Should L.A Confidental have won Best Picture?
-
JJdaPK — 14 years ago(August 03, 2011 08:40 PM)
I still need to see this film. But it's always rented out whenever I am in the mood to see it.
I do think the acting in Titanic was pretty good however. The only problem is the script which is over reliant on the characters repeating each others names and talking like 90s people instead of people in 1912.
I do think Titanic is one of the better Oscar winners in the past 30 years. It may not have been the best of 1997, but that doesnt make it the "Worst Best Picture". -
Cypherven — 14 years ago(September 05, 2011 10:50 AM)
I'm not a fan of Titanic, but let's face it, sometimes they have to give the oscars to some movies NOT because they made a lot of money, but because those movies connected with the audience. Titanic was an event picture, even our grandmas went to see it, and you have to give some recognition to the filmmakers for that achievement
Putting that aside, L.A. Confidential is a million times better movie.
Maybe the exception was Star Wars, everyone though it was going to win that year, but then came Annie Hall, both movies are great and both are considered classics today. -
MyDarkStar — 13 years ago(December 11, 2012 10:42 AM)
That's exactly right Cypher. This film is a true masterpiece, and nobody likes it more than me. It's definitely in my top 3 favorite films. Personally, I regard it as the greatest film noir movie of all time - even better than Maltese Falcon, or Touch of Evil. The dialog is superior. The plot is as dense as it could be without becoming overly complex. The casting and acting are spot-on perfect. And the character depth is just awesome.
But with that said, Titanic is a movie that meant a lot more to a great amount of people than LA Confidential will ever mean to its biggest fans (myself included). Titanic was a landmark epic movie event. LA Confidential was simply a film masterpiece. There's a difference, and in this case the movie which truly represented the year in cinema was given the award. -
ColinChapman — 14 years ago(December 29, 2011 02:56 PM)
That's where you are SO wrong MichaelInlori.
Whereas L.A.Confidential is on #70 on the Imdb top 250, Titanic is rightfully OUT of it!
Now I suggest you check out Red Letter Media's review of "Avatar" (which is a 1,7 million view hit on youtube) to see what kind of cheap tricks James Cameron uses to make a lot of people fall for his cardboard character fluff. Do so before I carefully explain to you how much of an i**** you are. -
Mcclane101 — 14 years ago(January 02, 2012 12:04 AM)
That guy's shot about LA Confidential not being remembered was ridiculous at best. It absolutely deserved best picture, but if the best picture did win everytime then Raging Bull, Mystic River, Gangs of New York, and other movies also were shafted. But people with a real sense of movies know this is the one to see.
-
JJdaPK — 14 years ago(January 02, 2012 04:23 PM)
Return of the King was the best Best Picture ever and should not have been beaten by Mystic River.
Gangs of New York is better than Chicago, but I don't know if it should have won.
Anyway, Titanic gets way too much hate. Just because it may have beat a more deserving winner doesnt mean it's the worst best picture. Worst Best Picture is a film that has little to no reedming qualitieslike Crash. -
Mcclane101 — 14 years ago(January 02, 2012 09:00 PM)
Return of the King was only better to those who don't have the emotional maturity for Mystic River. Cinematography aside, Return of the King's only merit was to be the final movie in an ambitious project, and it's Oscar was a reward for the 3 movies collectively. In the end, the LOTR series lacked the acting gravitas and writing to be truly great. Mystic River had both in spades.
Gangs of New York was streets ahead of any other movie that came out that year. That isn't debatable. What is, is that it might be the best movie of the decade. Crash was a cop-out because many voters thought America wasn't ready for Brokeback Mountain, and they were right. America, for the most part, isn't.
The Oscars have given up the right to be considered best picture because there are so many best pictures that are meant to send messages. I loved the Departed, but the only reason it won was as a lifetime achievement award to Martin Scorsese. Million Dollar Baby won as a way to make it up to Clint Eastwood for passing over Mystic River, and that is from the mouths of several voters.
