About to DeOSCARIZE SHAKESPEARE OR SPIELBERG?

This site is not affiliated with, nor endorsed by, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

 

It has been said many times before at DeOscarize.com that he or she who directs the best picture should be considered by The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to be the Best Director.

BEST PICTURE 2009 THE HURT LOCKER

BEST PICTURE 2009
THE HURT LOCKER

WINNER BEST DIRECTOR 2009 KATHRYN BIGELOW Born: 1951 THE HURT LOCKER

WINNER BEST DIRECTOR 2009
KATHRYN BIGELOW
Born: 1951
THE HURT LOCKER

That’s how it usually goes. On occasion, however, the Academy goes another way, as they say, and chooses a director who has not created the Best Picture of the year or at least,

WINNER Best Director 1940 JOHN FORD 1894-1973 THE GRAPES OF WRATH

WINNER Best Director 1940
JOHN FORD
1894-1973
THE GRAPES OF WRATH

the film that was chosen to be the Best Picture of that year.

 

NEW BEST PICTURE 1940 THE GRAPES OF WRATH

NEW BEST PICTURE 1940
THE GRAPES OF WRATH

PLEASE SEE “DeOscarize Rebecca, Best Picture 1940”.

DeOSCARIZED BEST PICTURE 1940 REBECCA

DeOSCARIZED BEST PICTURE 1940
REBECCA

The same thing happened in 1981 when Hugh Hudson

NOMINEE BEST DIRECTOR 1981 HUGH HUDSON CHARIOTS OF FIRE

NOMINEE BEST DIRECTOR 1981
HUGH HUDSON
CHARIOTS OF FIRE

did not win Best Director for that year`s Best Picture, Chariots of Fire.

WINNER Best Picture 1981 CHARIOTS OF FIRE

WINNER Best Picture 1981
CHARIOTS OF FIRE

We dealt with that, too. Please See: “Chariots of Fire, Best Picture?! Really?”

NEW Best Picture 1981 REDS

NEW Best Picture 1981
REDS

Then in 1998 the Academy chose Shakespeare in Love to be that year`s best picture.

WINNER BEST PICTURE 1998 SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

WINNER BEST PICTURE 1998
SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

However its director John Madden did not win for Best Director.

NOMINEE Best Director 1998 JOHN MADDEN Born: 1949 SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

NOMINEE Best Director 1998
JOHN MADDEN
Born: 1949
SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

That honour, that ticket to immortality was awarded to a director who had already achieved that immortality in 1993 by having directed the not just the #1 film at the box office for that year

#1 AT THE BOX OFFICE 1993 $1.029 BILLION

#1 AT THE BOX OFFICE 1993
$1.029 BILLION

 

CAST LEFT TO RIGHT: MARTIN FERRERO  Born: 1947, SIR RICHARD ATTENBOROUGH  1923-2014 JEFF GOLDBLUM Born: 1952, SAM NEILL Born: 1947, LAURA DERN Born: 1967

CAST LEFT TO RIGHT:
MARTIN FERRERO
Born: 1947,
SIR RICHARD ATTENBOROUGH
1923-2014
JEFF GOLDBLUM
Born: 1952,
SAM NEILL
Born: 1947,
LAURA DERN
Born: 1967

But for also having directed that same year, the 8th greatest American film ever made I speak with reverence of Schindler’s List.

WINNER BEST PICTURE 1993 SCHINDLER'S LIST

WINNER BEST PICTURE 1993
SCHINDLER’S LIST

 

In filmic time, I’ve just returned from having re-screened Saving Private Ryan

NOMINEE BEST PICTURE 1998 SAVING PRIVATE RYAN

NOMINEE BEST PICTURE 1998
SAVING PRIVATE RYAN

and I have come to realize that the reason John Madden did not win Best Director 1998 was the same reason Hugh Hudson did not win in 1981 and Alfred Hitchcock

NOMINEE BEST DIRECTOR 1940 ALFRED HITCHCOCK 1899-1980 REBECCA

NOMINEE BEST DIRECTOR 1940
ALFRED HITCHCOCK
1899-1980
REBECCA

did not win in 1940 and that is, that the Academy tacitly knew that the film they chose for Best Picture was in fact, not. Extenuating circumstances or outrageous profits prevented the best movie from becoming the Best Picture. In 1998, I suspect the extenuating circumstance that gave Shakespeare in Love the win was Harvey Weinstein.

