The nominees were:
-
unknown comic — 7 years ago(February 08, 2019 03:58 AM)
Network was nothing but a brilliant satire on the television industry.
Not to be taken seriously at all. Showing how far studios are willing to go for ratings
and how quickly they'll pull the plug.
the story of Howard Beale, the first known instance of a man who was killed because he had lousy ratings.
Considering the way TV has changed since then, it was as if Chayefsky had a crystal ball.
Morton Downey Jr, Jerry Springer, Geraldo, Maury Povich, Rush etc… -
ToastedCheese — 2 months ago(January 17, 2026 07:31 AM)
I’d say Network was very prescient film and should be taken seriously in terms of the pointed satire it had to present about mainstream media television, its ratings wars and manipulations to pander to the masses.
Norman! What did you put in my tea? -
LorqVonRay1999 — 3 months ago(December 28, 2025 12:45 AM)
I have not seen Bound for Glory but the winner should have been Network.
I love Rocky and I can see why it won but Network was so clearly the best film of those I have seen.
All the President's Men would be second.
And then Rocky.
Taxi Driver? Nah. -
ToastedCheese — 2 months ago(January 17, 2026 07:27 AM)
Of those films,
Network
, though I can understand
Rocky’s
win.
My personal choice, the near perfect
Carrie
would have been nominated and won best picture, actress, supporting actress and screenplay.
Norman! What did you put in my tea? -
JohnnyBoy — 2 months ago(January 17, 2026 10:51 PM)
https://thecineviewer.com/FilmsOf1976.html
For tons of movie reviews, 60+ genre lists, best of the year lists, and other content, check out:
www.thecineviewer.com -
ToastedCheese — 2 months ago(January 18, 2026 08:38 AM)
So you’re not a fan of Sissy Spacek or Piper Laurie in
Carrie?
Burnt Offerings
has decent performances and is an interesting supernatural horror film, but it is also cheesy at the same time.
As horror, I don’t feel BO holds a candle to De Palma’s classic teen angst supernatural horror thriller. Your personal call though.
Norman! What did you put in my tea? -
JohnnyBoy — 2 months ago(January 19, 2026 01:06 AM)
I thought they were just okay. Sissy Spacek didn't have enough screen time, probably because she was somewhat new of an actress at that time. Piper Laurie had come back from a 15 year hiatus, movie-wise, after The Hustler. I'll probably give Carrie another go in the future and see if my opinion can be improved.
For tons of movie reviews, 60+ genre lists, best of the year lists, and other content, check out:
www.thecineviewer.com -
ToastedCheese — 2 months ago(January 19, 2026 03:28 AM)
Check out this site. It gives screen time percentages and amount of minutes time for Oscar nominees:
https://www.screentimecentral.com/leading-actress-oscar-nominees
Spacek had approximately 45mins screen time in a 98min movie. Her presence was well dispersed throughout the runtime and the narrative was pretty much always about Carrie, even when not on screen.
That is what I find impressive about the film. It packs in a lot of detail and characterisation within a moderate/average runtime, without ever feeling under-developed or rushed. It conveyed what it needed too.
I used to have my gripes about the film. That is only because I read the book first and had expectations for it. I saw the film at a tiny retro theatre about 7yrs after its initial release. I was too young in 1976 to be able to see it and it was Restricted 18+ where I lived.
It was a double feature with Poltergeist. Carrie was on first and I was still technically underage. After Poltergeist, hid in the front toilets behind the screen and watched Carrie again before my last bus home…
Norman! What did you put in my tea?
— 7 years ago(February 08, 2019 12:30 AM)