Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

What is the biggest shock in Oscar history?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-01-2013, 09:27
Muttley76
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: I wear a Stetson now...
Posts: 89,450
Sean Connery's one of the most famous recipients on that basis. I don't necessarily think his performance in The Untouchables was any worse than his fellow nominees, but the general feeling is that he got it precisely because of the 'Old Guard' need to recognise him.
Don't agree with that, he received critical acclaim for his role in the Untouchables and was a throughly deserving winner, imho.
Muttley76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 12-01-2013, 09:30
Bluray
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 647
Don't agree with that, he received critical acclaim for his role in the Untouchables and was a throughly deserving winner, imho.
Yeah, I totally agree - that was a deserved win.
Bluray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 09:43
gashead
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bristol
Posts: 6,997
Don't agree with that, he received critical acclaim for his role in the Untouchables and was a throughly deserving winner, imho.
Yeah, I totally agree - that was a deserved win.
Yes, it was good performance, but whether or not it's 'better' than Albert Brooks' or Denzel Washington's is, as always, a matter of personal opinion. I recall at the time that many critics/ journos etc felt that it was Connery's 'legacy' that probably tipped the balance in his favour.
gashead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 09:44
Bluray
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 647
Yes, it was good performance, but whether or not it's 'better' than Albert Brooks' or Denzel Washington's is, as always, a matter of personal opinion. I recall at the time that many critics/ journos etc felt that it was Connery's 'legacy' that probably tipped the balance in his favour.
And critics and journos are always right
Bluray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 09:47
gashead
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bristol
Posts: 6,997
And critics and journos are always right
Well, I don't know about you, but Sky, BBC etc didn't ask me my opinion at the time so I can't comment on what us 'experts' think.
gashead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 10:09
Starry Eyed
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Kent
Posts: 1,508
Leonardo DiCaprio getting snubbed year in, year out. It's like the powers that be don't understand he has totally transformed from his Titanic teeny bopper days and is every bit as good as Daniel Day Lewis, who they have some weird raging hard-on for. It was especially bad when DiCaprio wasn't recognised for either Blood Diamond or Shutter Island, in which he's given the best performances of his career thus far imho.
Starry Eyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 10:17
Muttley76
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: I wear a Stetson now...
Posts: 89,450
Leonardo DiCaprio getting snubbed year in, year out.
Since when does getting nominated three times equate to being snubbed? He was recognised for Blood Diamond, by being nominated for it in the first place, for example. Being snubbed means you don't make the short list at all.

There is plenty of time for him to win yet, his still a relative youngster.

BTW, Forest Whitkers performance in The Last King of Scotland is one of the single most remarkable acting performances I have ever seen, and there is no way DiCaprio deserved to beat him that year, even though he was very good in Blood Diamond.
Muttley76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 12:17
mousy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 913
Gwynneth Paltrow winning over Cate Blanchett

in fact, Gwynneth Paltrow even being nominated

dreadful performance...if that wasn't a fix, nothing was
mousy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 12:22
dmuk
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,924
No nomination for Superman 4 - The Quest for Peace.

Once again, the industry turns it's nose up at a superhero movie.
dmuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 12:30
Wulfster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,268
No nomination for Superman 4 - The Quest for Peace.

Once again, the industry turns it's nose up at a superhero movie.
LOL!!

I must admit that I have never walked out of a cinema screening because of the lack of quality (upset stomach and bomb alert ... yes), but THAT was the film that I come closest to doing it!
Wulfster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 12:39
PythonFang
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 280
It was more disappointing than surprising, and it certainly was not shocking. For Hollywood to even recognise a film of such content was a step forward, but for it to win was just too much as far as they were concerned.

Crash was one of those awful films that likes to think it's dealing with political and social problems without actually scratching the surface or really offending anyone. Hollywood loves that shit. It was an acceptable substitute in an otherwise weak year in their eyes.
To add, I remember reading somewhere that the logic behind voting for the awful Crash over Brokeback Mountain was that by voting for a film that deals with racial issues the Academy felt they could tick the progression box without supporting a film that shows cowboys having anal sex. Nevermind the fact that Brokeback Mountain was the best film that year by some distance (at least in my opinion ).

