Undeserved Oscars
 

One comes to mind with 1998's "Affliction." James Coburn won for Supporting Actor, and the role and performance were not very convincing to me. The real talent was Ed Harris in "The Truman Show," as his character was very God-like, yet paternal.

I always thought Tom Hanks had a very easy role in Forrest Gump and didn't deserve the Oscar. Not that he's not a great actor; that just wasn't a challenging role.

There's the whole "Denzel didn't deserve it for Training Day, but they had to give it to him because he was robbed when Pacino won it for Scent of a Woman in 1992 over Denzel in Malcolm X. Pacino didn't deserve it in 1992, but they had to give it to him because he was robbed in 1974 when he didn't win for Godfather II. Art Carney won Best Actor in 1994, and he just didn't deserve it period."

Some say Gladiator didn't deserve it in 2000, but I don't know what you'd pick in its place. Probably Traffic.

Titanic deserved to lose to any of the other 1997 nominees -- L.A. Confidential, Good Will Hunting, As Good as it Gets, or The Full Monty.

I'll go with you on last year's Oscars - Denzel Washington was acting in "Training Day." He is, in fact, an actor, and that is what he was paid to do. However, it was not an Oscar-worthy performance. Anyone could have played the part.

I didn't catch Denzel in 1992's "Malcolm X," but I did catch Pacino in "Scent of a Woman," and the whole speech scene he gave at the school in defense to the Charlie character was inspiring. I don't feel "Scent of a Woman" was a make-up Oscar.

On the other hand, if it were a make-up Oscar, I'd have to say it was for 1972's "The Godfather," not for 1974's "The Godfather, Part II." I felt that his performance in "The Godfather" was awesome - he starts off meek and sensitive, then he matures while in exile in Sicily, and returns to America a totally changed man. In "The Godfather, Part II," Pacino's performance is...icy. But his stare and his mannered, measured way of speaking wasn't as commanding as, say, Brando.

How aboot a future predicition. Martin Scorsese will win Best Director for Gangs of New York just because he was robbed the other times. He could have made Kangaroo Jack and been nominated and won just because the Academy doesnt want any more Academy bashers.

Paul Newman for "Road To Perdition?" C'mon! He was just acting, for cripes sake! And the Academy can't use the excuse that they want their last chance to honor him - he was honored with an Honorary Oscar in 1985, and awarded with a Best Actor Oscar in 1986 for "The Color of Money."

If they wanted to honor "Road to Perdition" at all, it should have been Jude Law (not that he was absolutely terrific, but he gave the best performance in the film).

Denzel didn't deserve it for Training Day, it was an OK movie with a good performance.
Babe winning visual effects award over Apollo 13.
Rocky.
Breavehart winning over Apollo 13.
Timothy Hutton for winning for Supporting Actor instead of Lead Actor for Ordinary People.
The Godfather winning over Cabaret.

Those are just a few.

The "Cabaret" over "The Godfather" always got to me. Out of respect to "Cabaret," I watched it one day and was totally disappointed in the whole thing!

I'm glad "The Godfather" won Best Picture in 1972, but I will always be stunned by the fact that Joel Grey ("Cabaret") won over Al Pacino and James Caan (both in "The Godfather") for Best Supporting Actor. I didn't see Eddie Albert's performance in "The Heartbreak Kid," and Robert Duvall's performance in "The Godfather" was okay, but I'd have been surprised to see him win over the others.

Beautiful Mind was so horribly written and executed and didnt deserve Best Picture.

I second that! Just plain BAD

Anna Paquin in <B>The Piano</B>. I found her performance grating and mediocre at best.

I'll third that. There is no way anyone can ever prove to me that Ron Howard's directing of A Beautiful Mind was superior to the work that Peter Jackson did with FOTR. Ron Howard's done some good movies, but this was one of his weaker ones.

