The real Best Picture, 1994
-
smoko — 10 years ago(May 31, 2015 01:19 AM)
@nyrunner101
while the character who does virtually nothing substantial, the moonwalk and the smiley face are the two things I remember, is showered with riches.
I agree with the critic's point (though I like
Forrest Gump
anyway) but I think you're confusing Michael Jackson with Elvis Presley: -
kwongers — 21 years ago(April 13, 2004 07:43 PM)
I just watched "Quiz Show" in school, but I haven't seen the other four nominees, although I see bits of "Four Weddings" when I'm channel-surfing. I thought "Quiz Show" was a great movie; reminds me why I like Ralph Fiennes so much. He's a great actor.
-
bbgun5310 — 21 years ago(April 22, 2004 12:10 PM)
Why would it matter how many films a director has made? Even if it's their first, if it's good enough to win the Oscar, who gives a crap if it's the first film the director has made
Maybe you are talking about the Best Director category, but either way, if someone is deserving they should win the award. -
bbgun5310 — 21 years ago(April 23, 2004 08:22 AM)
oacoo, you continue to make no sense. According to that logic, when Pulp Fiction was released, everyone should have thought"Well, that's a hell of a good film, but let's not heap too much praise or too many awards because you know what will happen to Quentinhis next few films will go straight into the crapper because he'll be so full of himself!!"
-
bbgun5310 — 21 years ago(April 24, 2004 03:14 PM)
That is beside the point. Your original statement was
"I'm not one of Pulp Fiction's greatest fans, but on top of that I don't believe directors should win the Oscar for only their 2nd film, however good it may be. (I felt the same way about Lost in Translation.)"
That's what I was responding to. It's just very flawed logic. According to you, Orson Welles should have been ignored for Citizen Kane (his first full length feature film).
And by the way, Quentin didn't win Best Director for Pulp Fiction, Zemeckis took the award for the Gumpmiester -
Alexander_Tsuschka — 21 years ago(May 15, 2004 06:02 AM)
Overall, I too think that 1994 was one of the best years in the movie business.
The Oscar fo best picture should have went to The Shawshank Redemption or to Quiz Show as they both are more profound and meaningful that Forrest Gump.
I think that Tarantino would have deserved the Oscar fo Best Direction (now, he may never get it) and and that Tim Robbins should have been competting John Turturro and Ralph Fiennes for the Best Actor Oscar (which Hanks didn't quite deserve to get for two years in a row). But that's just my opinion.
"I am just unwillingly disturbed belly-button." -
mykungfuistrong — 16 years ago(July 12, 2009 09:35 AM)
Oh, come on, really? Try comparing Murray circa Stripes versus Murray in L.i.T. You can't deny he's grown so much as an actor. His performances these days are capable of so much subtlety and pathos. He's really become an actor capable of so much more than bluster and slapstick (although that particular brand of comedy worked pretty well in films like Scrooged and Ghostbusters!) Don't be a hater! lol
-
mpoconnor7 — 14 years ago(September 26, 2011 03:30 PM)
What has Bill Murray done since Lost in Translation? It's not like he did a Leslie Nielsen (in reverse) and suddenly became a dramatic actor from that point forward after being a comedian for more than 25 years. Nor did his Oscar nomination lead to very much acting work (comedic or dramatic) since then. It's like when Dan Aykroyd got an Oscar nomination for Driving Miss Daisy, it didn't help his career very much as he didn't transition to being a fulltime dramatic actor, although I think he had the talent to do so.
-
d_henderson1810 — 14 years ago(September 25, 2011 06:25 AM)
Fiennes was great in this. In fact, if we are going to gripe about Oscars, I think that both Ralph Fiennes and John Turraro should have been nominated for acting awards for "Quiz Show". Do you agree?
-
MisterBizzones — 21 years ago(May 24, 2004 02:16 AM)
I finally saw this the other night and was thoroughly impressed. Apart from the fact that the third act is a little anticlimactic, I can see why Quiz Show received the accolades it did. I was especially impressed by Rob Morrow - why isn't that dude more of a name?
-
jasperdoestheastro — 21 years ago(May 25, 2004 09:13 AM)
#1 PULP FICTION
#2 THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION
#3 QUIZ SHOW
#4 FORREST GUMP
#5 FOUR WEDDINGS AND A FUNERAL
This is my list of favorites in order of those years nominees.
In fifty more years Pulp Fiction's flawless genius will become more and more apparent.
Well maybe Tesla does the astro. -
rikuhourula — 21 years ago(June 01, 2004 12:02 PM)
Pulp Fiction and Four Weddings will be the most often viewed and remarked on. PF in part because it was such a trend setter and will be viewed as a bit of a time capsule and Four Weddings as a classic comedy. That's not to say that Four Weddings is better than the other three, it clearly is not, but 50 years from now TCM will be having a Hugh Grant retrospective (hard to imagine today, I know) and there it'll be. A good comedy is both rare and treasured.
1994 was remarkable bot so much because there were five such excellent nominees for best picture, but because the academy managed to nominate five worthy pics.
I thought Pulp Fiction was far and away the best of them. Tarrantino's never come close to matching it and may never. Quiz Show stands up quite well and always well, it's an excellnet pice of historical drama that Hollywood sometimes manages to do quite well. Gump became ingrained in our culture for a short time ("life is like a box" "Run Forrest, run") to such an extent that some people grew sick of it. Shawshank has had surprisingly strong support, especially on this website.