, well...)
Tess – Philippe Sarde
Fame – Michael Gore
Altered States – John Corigliano
The Elephant Man – John Morris
The Empire Strikes Back – John Williams
What won for BEST SCORE?
Fame. There are at least 2 masterpieces on that list and neither is the SCORE to FAME.
The Academy gets it dead wrong sometimes. In this case I think people liked the songs and ASSUMED they were done by Gore. Yes, even the Academy doesn't understand how music works in film. That, and it is often said that members for on the categories they know and care about then give the ballots to their assistants, secretaries and family members to vote on the rest.
I also think that at times there is the split vote scenario. You might have two or three nominees that are truly deserving and they split the vote between them (especially if one person is nominated twice as has happened for Williams on a few occasions). This can allow for a distant third or fourth to eek out the win. Remember, it's just the nominee with the most votes, no majority is needed. So with 5 nominees, you could have a winner with 21% of the vote. (And with 10 nominees, well...)
Posted on 3/21/25 at 5:41 pm to alajones
quote:
I mean, you can chuckle, but I did present evidenc
You stating something as fact is not presenting evidence
I’m just saying they always campaigned for awards. quote:
I don’t think the campaign would have really started until after the lists were released.
Critics year end lists typically come out in mid/late December early January the Oscar nominees are announced late Jan I think, but reviews are when the movie was released and “campaigning” does not affect that.
quote:
I’m really not sure what point you’re making here.
Just that there was a run of BP winners the 4 of the 5 years before that were longish epics serious epics Schindler’s List/Bravehart//Titanic based on historic events and the English Patient set during WWII and maybe some want to vote in another direction
or maybe The Thin Red Line “split” the vote 
Posted on 3/21/25 at 8:06 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:Literally on the same page a few posts down.
You stating something as fact is not presenting evidence
This post was edited on 3/21/25 at 8:09 pm
Posted on 3/21/25 at 8:23 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
The greatest Oscar snub of all-time
Morgan Freeman for Driving Miss Daisy
This post was edited on 3/21/25 at 8:25 pm
Posted on 3/21/25 at 8:50 pm to alajones
quote:
No, I’m not going to campaign for my movie. I’ll do promotions for my movie, but I’m not going to try and charm people and send them things so they vote for my movie.’
Sorry, everyone else in the goddamn world calls promoting your movie and yourself during the awards season "campaigning." Spielberg refusing to name it such is not evidence of him refusing to campaign.
And I would think it obvious that his campaign as talent would look different than the campaigning of a studio head.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:23 pm to Jay Are
This video lays out how Shakespeare in Love won:
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:31 pm to Jay Are
Dumbass of the day
Posted on 3/22/25 at 6:26 am to SCLSUMuddogs
quote:
Forest Gump winning over Pulp Fiction and The Shawshank Redemption was dumb
Sorry but like it or not, Forest Gump was a amazing movie. And more worthy than Pulp Fiction. And at the time, more deserving than Shawshank. Shawshank grew as the years have gone by.
Hanks can eat a bag of dicks as far as I am concerned but that was a amazing movie
Posted on 3/22/25 at 7:13 pm to ATCTx
quote:
Nicholson in the very average "as good as it gets"
I finally sat and watched this whole movie a little while back and it was no better or different than a random Lifetime or Hallmark movie. I have no idea why this movie was a thing that year but that's always the Oscars
Posted on 3/22/25 at 7:41 pm to pevetohead
quote:
Dumbass of the day
Because I understand what campaigning means? And that most awards season campaigning does not look like what Weinstein was doing?
Posted on 3/22/25 at 8:36 pm to Jay Are
People rightfully complain about Kilmer not getting Best Supporting Actor for Tombstone but he also was robbed of a Best Actor nomination for The Doors. The movie has a lot of flaws but Kilmer was dead on as Jim Morrison and did all his own singing in the movie as well.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News