Your opinions are valid as opinions, but as statements of fact are lacking. -
JJdaPK — 14 years ago(January 02, 2012 09:26 PM)
You're right, I shouldnt state my opinions as facts. But when I say Return of hte King is the best "Best Picture", I was just talking from my point of view.
Anyway, I disagree that The Return of the King has poor writing. I think the Lord of the Rings (can't really just say RotK since the trilogy is more like a three part movie), has a great story and it reached it's peak in Return of the King. That's why it deserved the Oscar. The acting wasnt Oscar worthy (with the exception of Andy Serkis who I do think should have won an oscar in the second film, motion capture or not), but it was good enough to make me care about the characters.
Also about CrashI'm not saying it's a bad movie because it beat a more desrving winner. I'm saying it should have lost because I think is a very very BAD movie and that there are probably a dozen or two other movies that should have been nominated instead. I have never seen such a preachy and horribly written movie and downright insulting movie as Crash. That doesnt mean Brokeback needed to win (that movie is a bit overrated), but at least SOME movie other than Crash should have. -
Loincloth — 14 years ago(January 07, 2012 06:41 PM)
McClane 101, I respect your opinions and you lay out your points very well, but I'm afraid to say that Gangs of New York is indubitably a great film is laughable: much, indeed, like that movie, the worst film Scorsese's made a country mile and a film that was so piss-poor it made me want to stab the screen. I'd give it 2 out of 10; both for Daniel Day-Lewis. And in case you're thinking it's just me, I know around two dozen people who've seen it; and one who likes it.
-
Mcclane101 — 14 years ago(January 07, 2012 10:38 PM)
The characters of Gangs of New York were the best this side of No Country for Old Men. Daniel Day-Lewis was on fire in that movie and it gave him the juciest role he'd had for a decade. It was the movie that Leonardo Dicaprio broke through as a great in. It is a cynical take on that part of history, but to cynics like me it is refreshing. I could get into why it is my favorite Scorsese movie since Taxi Driver, but that would take more than I want to write. Suffice it to say, as someone who has tried his hand at acting and now occasionally tries to teach it, Day-Lewis, Dicaprio, and Brendan Gleeson give some of the best performances of any of his movies. Maybe No Country and Mystic River are the only two ensemble casts that compare this decade. But, being that this is an LA Confidential thread, I liked it more. The 90s was a decade of great movies, but LA Confidential is my favorite. Schindler's list may have been more important, but LA confidential was more enjoyable, and that is the reason I like Gangs over No Country for my movie of the decade.
-
Hopper10 — 13 years ago(September 14, 2012 05:52 PM)
How did return of the king lack writing? The script was drafted from one of the greatest writers of all time! And on scope and scale Mystic Rivers a beep joke compared to ROTK.
Dear Warden, You were right. Salvation lies within. -
Mcclane101 — 13 years ago(September 14, 2012 11:59 PM)
This comment is the real joke. If scope was all it took then Waterworld would be an Oscar magnet. Mystic River had phenomenal acting and a tight plot that didn't take 45 minutes to end and, unlike LOTR, didn't have dialogue that would make Michael Bay embarrassed for the writer. It's not like it was a straight adaptation. Peter Jackson curiously added and subtracted from the books. The stuff he cut was better than all of his additions.
And while we're on the subject, with all due respect to JRR Tolkein for what he did for fantasy, he was not a great writer. George RR Martin beep better writing, though it does take forever for him to do it.
Stupid ass quote -
Hopper10 — 13 years ago(September 15, 2012 10:43 AM)
"he was not a great writing."
Hmm i feel like you have no place to say Tolkien wasnt a great writer* haha. But seriously Return of the King is more than a movie. Its one of the greatest fantasies of all time. Whats gonna be remembered more in 10 years?
Dear Warden, You were right. Salvation lies within.