And when I think about it this win's not even particularly shocking given how much America loves her, but Sandra Bullock beating both Gabourey Sidibe and Carey Mulligan a few years ago was truly terrible.
PythonFang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 14:51
Dizzle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 389
With all due respect, it most certainly was shocking, every one but every one expected it to win, it was a red hot favourite. In my life time no films failure to win Best Picture has caused more of a stir than this one. There was even the notorious full page ad taken out in Variety magazine in relation to this issue, which is certianly the only time anything like that ever happened.
You would only find it shocking if you expect the Oscars to be like every other award ceremony out there. With a little background knowledge of how the Academy work, there is no way you would find it as shocking.

To add, I remember reading somewhere that the logic behind voting for the awful Crash over Brokeback Mountain was that by voting for a film that deals with racial issues the Academy felt they could tick the progression box without supporting a film that shows cowboys having anal sex. Nevermind the fact that Brokeback Mountain was the best film that year by some distance (at least in my opinion )

And when I think about it this win's not even particularly shocking given how much America loves her, but Sandra Bullock beating both Gabourey Sidibe and Carey Mulligan a few years ago was truly terrible..
Exactly. It's all Academy politics.

Even Sandra Bullock's win had a feel of "she's paid her dues over the years, let's give her best actress as a reward." All political, she wasn't even nominated for the BAFTA.

Leonardo DiCaprio getting snubbed year in, year out. It's like the powers that be don't understand he has totally transformed from his Titanic teeny bopper days and is every bit as good as Daniel Day Lewis, who they have some weird raging hard-on for. It was especially bad when DiCaprio wasn't recognised for either Blood Diamond or Shutter Island, in which he's given the best performances of his career thus far imho.
I've never understood why people are so insistent that DiCaprio deserves an Academy Award. I'm sure he will win best actor one day, but he's never been close to an Oscar winning performance so far in his career in my view. I think the fact that he seems so desperate for one is harming his immediate chances. And the Daniel Day Lewis comparison is just plain laughable.
Dizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 14:54
little-monster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 14,662
Gwynneth Paltrow winning over Cate Blanchett

in fact, Gwynneth Paltrow even being nominated

dreadful performance...if that wasn't a fix, nothing was
I liked Gwyn's performance but i agree, Cate should of walked away with it. Although to be fair, I loved Cate's performance as Katherine Hepburn in Aviator which she did win the oscar for.
little-monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 15:22
stripedcat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,200
Grace Kelly beating Judy Garland for Best actress. Was a huge huge shock in the day and something still discussed about to this day. If you have seen Judy in A Star Is Born, you will see why she deserved it.

I agree about Kate Winslet. Her performance in The Reader was crap and perhaps the only performance of her career I have never liked. She should of won for Titanic, but was beaten by the forgettable performance of Helen Hunt.
The 'Grace Kelly/Judy Garland' always gets mentioned. It was not actually as shocking as made out, because Grace had won the Golden Globe, National Board of Review and New York Film Critics' Award for her role in 'The Country Girl', she did seem to have the momentum that year. Plus, having about 4 films out for that year helped.

I also agree that Kate Winslet probably should have won for 'Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind' rather 'The Reader'.

The most recent Oscar surprise was Melissa Leo winning for 'The Fighter' over Hailee Steinfeld for the remake of 'True Grit'.
stripedcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 16:39
Virgil Tracy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 19,587
when The Color Purple got nominated for all the major awards and Spielberg wasn't .
Virgil Tracy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 16:44
Sez_babe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 105,927
What are the main differences between the Golden Globes, the Baftas and the Oscars in terms of voting etc?
Sez_babe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 17:18
marjangles
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,037
What are the main differences between the Golden Globes, the Baftas and the Oscars in terms of voting etc?
The Golden Globes is voted for by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association which is about 100 people who report on the US film industry around the world.