Dances With Wolves for Best Picture

Denzel Washington for Best Actor (really upsets me, because I have notions that the Academy gave this to him for all the wrong reasons and I ain't talkin' about for his past work.)

Gladiator for Actor & Picture

Jack Lemmon for Best Actor in Save the Tiger. Plenty of other films he was much better in. He beat out Jack Nicholson (The Last Detail) Al Pacino (Serpico), and probably the best performance put on screen by Marlon Brando in Last Tango in Paris!!! :eek:

I could go on and on.

People who should have been nominated:

<b>Brian Cox in L.I.E.
Ian Holm in the Sweet Hereafter</b>
Jack Lemmon in Glengarry Glenn Ross
Brad Pitt in Snatch
Guy Pearce in Memento
Steve McQueen in Bullitt

<b>Jennifer Connelly in Requiem for A Dream
Liv Ullmann Scenes From A Marriage</b>
Nicole Kidman in Eyes Wide Shut
Grace Kelly in Rear Window
Isabella Rossellini in Blue Velvet

All these threads come down to is whining that the film or performance that you PERSONALLY liked got beat out by a film you PERSONALLY didn't like. For every person that bitches about an actor getting pased over in favor of another, I can find a person who feels that actor deserved the honor they received.

The Dances with Wolves one is one of my favorites because everybody loved Goodfellas. But to me and other people I know, Dances with Wolves was the film we liked better and we cheered it's winning.

The Oscars are all about personal opinions. It is one big opinion poll and it isn't mean to line up exactly with your choices or your best friend's choices. If a film or a performance you like wins, great, it makes you happy. But to ridicule a film or performance that you personally didn't care for but others loved seems like the same thinking that causes poor losers.

Either Almost Famous or Requiem for a Dream, two of the greater films in years. Oh wait a second, they weren't nominated. Too bad as a 160 minute popcorn movie won in it's place. Also in 2000, Julia "Big Mouth" Roberts winning for Erin Brockovich. Excuse me, Ellen Burstyn deserved it for Requiem for a Dream.

Braveheart for best picture in 1995 (I didn't think the film was all that special, better films were released that year).

If Titanic wasn't one of the highest grossing films of all time, it would have never won the Oscar. That Oscar should've went to L.A. Confidential (or Good Will Hunting). Another travesty that year was when Titanic won best visual effects. I'm sorry, but Starship Troopers should have had that award that night. Starship Troopers is still one of the few movies with a near-perfect example on how to blend live action with CGI. Come to think about it, Titanic deserved zero awards that year.

A Beautiful Mind for best picture and director. Many other films deserved it than A Beautiful Mind (2001 was a great year for movies) and Peter Jackson should've won for LOTR: FOTR. But LOTR: FOTR did not deserve best visual effects. The effects looked too "computer-animated" too me (I also had the same problem with the first Harry Potter film). That award belonged to Pearl Harbor (just for the attack sequence which imo blew away any visual effect in LOTR: FOTR even if the film was crap) or A.I..

Black Hawk Down for best editing. Memento should have had that.

Shakespeare in Love winning over every other best picture nominee that year.

You'll Be In My Heart winning over Blame Canada. :)

And the most obvious one:
Dances with Wolves over Goodfellas.

And that's just a few. There are a lot of undeserved Oscars out there.

Perfect example of how this is all opinion based. There is no set right or wrong view on a film. I loved A Beautiful Mind and was glad it won. I don't need to convince you of anything in regards to Ron Howard's directing versus Peter Jackson. You liked FOTR, I thought it blew. Vice versa for A Beautiful Mind. Who is to say who's opinion is the right one?

That's what is great about these type threads - pretending we could decide on the winners! Hey, there are people who do just that - decide winners. Why couldn't we?

The only thing I would want to see here, though, are reasons for people's opinions (for the most part, we do). Unfortunately, we don't get to hear people's real reasons for some of the winners we see year after year.

What is your problem?

