-

Jump to content



Photo

On second thought, Russell Crowe should have gotten that Oscar. Simply incredible!


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
23 replies to this topic

#1 of 24 Inspector Hammer!

Inspector Hammer!

    Executive Producer

  • 11,067 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 15 1999
  • Real Name:John Williamson
  • LocationWilmington, Delaware

Posted July 01 2002 - 06:58 PM

After now having the great pleasure of finally seeing A Beautiful Mind, I have to say that Russell Crowe SHOULD have gotten it instead of Denzel Washington. Not saying that Denzel wasn't great, he was incredible in Training Day, but he can't even begin to touch what Russell Crowe did here. His performance as John Nash, the incredibly brilliant, but mentally disturbed mathematician knocked my socks off!

Film after film, he's proving to be one of the great one's of our time, right along with Tom Hanks IMO.

It almost seems as if the Academy frowns upon recreations of real people in films. Denzel Washington should have gotten his first Best Actor Oscar for Malcolm X but didn't. Jim Carrey should have gotten it for Man on the Moon but wasn't even nominated. Almost as if they have the attitude that all the actor is doing is impersonating another person so big deal they don't deserve it. That's just ridiculous if that's the case.

About the film though, I found it very intriguing that this man was one of the most brilliant minds of all time and changed the way we percieve game theory and economics, but was also, as pointed out by Roger Ebert, a man who for a time could be seen walking the campus nervously smoking and muttering to himself. I found it rather inspiring that he was able to overcome his handicap by process of simple problem solving. He, along with his loving and supportive wife played by Oscar winner Jennifer Connelly, recocnized what was happening in his mind, and found a rather simple solution to it and was able to function academically once again. Reason, consequence, solution. Others with this illness unfortunatly are not so fortunate.

Not saying that it was easy for him to overcome this illness, I can't even begin to grasp the nature or sevearity of what he went through for years. I'm simply saying that he took what he knew and understood as fact, that everything has a pattern, and consequently, a solution, and was able to apply it, and find his way back to sanity.

In closing, I must say that I feel that Russell Crowe was so robbed of this Oscar. It's a real shame the the Academy failed to recognize a performance of this calibre. I mean if he didn't get it for THIS performance, he never will! Posted Image
"That's Jack Bauer!!!!!! He's coming for me!!!!!" - Charles Logan

#2 of 24 Yee-Ming

Yee-Ming

    Producer

  • 4,329 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2002
  • Real Name:Yee Ming Lim

Posted July 01 2002 - 07:03 PM

Quote:
I mean if he didn't get it for THIS performance, he never will!

errrr, I suppose you mean he never will win _another_ Oscar?

#3 of 24 Inspector Hammer!

Inspector Hammer!

    Executive Producer

  • 11,067 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 15 1999
  • Real Name:John Williamson
  • LocationWilmington, Delaware

Posted July 01 2002 - 07:16 PM

It was a figure of speech. I mean just how good does an actor's performance need to be before he/she get recognized for it by the Academy?
"That's Jack Bauer!!!!!! He's coming for me!!!!!" - Charles Logan

#4 of 24 Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Studio Mogul

  • 24,507 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted July 01 2002 - 07:42 PM

I mean just how good does an actor's performance need to be before he/she get recognized for it by the Academy?
John,
Those type of things have been happening for many years in the Academy going back to the beginning of the awards. Case in point, in 1967, a certain actor recognized at this year's awards starred in three films that year. He gave brillant performances in the lead role for all three of the 1967 released films, but you know what? He wasn't even nominated for any of those performances. Take a look at those three films.
  • In the Heat of the Night
  • Guess Who's Coming to Dinner
  • To Sir With Love
Thus, the nature of the beast! Shit happens and the Academy keeps rolling along.




Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#5 of 24 Inspector Hammer!

Inspector Hammer!

    Executive Producer

  • 11,067 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 15 1999
  • Real Name:John Williamson
  • LocationWilmington, Delaware

Posted July 01 2002 - 07:46 PM

Robert,
yep. But nevertheless, it never ceases to amaze me when a great performance like Russell Crowe's doesn't score Oscar gold.
"That's Jack Bauer!!!!!! He's coming for me!!!!!" - Charles Logan

#6 of 24 Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Studio Mogul

  • 24,507 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted July 01 2002 - 07:50 PM

John,
I gave up on the Academy a long time ago! Tom Hanks should have won a third AA for "Saving Private Ryan", but that's just another example of spreading the wealth around.

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#7 of 24 Inspector Hammer!

Inspector Hammer!