HARVEY WEINSTEIN Born: 1952 PRODUCER/STUDIO EXECUTIVE

HARVEY WEINSTEIN
Born: 1952
PRODUCER/STUDIO EXECUTIVE

If he could get the Academy to choose The Artist,

WINNER BEST PICTURE 2011 THE ARTIST

WINNER BEST PICTURE 2011
THE ARTIST

he could certainly have gotten them to choose Shakespeare in Love instead.

WINNER Best Actress 1998 GWYNETH PALTROW Born: 1972 SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

WINNER Best Actress 1998
GWYNETH PALTROW
Born: 1972
SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

It is a wonderful movie and there really should have been more comedies chosen as Best Picture over the years by the Academy.

WINNER 1998 Best Supporting Actress JUDI DENCH Born:  1934 SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

WINNER 1998
Best Supporting Actress
JUDI DENCH
Born: 1934
SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

But almost 20 years later, Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan, particularly the first 30 minutes establishes a very good case for being the film that should have been Best Picture 1998,

NOMINEE BEST ACTOR 1998 TOM HANKS Born: 1956 SAVING PRIVATE RYAN

NOMINEE BEST ACTOR 1998
TOM HANKS
Born: 1956
SAVING PRIVATE RYAN

the same as Reds should have been Best Picture 1981 and Grapes of Wrath 1940. As you can see DeOscarize.com has already dealt with the former two and now it’s time to put an emphasis on the latter.

At DeOscarize.com it’s time to approve or appeal my decision to DeOscarize Shakespeare in Love

DeOSCARIZED BEST PICTURE 1998 SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

DeOSCARIZED BEST PICTURE 1998
SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

and make Saving Private Ryan the NEW Best Picture of 1998 thereby preserving the added immortality that Steven Spielberg enjoys in retaining Best Director 1998.

NEW BEST PICTURE 1998 SAVING PRIVATE RYAN

NEW BEST PICTURE 1998
SAVING PRIVATE RYAN

WINNER BEST DIRECTOR 1998 STEVEN SPIELBERG Born: 1946 SAVING PRIVATE RYAN

WINNER BEST DIRECTOR 1998
STEVEN SPIELBERG
Born: 1946
SAVING PRIVATE RYAN

Interesting. We started this with the intention of DeOscarizing Steven Spielberg and ended up DeOscarizing Shakespeare in Love, instead.  That’s never happened before but now that it has, it just adds to the ebb and flow of the alternate reality that is this website. If you don’t like where you are, you can always phone home at DeOscarize.com.

NOMINEE BEST PICTURE 1983 E.T. The ExtraTerrrestrial

NOMINEE BEST PICTURE 1983
E.T.
The ExtraTerrrestrial

NOMINEE BEST DIRECTOR 1983 STEVEN SPIELBERG W/ DREW BARRYMORE  7 YEARS OLD

NOMINEE BEST DIRECTOR 1983
STEVEN SPIELBERG
W/ DREW BARRYMORE
7 YEARS OLD

DREW BARRYMORE Born: 1975

DREW BARRYMORE
Born: 1975

Of course I can see where folks might think I’m wrong. I’m prepared to make my case for DeOscarizing Shakespeare in Love. Can you make the case to prevent it? Is there another moive that you would DeOscarize Shakespeare in Love for? Let’s discuss it.

Enjoy! Discuss! Prevail!

 

This is my Website. My DeOscarize©™ Website consists solely of this Webpage. Although it may not seem like much to you, let me assure you that it has the requisite originality to qualify it for copyright protection under USC § 204. Copy at your peril!

 

Copyright © 2015 Thomas O’Neill

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s