Just like in the movie, Forrest always seems to surprise us just when we believe he has reached his limit. The Oscars in 94 were no exception. So here at number two sits one of the great mistakes in modern awards history. The heartfelt farce with everybodys favorite actor defeated two of the most enduring films of the nineties. Shawshank Redemption may well be the most beloved film of the decade. It has certainly aged well in our minds thanks to popular culture and being a regular on late night cable, but its ubiquitous status only serves to highlight just how effectively this film transcended audiences and critics alike that year and ever year since. The film is a testament to good storytelling; every character oozes personality and performances backing them allow you to empathize completely with their every move. The other film Forrest Gump managed to outwit on Oscar night was Pulp Fiction. This one hits home pretty hard because it was Pulp Fiction that created the love for film I have today. Experiencing the richness of the dialogue for the first time a powerful experience I hope every person will have the privilege of sharing with me at some point in their lives. It was a seminal piece of filmmaking from a director whose style is, itself, a synthesis of much of films history. Describing the contents of the narrative seems nearly impossible. It's a seedy modern gangster picture, but, at the same time, it really isn't. Pulp Fiction is a wholly original experience from start to finish in the best ways imaginable. Both were worthy winners. Neither won. Maybe they split the vote of the sane members of the Academy once again?
1. Shakespeare in Love, PERIOD
SEVEN Academy Awards!?!? You have got to be kidding. Miramax would have been loathsome for getting Shakespeare in Love one award, but seven makes them the root of all evil. The film's victories on Oscar night can be attributed almost entirely to the ugly part of the awards - lobbying. Miramax spent months hyping, promoting, and otherwise drumming up hype about their film for the Academy voters. 1998 was an unbelievably strong year in film and yet, somehow, Shakespeare in Love (the lowest common denominator of nominees that year) ended up sifting to the top almost every time. When you include Benigni's already mentioned win from above theres good reason to scrap the results of the 71st Academy Awards completely. To give this proper perspective I have to go category-by-category to break down just how wrong the Academy got it this year. We will never get to know if the Academy really is this bad or if their mistakes are the product of shady lobbying practices or maybe, in this case, if it was simply a product of Gwyneth Paltrow's breasts. My money is on the breasts. Costume Design Who won: Shakespeare in Love Who should have won: Elizabeth Why: There is a difference between period garb and art. Every strand of fabric in Elizabeth was crafted with care and vision. I dont even Elizabeth is a particularly great film, but my god is it visually breathtaking. Best Art Direction Who won: Shakespeare in Love Who should have won: Elizabeth Why: See above. Elizabeth is simply beautiful. The promotional posters belong in an art gallery just as much as they do under the marquee. Best Original Musical or Comedy Score Who won: Shakespeare in Love Who should have won: Mulan Why: Lets get down to business here. Mulan breathed new life into Disney musicals. Disney took on the challenging task of mixing Asian influences with western hooks and succeeded spectacularly. People could care less what was playing in Shakespeare in Love. I still listen to Ill Make a Man Out of You and A Girl Worth Fighting For on a regular basis and from the state of their YouTube hits it seems like I'm not alone. Those are timeless songs that deserve recognition and adoration with the best of Disneys musical history. Best Original Screenplay Who won: Shakespeare in Love Who should have won: The Truman Show Why: Key word here: original. Andrew Niccol has brought us some of the best high concept science fiction of the past twenty years. The Truman Show was no exception. In fact, it is his best concept to date. That screenplay could go toe-to-toe with any winner since, but somehow it lost to Shakespeare in Loves witty but unequal farce. Best Supporting Actress Who won: Judi Dench - Shakespeare in Love Who should have won: Kathy Bates - Primary Colors Why: Dame Judi Dench is the best. She can do no wrong in my book... but that doesnt mean she cant do neutral. Thats exactly what her part in Shakespeare in Love was. She gave it her all but the role of the Queen lacked depth or weight. Kathy Bates on the other hand propelled Primary Colors to another level with her performance. She kept the films generally light tone from spiraling into the realm of the slight - no small task considering John Travolta was running around doing his best Bill Clinton impersonation for ninety minutes. Best Actress Who won: Gwyneth Paltrows breasts - Shakespeare in Love Who should have won: Cate Blanchett's acting - Elizabeth Why: Time seems to have weighed in on this decision for us. Gwyneth Platrow was once the apple of every filmgoers eye; now she just names her kid Apple. Nobody likes her. Its not just that she is unlikeable in the tabloids either. Paltrow hasnt exactly lived up to her Best Actress status on screen. The best explanation? She never deserved it in the first place. Her role in Shakespeare in Love was little more than adequate in a film primarily driven by story. Cate Blanchett should have won. She put in a career defining performance as the title character in Elizabeth. Blanchett demanded your attention any time she was on screen in a way Paltrow couldn't even imagine. Paltrow doesnt even command the screen while guest starring on Glee nowadays. This is a top five slight on its own. Best Picture Who won: Shakespeare in Love Who should have won: Saving Private Ryan Why: Saving Private Ryan could easily be the best film of the past twenty-five years. The opening scene which depicts the storming of Normandy Beach is the most honest depiction of war ever put to celluloid, but at the same time Spielberg inlays masterful style. A dozen vignettes tell powerful stories in a matter of moments - the man collecting his own arm still haunts me to this day. It is powerful storytelling from beginning to end, Spielberg at his finest, and yet it lost. Not to Life is Beautiful or Elizabeth or the not-even-nominated American History X. It lost to Shakespeare in Love. There are no words. I'm done with the Academy Awards. I wash my hands of them; I hope you'll join me.
Phil loves a good debate. Don't expect him to shy away from starting the conversation. Follow him on Twitter @MrTallgeese if you're of a like mind, or if you just want to troll him relentlessly.
