biggest oscar snub

I dont know if this is the biggest because everyone knew julia was going to get it but Ellen Burstyn's performance in Requiem for a Dream was one of the best film performances ever.

Also snubbing Raging Bull for Ordinary People was bullshit

i don't think the oscars are really about quality performances and the like. it just seems like a lot of patting friends on the back to me.

Big Fish got robbed.

1983 - Al Pacino - Scarface.

Fucking Robbed.

Kubrick. His entire career was snubbed by the Academy, IMO.

Goodfellas for, ugh, Dances with Wolves

Chariots of Fire beating Raiders of the Lost Ark in 81

Rain Man beating Dangerous Liaisons in 88


Titanic beating L.A. Confidential in 97


A Beautiful Mind beating LOTR-FOTR in 01


Big Fish not being nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay is clown shoes.

I don't remember what year it was because I can't stand the Oscars, but when Gladiator won best picture and nothing else, inlcuding director, screenplay etc., it was a fucking joke.

titanic winning anything is a travesty.

as far as recent years are concerned, chicago beating both gangs of new york and the pianist for best picture is simply vexing.

i'm a little biased, but this year i think this guy should have been nominated:

While not the biggest snub of all time, Scarlett Johansen deserved to be nominated for Lost in Translation this year.

1941: How Green was my Valley wins over Citizen Kane.

Roberto Bengini (sp?) winning best actor for Life is Beautiful over Edward Norton for American History X. All the awards shows are just popularity contests, even the Oscars.

Rocky over Network I believe it was, already mentioned LA Confidential over Titantic in the Titantic post, I'll also second the Julia Roberts over Ellen Burstyn, Ellen Burstyn just period has never gotten enough accolades for her talent.

I don't agree completely, but that year, both Ian Holm for The Sweet Hereafter and the movie itself should have been at least nominated.

For my personal biggest screw job onf those nominated, it's easily Gwynth over Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth.

i was reading up in AWN now big studios push for their film to be picked rather then performance and all that other crap, it would not be surprising to find the same things happening in the live action movie world

i do agree that norton's performance in american history x was quite stunning. i also propose that the oscar for benini's performance was likely a sop by the academy to prove that not only american films win. however, i do think that objectively speaking, that is, popularity aside, that benini made a performance which outclasses norton's.

i have to disagree. while there was certainly the old, ooh he's playing a retard, vote, as someone that lived with an autistic brother for 23 years i can tell you that film is fucking fantastic. hoffman is perfect, really perfect, and the relationshi[ between him and cruise is amazing. no doubt dangerous liasons is good, but rain man is wonderful.

His performance was flawless, I simply think Liasons is a superior film. However, I think you're biased towards autistic films

But was Benini really acting or was he just clowning as he always does? Norton transformed himself.

surprisingly not, in fact if anything it's the other way. i've seen many over the years, and they are never anything like real, that's why rain man is so great, it really does capture perfectly both what autistic people are like (albeit being a savant, which is incredubly rare) but also the incredible difficulty of living with an autistic person. if i am biased, it's that i can recognise through experience the greatness in that film most people are unaware of because they haven't experienced it. i see it more as being able to truly understand what the film is about rather than simply being biased.
i guess there are 2 ways of looking at it. either the film is a failure on some level, because it can only communicate its message properly to people that have already exerienced something similar, or it is a triumph because for people that really understand the film, nothing could convey the emotions involved better.
i like to think it is the latter, as to me it's one of the most emotionally involving movies i've ever seen, that certainly is biased, hoofman and cruise's relationship is too similar to my own situation to pretend otherwise, but that doesn't stop it from being an amazing piece of cinema, beautifuly acted and directed, which carries an emotional weight that i don't think dangerous liasons does - to anyone.

this from the guy who doesn't think Animal House is funny

Sean Astin not getting nominated this year for "Return of the King."

Rain Man shouldn't have won because of this


The Cruiser!!!!

[Edited on Feb 05, 2004 by Scopitone]

Why are his hands so damp?

Could it because he's................ gay? [pinkie finger goes to corner of mouth]