If you do not want to take part in the thread, and all you have is some sort of smarmy remark (like your **** doesn't stink) then I would kindly ask you to leave it to yourself. No one wants to come into a thread and share their opinions when they have people like you to put them down (although I am sure you are going to let us know that you "really were not."

All this thread is, is opinions. Do you expect more? You should have never clicked on the link.

And I am sorry to the mods, if you find my comments offensive BUT his comments are just wrong and bring down the hopefulness of a "crap" less thread. And it just brings down my day as well.

Now I must go out to dinner with the girlfriend to bring my hopes back up.

WTF? I have no problem at all with people giving their opinions that one movie was better than another. What I do have a problem with is stuff like this:

"Beautiful Mind was so horribly written and executed and didnt deserve Best Picture."

That is not stated as opinion by any stretch of the imagination. That is stated as fact. I have no problem with people voicing their thoughts on what was a better film in their opinion. I do have a problem with people whining about their films being so great and the ones that beat them so obviously sucked and everybody must be stupid if they don't agree.

If that brought "down your day," too bad.

I don't know i thought Moulin Rouge should have won last year. And Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon should have won in 2000. I still need to see 4 or the 5 nominees this year before i have an opinion about best pic. I've only seen Gangs of New York.
I also thought that Sean Penn should have won best Oscar last year(even if he's a douche). He did a great job in I AM Sam.
And i have to agree with those who said Peter Jackson should have won Best Director. Don't get me wrong I loved Beautiful Mind, but i think Jackson proved more with LOTR than Howard did with Beautiful Mind. Both great movies though.

At least there is one other person out there that shares this opinion with me. If anyone from "Road to Perdition" was going to get nominated for an award it should have been Jude Law. The performances were good all around, but his stood out from the rest.

Quote:

Denzel Washington for Best Actor (really upsets me, because I have notions that the Academy gave this to him for all the wrong reasons and I ain't talkin' about for his past work.)
--------------------------------

Hummmm.....very interesting, because Denzel has been shafted twice IMO. First for Malcolm X and second for The Hurricane. There is absolutely no way Kevin Spacey's performance in American Beauty was better than Denzel's in The Hurricane. I believe Kevon Spacey's best acting was acting like he deserved to win the Oscar over Denzel during his acceptance speech.

Just out of curiosity, do you really not get that that statement about A Beautiful Mind is an opinion? That's something I've always found puzzling about these faceless conversations on the internet. Did you really need to have that phrase preceded by "I think" or one of those lazy "IMHO" abbreviations to know? I'm just wondering because I see this kind of bickering a lot, of course, especially when it comes to people sharing reactions to popular entertainment. Thanks.

To respond to the topic then, I think A Beautiful Mind was probably the most pedestrian Ron Howard movie in a long time, and that The Fellowship of the Ring was superior in every aspect, from storytelling to craftsmanship. But I'm not surprised that the latter lost, as it seems every year that the voting community is swayed by an overarching sentiment or two, fueled by trade ads and entertainment coverage, and that many of the awards are distributed on that basis. Last year seemed to be the year that many felt Ron Howard "finally deserved" (whatever that means) an Oscar, so he won. Oh, and black people should win because they're black, not because Denzel Washington and Halle Berry gave the strongest performances of the year, which many would feel is the case. Hell, it's as much fun to complain about the Oscars as it is to get excited by them.

And I think that neither should have won, because Russell Crowe gave the best performance of the year in The Insider. I couldn't stand The Hurricane and thought American Beauty was okay, but I keep returning to The Insider for another viewing, and I'm always enthralled by the acting in that film. Even Pacino, who's gone over the top more often than not in every film, gives his best performance since Donnie Brasco.

We're in agreement that Kevin Spacey did not deserve to win.

Whoopie Goldberg winning for Ghost has always bugged me. Then again, I'm not a big fan of Whoopie. still, her performance wasn't that great, IMO.