The BAFTAs are voted for by members of the British Academy and the Oscars by members of the American Academy. There are huge overlaps in membership of the two groups but there are various differences. Membership is made up of former winners and nominees plus other invitees of the committees.

I think some of the BAFTA awards are decided by panel rather than vote of the full academy (the technical awards generally) but every Oscar is decided by full vote of the academy.
marjangles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 18:35
degsyhufc
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Up North
Posts: 48,449
Don't agree with that, he received critical acclaim for his role in the Untouchables and was a throughly deserving winner, imho.
It was the perfect Irish accent that clinched it for him
degsyhufc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 18:36
degsyhufc
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Up North
Posts: 48,449
The most recent Oscar surprise was Melissa Leo winning for 'The Fighter' over Hailee Steinfeld for the remake of 'True Grit'.
Definately agree with that. It was an outstanding performance and she totally outshone Bridges and Damon.
degsyhufc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 18:38
degsyhufc
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Up North
Posts: 48,449
Leonardo DiCaprio getting snubbed year in, year out. It's like the powers that be don't understand he has totally transformed from his Titanic teeny bopper days and is every bit as good as Daniel Day Lewis, who they have some weird raging hard-on for. It was especially bad when DiCaprio wasn't recognised for either Blood Diamond or Shutter Island, in which he's given the best performances of his career thus far imho.
I've never understood why people are so insistent that DiCaprio deserves an Academy Award. I'm sure he will win best actor one day, but he's never been close to an Oscar winning performance so far in his career in my view. I think the fact that he seems so desperate for one is harming his immediate chances. And the Daniel Day Lewis comparison is just plain laughable.
I just can't take Di Caprio in serious, adult roles. He doesn't have the gravitas. I feel the same about Levitt.
degsyhufc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 19:04
Mystical123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 11,309
Marcia Gay Garden and Juliette Binoche winning. Neither were regarded as front runners at all, esp Binoche beating Lauren Bacall.
Binoche beating Bacall was the first thing I thought of whenI read this thread's title.

In recent years, I think the biggest shock was Crash beating Brokeback Mountain in 2005, as the latter had won just about every other Best Picture award all award season till that point.
I wouldn't call it a shock at all - the Academy is still quite conservative so it was never going to reward Brokeback. I actually liked Crash so wasn't disappointed at it winning!




Not a shock as such, and she certainly deserved another Oscar, but the Iron Lady is far from Meryl Streep's best work, and Viola Davis or Michelle Williams really should have won instead last year.
Mystical123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 20:55
brumgal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 284
Ennio Morrocone not getting it for The Mission score.
brumgal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 21:00
Johnbee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,204
I would not describe any film award as a shock. People who are 'shocked' by that sort of thing have taken leave of their senses.

However I will say that in the year Forrest Gump won best picture, all the others nominated were better.

Kate Winslet was absolutely wonderful in The Reader. Marisa Tomei was brilliant and funny in My Cousin Vinny, well worth the win.
Johnbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 21:09
allthatyouwant
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: York
Posts: 1,066
Even though I loved Bridesmaids and Melissa McCarthy I was a little bit surprised to see her get an Oscar nomination, she was very good in the film but would you call it Oscar worthy?
allthatyouwant is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 21:10
Toy_Hero
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 9,613
Gwynneth Paltrow winning over Cate Blanchett

in fact, Gwynneth Paltrow even being nominated

dreadful performance...if that wasn't a fix, nothing was
This is what came to my mind. Oh my god, for me she was probably the least deserving in the category. I personally thought Fernanda Montenegro deserved it for Central Station. Her performance was just amazing!! If she hadn't have won, I was expecting Cate Blanchett to have won

Maybe not a shocker, but I thought Tilda Swinton deserved a nomination for We Need To Talk About Kevin last year
Toy_Hero is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:40.