    Executive Producer

  • 11,067 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 15 1999
  • Real Name:John Williamson
  • LocationWilmington, Delaware

Posted July 01 2002 - 08:06 PM

In other words, the Academy doesn't know what the hell they're doing! Posted Image I'm figuring that out one year at a time, give me a few more let downs like this one, and i'll probably be joining you in your opinion.

And yes indeed, Tom should have won one for 'SPR'. I'm of the opinion that if Tom Hanks or anyone for that matter gives the best performance year after year, give him/her the Oscar as many times as he/she deserves to win it! Who cares if they've already won it twice, give it to them a third, forth, fifth, as many times as they deserve to have it!

While we're on the subject, I find it absolutly stupifying that the Academy voters use vhs copies of the nominated films to view!?!? Posted Image If your a member of the Academy, you should be REQUIRED to see the films in either a theater, or a private screening room!
"That's Jack Bauer!!!!!! He's coming for me!!!!!" - Charles Logan

#8 of 24 Lou Sytsma

Lou Sytsma

    Producer

  • 5,262 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 01 1998

Posted July 01 2002 - 11:57 PM

Hmmm - after watching this last night for the first time - I don't understand why this movie won any awards period.

The movie came off like one of those old disease of the week TV movies.
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.

#9 of 24 Edwin Pereyra

Edwin Pereyra

    Producer

  • 3,501 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 1998

Posted July 02 2002 - 01:13 AM

Quote:
In closing, I must say that I feel that Russell Crowe was so robbed of this Oscar.

Hmmm, these actors being robbed of an Oscar is almost becoming a weekly issue with you John.

Case in point: I still say Jim Carrey was robbed of an Oscar nod for 'MAN ON THE MOON'.

Posted Image

~Edwin
DVD Unwind: Paradise Now (Coming) • King Kong - - • KeaneThe Squid And The WhaleA History Of ViolenceHarry Potter and the Goblet of FireThe Best Of Youth (Italy) • Good Night And Good LuckHowl's Moving CastleWalk The Line - - • ZathuraNorth Country

#10 of 24 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Second Unit

  • 283 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 26 2001

Posted July 02 2002 - 02:43 AM

John, I could not agree with you more. Not only was Crowe robbed with A Beautiful Mind, he was also robbed with his performance in The Insider. When incuding The Gladiator, how many actors out there today could have performed this acting Trifecta in such a compelling way in three straight years? I also agree it has always been this way with the Academy. Paul Newman, Dustin Hoffman and Henry Fonda didn't necessarily win their Oscars for their best acting roles.

#11 of 24 Danny R

Danny R

    Supporting Actor

  • 875 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2000

Posted July 02 2002 - 02:49 AM

. I mean just how good does an actor's performance need to be before he/she get recognized for it by the Academy?

You are suffering the delusion that the Oscars are actually decided based on one's skill and performance, when in reality they are a popularity/political award.
They found my psych results fit a certain profile. A certain "Moral flexibility" would be the best way to describe it....

#12 of 24 Mike Broadman

Mike Broadman

    Producer

  • 4,956 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 24 2001

Posted July 02 2002 - 03:17 AM

At least we all have to admit that these things are very subjective.

Crowe's performance did not do it for me as much as it did for some others. He had his moments, but he played up the "I'm such a weird guy" angle a bit much throughout the movie. It was like Forrest Gump Does Calculus.

Washington was good, but his role was arguable less demanding than Crowe's, so it's tough to compare. I do agree that Washington was brilliant in X, though.

#13 of 24 Butch C

Butch C

    Second Unit

  • 282 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 2001

Posted July 02 2002 - 03:26 AM

THE ACCADEMY DOES NOT KNOW WHAT THE HELL THERE DOING... BECAUSE THEY DONT AGREE WITH ME.


hahahahahahahahahhahahhahah ohhhhh hahahahah

#14 of 24 Patrick G

Patrick G

    Second Unit

  • 282 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 03 2000

Posted July 02 2002 - 03:27 AM

I was also pissed that Crowe didn't win for what was easily the best performance of the year, and in my opinion, one of the best performances of ANY year. I really thought Denzel should have thanked Russell for winning last year. After all, that was the only reason Denzel was holding the Oscar this year.
Patrick D. Gamet
Home Theater Nut & OAR Activist
patrick@gametnet.com

#15 of 24 Mitty

Mitty

    Supporting Actor

  • 885 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 13 1999

Posted July 02 2002 - 04:33 AM

Quote:
After all, that was the only reason Denzel was holding the Oscar this year.

Well, that and the fact that he (Denzel) didn't win a decade or so ago for Malcolm X. Not to mention that Crowe's Oscar for Gladiator was really to make up for the fact that he didn't win for The Insider the year before.

Oh yeah, and let's not forget Russell Crowe's antics at the BAFTA awards...

