March 23, 2019 at 2:36 pm #1202827184
Fact is dreamworks spent more than Miramax in TRADES only. But Miramax didn’t just spend big in trades! Miramax had two or three page ads in magazines and newspapers when that still was done! And not just Arts sections either!! Miramax would buy an ad in the main news sections! So you would have your double truck ads and more!! It was total spending spree and Miramax did buy it!
Saving private Ryan was robbed brutally and SIL only exists popularly today because it’s in scary movie 1!
I didn’t agree with dreamworks insane decision to say “vote spr-support veterans” insurance campaign. It was dumb. They should have kept relentlessly on the stomach churning brutality and violence and realism. But then they heard academy voters weren’t watching the screener to avoid reliving the experience so felt they had to switch to support the veterans.
SIl was an absurd and ridiculous win that reflected spending and a little squeemishness
Not to mention SIL had the Weinsteins. Until Harvey was finally exposed publicly, no one else was as good at playing the Academy — so much that Miramax continued to rack up Best Pictures even after the Weinsteins left, right up till Disney sold it. (They got a couple in at TWC too.) I agree that SPR was robbed.March 23, 2019 at 2:50 pm #1202827197
Really? I think the ugly uproar over Gweneths win borders on mania that isn’t justified at all. She is by far not the worst best actress or Oscar ever. You need to separate your hostile feelings for Gwyneth personally versus judging her performance on its own value. She had just done Emma before Shakespeare in Love which was also warmly received at the time just like her performance in Shakespeare. At the time the majority thought the Oscars chose the right actress. I still do. Cate Blanchett was good in Elizabeth but the movie is a mess. That definitely caused her loss.
As far as worst Oscars here are a few really poor wins.
Grace Kelly in Country Girl.
Wooden performance in a role she is horribly miscast in. Shouldn’t have been nominated at all.
Elizabeth Taylor for Butterfield 8.
Bad Oscar given for sentimental reasons not performance or ghastly movie. Shirley MacLaine was robbed for her great work in the Apartment.
Judy Holiday for beating out superb once in a lifetime performance by Bette Davis and Gloria Swanson.
Judy is a lovely comedic actress but her performance was in a light comedy not at all in the same strata as the two above.
That’s three much worst Oscars than Gwyneth Paltrow.March 23, 2019 at 4:46 pm #1202827258
shakespeare in love deserved every award it got! great story, great acting, great everything! saving private ryan was a bunch of gory albeit realistic scenes of war carnage, but the story was kinda dumb,March 23, 2019 at 5:06 pm #1202827276
SIL is so good, one of my favorite screenplays ever. Saving Private Ryan had a good opening scene and that’s it.March 23, 2019 at 5:54 pm #1202827286
I do not think that Gwyneth deserved the Oscar and her win was part of the sweep for Shakespeare In Love. My vote would have been for Fernanda Montenegro.March 25, 2019 at 8:03 am #1202828666
I would have voted for Fernanda Montenegro and my whole Best Picture line-up would be totally different from the five that was nominated except for Thin Red Line and possibly Shakespeare in Love. The problem I had with Saving Private Ryan was that the characters were pretty one-note and fit into their stereotypes and I didn’t like the premise. I also thought apart from the battle scenes, which obviously is a huge part of the movie, the rest of it didn’t reach those heights. Some parts of the last battle with that coward-like character was so…Spielberg and pretty offensive to those men who served in that position myself. As someone said, it was a typical Spielberg experience. I like his latter work way more than his work here.
Even though I enjoyed The Thin Red Line, I have to laugh at non-critic Bill Maher’s disdain for movie critics and THAT movie. When he was talking about the Oscar contenders he bashed The Thin Red Line and said nothing happens. Just shots of scenery and parrots and then went “Polly, want a movie?”
That’s when I sort of knew Maher didn’t share my taste in film, but it’s some times nice to hear someone be mean to movies critics loved. He did the same thing to Requiem for a Dream but he also put way too much stock in the importance of the film Traffic in comparison and said how it should influence national drug policy, and one woman on the panel finally screamed out “it’s just a movie!” To be fair though, maybe the movie was overstated, but Maher is right about drug policy needing revisement, especially in the late 90s-early 2000s and now.
I think Paltrow’s win gets a lot of hate because it’s Paltrow, she beat Blanchett, AND SIL’s wins are mostly attributed to Weinstein and Miramax’s campaigning rather than the film’s merits. It gets the whole perception of everything about it being undeserved. Paltrow’s whole push for Oscar and win probably reminded too many people of studios pushing for a hot young thing and giving her an undeserved or too early award just to add to her resume for marketing purposes. Funny how less people minded that when it comes to some other and more recent Best Actress winners who I think gave lesser performances than Paltrow did in SIL, but they’re way more likeable than Paltrow so….March 25, 2019 at 9:04 am #1202828725
I don’t hate Paltrow’s win because she beat the superior Blanchett, especially when the latter went on to rack 6 more nominations and 2 wins, including a Best Actress performance that will go down amongst the greatest. Cate is a much more acclaimed and respected actress than Gwyneth ever will. The fact that she’s currently fighting for a THIRD Oscar and double digits noms while Gwyneth never even came close to a sophomore nom is very telling. I dislike Gwyneth’s win because to me her performance was the weakest, period. Idc about how “cute”, “charming” or vaguely compelling as a Disney Princess she was, I literally cannot think of a weaker performance. No matter which year, she still would have been underserving for this particular performance, Weinstein or not. Most of the other reviled BA wins have their moments (Berry crying at the hospital when her kid died, Lawrence upstaging Robert de Niro, Stone and that audition scene etc) but Paltrow did nothing.
And I never really cared about her being unlikable. I actually find her cringy attitude and statements quite amusing.March 25, 2019 at 9:35 am #1202828756
How come nobody talks about about Emily Watson’s performance in Hilary and Jackie? I thought she was outstanding and the film itself was really compelling.March 25, 2019 at 6:28 pm #1202829363
How come nobody talks about about Emily Watson’s performance in Hilary and Jackie? I thought she was outstanding and the film itself was really compelling.
She was great. And her scenes with Griffiths make the movie a must see! But unfortunately barely anyone saw it in 98/99 and even less people view it today! The movie is one of those that has just vanished. Oscar voters nominated Watson for Brraking the waves and wanted to see her repeat that level again and she was close! And they nominated Griffiths too deservedly!March 25, 2019 at 8:58 pm #1202829473
Never seen Saving Private Ryan and I’m not really interested in doing so.
Shakespeare is a good movie- it’s not amazing but I enjoyed it.March 25, 2019 at 9:31 pm #1202829507
If you have seen a war movie post saving private Ryan you have seen its influence
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.