Michael Keaton - Best Actor for 'Birdman or: The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance
Eddie Redmayne was good at portraying a man who had ALS... but that's about it. Keaton was an absolute tour-de-force in 'Birdman.' A performance I could never imagine in my wildest dreams could've been possible from Keaton.
Can't argue with this one, but the Academy does love to vote prestige. It was like Sean Penn winning for
Milk over Mickey Rourke in
The Wrestler - a tragic historical figure versus a down-on-his-luck loser, so it's no surprise that the Academy favoured the former in both cases. That's a good pick for a snub right there and I wonder how many people look back now and think Penn truly deserved it over Rourke.
'The Revenant' - Best Picture 2016
Don't get me wrong, I love Spotlight. It's one of those rare 100% story driven films that don't come around all that often, yet this one being grounded in such harsh reality with the subject material It's based on, makes it seem all the more engaging. It's an answered cry for help in the form of a very important film, for all victims of sexual abuse. But I'd being lying to myself If I didn't say 'The Revenant' wasn't the absolute Best Film from that year. (Sorry 'Mad Max: Fury Road' F**k Boys.)
I'd be lying if I said it was.
'The Pianist' - Best Picture 2003
Roman Polanski's Heartbreaking Film loosing to 'Chicago' was absolutely criminal. This was the Academy's chance to finally honor Polanski for his years of hard work, and the delivery of one of his Best Films, If not his best. Instead, the Academy went with the Mainstream Crowd Pleasing Musical 'Chicago.' This is a quintessential example of the Academy's Ugly Love for Musicals, and how that can come in the way of much better films being screwed over in favor of bias.
What really makes the love ugly is when they reward mediocre musicals but not so much the great ones e.g.
Singin' in the Rain. If that was a Best Picture winner I'd get it, but stuff like
Oliver! or
Chicago winning...not so much.
'Silence' - Snubbed Nom for Best Picture, Best Actor, and Best Director 2017
You could make the argument that Universal botched up the awards seasons campaign,
and that's why 'Silence' got nominated for barley anything. (Much like they did with 'Steve Jobs' the year before, although this film was much better.) But history has proven other films can sneak in without ANY Awards Campaign and get a BP Nom. I think It's the Academy's Typical Dislike for Scorsese. And as for Garfield, I'm happy they at least recognized Garfield in a year that was a clear homerun for the talented young actor. But I don't care how good he was in 'Hacksaw Ridge,' he was nominated for the wrong thing and the lesser of his work that year. He was absolutely staggering in 'Silence.'
I'm not surprised.
Silence is a lengthy and demanding film that is technically simplistic and thematically complex so it's a divisive film by design - that, and it's a complete stylistic departure for Scorsese when you compare it to the films of his that do get lots of nominations/wins.
Hugo got eleven noms and five wins (including Picture/Director), and it's about as far removed from
Silence as any film in Scorsese's filmography can get - meanwhile,
Silence only got a nomination for cinematography (and it unsurprisingly lost to
La La Land because the Academy loves whizz-bang flourishes more than functional stillness - just look at Lubezki winning three times in a row). It might have been better than most of the actual BP noms, but them's the breaks. Garfield is tolerable more than anything - his accent did nothing for me, but I suppose he was better in this than in
Hacksaw Ridge (which is the kind of film that requires the creation of a word that's the opposite of snub).
'Mulholland Drive' - Best Director, and Snubbed Nom for Best Picture 2002
Academy History has proven they respect Lynch enough to give him a Best Director nod when they think he's deserved it, considering he IS one of the Greatest Directors working today. But a Director Nom is usually as far as they'd like to go with Lynch, his films are usually too artsy for the Academy. They'd like to go with what they're is familiar and typical. For instance; Generic Dramas, Ala; 'A Beautiful Mind, Ordinary People, Platoon.' I personally believe 'Mulholland Drive' was the chance to really give Lynch his due for his Best Film to date. If they weren't going to nominated it for Best Picture, they could AT LEAST hand Lynch his WAY Overdue Academy Award for Best Director... right? Also, It's a Film about Hollywood. HOW COULD THEY HAVE PASSED THAT UP?!
The Academy only likes Hollywood movies if they treat Hollywood nicely, which
Mulholland Drive emphatically does not do. Besides, it's worth remembering that Best Director noms are decided by the directors who are in the Academy but the winners are voted on by the Academy as a whole - the directors can try to pick directors that the rest of the Academy would otherwise disregard. Looking at the other nominees from that year, it's not too surprising that Howard got picked seeing as he's the "boring" choice - Scott won the year before, Jackson's win could be put off for another two years, and Altman was also too much of a maverick to stand a legit chance of winning.
Babel - Best Picture, Best Director, Best Film Editing, and Best Original Screenplay 2007
Let's Face it; 'The Departed' was the flat attempt to finally give Scorsese his long awaited due, but 'The Departed' was not the film to give him that honor. It was already too late for one of the World's Finest Filmmakers. You see, when Martin Scorsese was snubbed for 'Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, The Last Temptation of Christ, and Goodfellas.' He was a Young Filmmaker, blasting his way through The Film Industry and solidifying himself as one of Hollywood's Finest. But the only people who didn't see anything in him, was the Academy. They felt It was necessary to put more Popular Figure Heads, Ala; John G. Avildsen, Barry Levinson, Robert Redford, and Kevin Costner, over the Aforementioned Scorsese. Even in his later years such as his Best Director Nom for 'The Aviator,' he was snubbed. Head Back to 2006-2007, Scorsese had become Legend, It didn't matter If he had an Oscar or not. He was an old relic who continued to put out Quality Films year after year, and he then made 'The Departed' and made everyone in the Academy Realize; "OH SH*T WE F**KED UP, has Scrosese gotten his due yet? He hasn't? WELL TIME TO HAND HIM THAT!" Meanwhile, another young filmmaker was making a name for himself in the Film Industry through his enormous talent, and he went by the same of; Alejandro González Ińárritu. In the end, because of Academy Hollywood Politics, another brash, deserving filmmaker was snubbed, and so was his film, which transcended the way we communicate. It would've been an actual FIRST where the Academy picked the ACTUAL progressive winner instead of a sentimental one.
I can't feel bad about this one when Inarritu went on to win back-to-back directing Oscars anyway (and, while I'll begrudge him a win for
Birdman even if he wasn't my first preference, there is no way he deserved to win over George Miller). I think Scorsese and
The Departed winning might well have been because there weren't any other major standouts and/or they were trying to mix it up (such as not giving Eastwood a third Director/Picture win so soon after
Million Dollar Baby or giving it to another
Crash-like film like
Babel), so they just went f*ck it and gave him the sympathy vote for what I'd contend is his weakest film (but I'm in the minority on that one).
'The Dark Knight' - Snubbed Nom for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay 2009
It should've swept everything, It's should've. But instead, 'Slumdog Millionaire' Won the Best Picture Award over Nolan's Game Changing Masterpiece. Granted, I'm very much aware It was Slumdog Millionaire's Year, I get that. But the fact that they didn't even nominated it, baffles me. It's another pure example of Academy Bias; "WE DON'T LIKE SUPERHERO MOVIES, NOT MATTER HOW GOOD." And you know what? I'm happy The Dark Knight was snubbed. It'll live in infamy regardless of how many awards it wins, and in hindsight, what we've learned from all of this; Awards really don't f**king matter, only the legacy of the films do.
Surprised you didn't bring up
Interstellar.
Reply to Topic