My head is spinning.

Anyway, the Academy's batting average for awarding actors for the wrong performance would make Ted Williams envious. Does your brain automatically think 'Scent of a Woman' when Al Pacino's name is mentioned? Or how about Henry Fonda's legendary performance in...On Golden Pond? Paul Newman as Fast Eddie Felson in 'The...Color of Money?' Etc.

#16 of 24 Patrick G

Patrick G

    Second Unit

  • 282 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 03 2000

Posted July 02 2002 - 04:45 AM

He didn't win a decade ago for Malcolm X because Al Pacino deserved to win. Maybe not for Scent of a Woman, but definitely for The Godfather, The Godfather Part II, Serpico or Dog Day Afternoon, for which he was nominated, but didn't win.
Patrick D. Gamet
Home Theater Nut & OAR Activist
patrick@gametnet.com

#17 of 24 Inspector Hammer!

Inspector Hammer!

    Executive Producer

  • 11,067 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 15 1999
  • Real Name:John Williamson
  • LocationWilmington, Delaware

Posted July 02 2002 - 05:41 AM

quote...
"...in reality they are popularity/political award."

I'm starting to believe that too, and it really sucks. Posted Image

quote...
"...these actors being robbed of an Oscar is almost becoming a weekly issue with you John."

Pure nonsense!

I havn't said anyone was robbed of an Oscar in at least a couple of weeks! Posted Image
"That's Jack Bauer!!!!!! He's coming for me!!!!!" - Charles Logan

#18 of 24 Seth Paxton

Seth Paxton

    Lead Actor

  • 7,588 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 05 1998

Posted July 02 2002 - 06:11 AM

Quote:
At least we all have to admit that these things are very subjective.
Thank god Mike and Butch came in with those posts, so that I didn't have to.

Spreading the wealth around is not a bad thing first of all. I mean Crowe got his after being missing on Insider, and Denzel got his after missing on X.

However, if you guys want we can just give it to Hanks and Crowe every year.

Keep this in mind, people ALSO complain when the same actor or actress gets nominated year after year.

And also for everyone thinking robbery there is someone like Lou thinking "what's the big deal".


SUBJECTIVE is NOT political. Spreading it around is not political, it's trying to be nice and give everyone some recognition for their good efforts. And voting, a popularity contest by its very nature, will always pull toward the mainstream a bit. In fact, I have been very happy that most years the average filmgoer thinks the Oscars are some artsy pick rather than the best film. That tells me it's not a total sell-out forgetting about the artistic side of film...that would be the Blockbuster Awards. Posted Image

Any of us can look at anyone's actions and either be pessimistically suspicious or optimistically understanding.

But once you choose your outlook, all evidence will seem to back up your stance.


In regards to this specific case, I think I would have voted for Crowe, but have no problem with Denzel winning. I sort of like that "entertainment" films are not lost in the shuffle because I think they still require great talent to make them play so well (think Ford in Raiders, along with SS direction).

So while I thought Gladiator was a non-Oscar calliber pop film, I did think Crowe was excellent and worthy of the win. Denzel carried TD in much the same way Crowe carried Gladiator, IMO. That should count for something. It's also what paid off for Roberts last year even though Burstyn did more in a smaller role.

It doesn't hurt if you are everything a film is about and people really enjoy the film. Naturally you are going to stick in their minds.

Just like getting a very emotional part is a big benefit. But isn't it perhaps tougher to make a subtle part great, or an entertaining part shine as serious acting, than it is to ball and cry over your son/husband/mom/wife dying of cancer or something?

Denzel dominated the screen with a colorful performance, Crowe played it a bit closer to the vest yet had the "I'm crazy" thing to lean on to also. In the end for me it was almost a pick 'em so I would have been satisfied with either winner, and I suspect the voting was close as it was.

#19 of 24 Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Studio Mogul

  • 24,507 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted July 02 2002 - 06:16 AM

Ditto to what Seth just said, I think??????????Posted Image




Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#20 of 24 Quentin

Quentin

    Screenwriter

  • 2,492 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2002
  • Real Name:Quentin H
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted July 02 2002 - 06:35 AM

It really IS all subjective.

I happen to be someone who was NOT impressed by Crowe's performance in ABM. I thought it was too much. I thought he acted the infirmity (with all his twitches and mumbling and baggy clothes) rather than digging deep and finding the character. I don't necessarily blame this all on Crowe...I think the script and Howard have a lot to do with it. But, I didn't even think the performance was worthy of a nom.

However, I DID think he was robbed for "The Insider". That is a sublime performance that does the opposite of what I just described. Incredible.


Back to Archived Threads 2001-2004



Forum Nav Content I Follow