RU|CNN: Oscar snub proves critics were right, 'Passion' not worthy

CNN: Oscar snub proves critics were right, 'Passion' not worthy

Ravenwood - 01/27/05 08:00 AM

Mel Gibson did absolutely no campaigning for an Oscar. He didn't even send out a screening video. On the other hand, Michael Moore was actively campaigning for a "Best Picture" nomination. But will CNN do a similar story on Moore or his 'partisans'?

Internet Christian soldiers are admitting defeat in their battle to win a best picture Oscar nomination for "The Passion of the Christ" -- but their campaign to influence Hollywood goes on.

Web sites supporting Mel Gibson's movie about Jesus' last days -- the eighth-highest grossing American film of all time -- failed to convince enough Oscar voters that it deserved a best picture nomination.

CNN goes on to say that 'Passion' just wasn't worthy of any awards. They quote Oscar "scholar" Tom O'Neil as saying, "The vast consensus of American film critics said it was not worthy -- beginning with The New York Times, which called the movie a 'serious artistic failure.' "

Personally, I don't think it was "Best Picture" material (but then neither was 'Gladiator'). But I think Gibson should definitely had been considered for "Best Director".

Other unworthy 'Best Picture' films (in this man's opinion):

Gladiator (2000)
Titanic (1997)
Dances with Wolves (1990)
Platoon (1986)
Godfather II (1974)
French Connection (1971)

Comments (5) top link me

Comments

Here's some other unworthy Best Pictures

Chicago (2003) - every other nominee was a much better choice

Shakespeare in Love (1998) - Clearly better than the Thin Red Line but its not better than Saving Private Ryan or La Vita e bella (Life is Beautiful),

The English Patient (1996) - I think Seinfeld covered this one sufficiently.

Forest Gump (1994) - A fine film but no where near as good as the Shawshank Redemption (commie bigot Tim Robbins notwithstanding) or Pulp Fiction.

Ordinary People (1980) - No way is it better than Raging Bull, or the Coal Miners Daughter, or the Elephant Man.

Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) - Ugh!!! Should have gone to Breaking Away or Apocalypse Now.

I disagree about Godfather II - though I could understand thinking Chinatown should have won.

Midnight Cowboy (1969) - Gay Hippy Porn. Give me Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid over this crap any day.

Beyond that, I just am not that familiar with all the movies nominated - but would point out that the general quality and timelessness of the movies is much greater.

Posted by: countertop at January 27, 2005 1:05 PM

The Ron Howard film, "A Beautiful Mind", how did people even think of that as a good movie never mind it winning.
It was two stars, mediocre at best, and that is being generous.
It was an unforgetable movie because I saw it after it won the award, and I couldn't believe it.
The awards are completely worthless to use as a measure of any part of a film today.

Posted by: Terry at January 27, 2005 3:30 PM

Terry;

The award to ABF was not really for the movie itself, but was a nod the subject of the film. I agree that this should not be the criteria for an Oscar, but when viewed in that context I at least understand the selection by the committee.

This is much different than Titanic. I mean, you know the damn boat is going to sink! What is my motivation for sitting in a theatre for 3 hours for that?

Posted by: Nick Bourbaki at January 27, 2005 3:34 PM

I agree. Titanic especially irritates me. It won so many awards and wasn't that great of a movie. Maybe the fact I hate ninety-percent of the cast and Celine Dion adds to my negative opinion, but the movie was WAY overhyped. Mediocre at best.

Posted by: Adam Lawson at January 27, 2005 6:34 PM

I still haven't bothered to watch Titanic. My distaste for the hype is that great.

Posted by: Da Goddess at February 1, 2005 6:37 AM