Oh god, what a year. Look at those five (okay… four) nominees. They’re terrific. And then the decisions they made — not really a weak one in the bunch. I may disagree with one of them, but outside of that, they’re great. This also feels a bit like an underdog year. Since Bugsy was obviously the classy film in contention, and JFK being what it is — it just seems surprising that The Silence of the Lambs won the way it did. But I’m not complaining.

The Silence of the Lambs is the third and most recent film to win the big five — Best Picture, Best Screenplay, Best Director for Jonathan Demme (talked about here), Best Actor for Anthony Hopkins (talked about here) and Best Actress for Jodie Foster (talked about here). Perfect decisions, the lot of them. Maybe the Demme and Foster wins could have gone differently, but I like the big five win. It’s nice. (Also, fun fact: All three films to win the big five (you better know which three they are) only won those five awards and nothing else. Weird, huh? The rest of the year is simple: Mercedes Ruehl won Best Supporting Actress for The Fisher King (talked about here). The category was terribly weak and she was really the only choice. And Best Supporting Actor was Jack Palance for City Slickers (talked about here). Not a great choice based on performance by any stretch (Michael Lerner (and for that matter, an un-nominated John Goodman) was so much better in Barton Fink), but it’s a veteran Oscar, and Palance is awesome. So it’s okay.

1991 is a very simple year, punctuated by great films. Seriously, if you haven’t seen at least three of the films on this list (though really, four), you probably don’t really like movies.

BEST PICTURE – 1991

And the nominees were…

Beauty and the Beast (Walt Disney Pictures)

Bugsy (TriStar)

JFK (Warner Bros.)

The Prince of Tides (Columbia)

The Silence of the Lambs (Orion) Read the rest of this page »

I like 1992 a lot. Because this could have turned into a really bad year. But the Academy rallied. I say that because, based on the precursors, it seems like The Crying Game or Scent of a Woman were possibly favorites to win here. Though, Unforgiven did have the most nominations (along with Howards End), so maybe it was always gonna win. Either way, I’m glad they went the way they did.

Clint Eastwood won Best Director for the film (talked about here), which is nice. He deserved it (plus the other nominees were so weak). Gene Hackman also won Best Supporting Actor for the film (talked about here), which was a good decision. They were gonna give it to either him or Nicholson, and while I liked Nicholson’s performance better, I’m glad they gave it to Hackman. Best Actor this year was Al Pacino for Scent of a Woman (talked about here), which, just logistically, was a good decision. The man was so horrendously overdue by this point, it was best to just give him something. Of course, the win came at the expense of a brilliant Denzel Washington in Malcolm X and Robert Downey Jr. in Chaplin, but sometimes it’s best to just correct mistakes. Denzel got his second Oscar anyway. It worked out as well as it could have. Best Actress was Emma Thompson for Howards End (talked about here). The performance wasn’t particularly good (nor was the film), but it was just her time. It also allowed Holly Hunter to win after this, and the category wasn’t that strong. So it’s fine. And Best Supporting Actress was Marisa Tomei for My Cousin Vinny (talked about here). I don’t care what anyone says, I think this is a terrific decision. The category was one of the worst in history. It was between her and Judy Davis, and I think Tomei’s been more of a lasting actress than Davis, having given more awards-worthy performances over her career. (I also liked her performance better and didn’t despise her film, so that also helped.)

Overall, this is a year that could have turned out very sour, and instead, turned out all right. I don’t disagree with the winners (just the films two of them won for). And then we get Unforgiven as a Best Picture, which is amazing. It’s really the film on here that’s held up the best. Chalk up another great decision to the 90s (making up for those awful 80s).

BEST PICTURE – 1992

And the nominees were…

The Crying Game (Miramax)

A Few Good Men (Columbia, Castle Rock Entertainment)

Howards End (Sony Pictures Classics)

Scent of a Woman (Universal)

Unforgiven (Warner Bros.) Read the rest of this page »

1993 is a real easy one to recap, since one of the consensus best films of the Oscars was up this year — Schindler’s List. I doubt there are many people who would argue with this choice.

Steven Spielberg also (finally) wins Best Director for the film (talked about here). Unfortunately, the film does not also win Best Actor for Liam Neeson, because they decided to give the award to Tom Hanks for Philadelphia (talked about here), which I think is a terrible decision. Not only should Liam Neeson have won here, but Daniel Day-Lewis, Anthony Hopkins (and even Laurence Fishburne) gave better performances than Hanks did. I rank this as one of the worst Best Actor decisions of all time. Then, Holly Hunter won Best Actress for The Piano (talked about here). This is because the Academy was stupid and gave Cher an Oscar over her in 1987 and because the Academy couldn’t contain themselves the year before this and gave Emma Thompson an Oscar for a lesser performance than this one. But, Holly got an Oscar, so it works out, even if I don’t like the film all that much. Anna Paquin also won Best Supporting Actress for the film (talked about here), which I consider one of the worst decisions of all time in the category. Nearly everyone else in the category gave a better performance than she did. Speaking of everyone else giving a better performance than the winner, Tommy Lee Jones won Best Supporting Actor for The Fugitive (talked about here). It’s pretty clear they were voting for the man and not the performance, because Ralph Fiennes, Pete Postlethwaite and Leonardo DiCaprio were all better than Jones was. But I grudgingly accept this because I love Tommy Lee Jones. Still, he shouldn’t have won.

But these questionable middle decisions are all pushed aside because of a strong Best Picture choice. That’s how these work. A great Best Picture choice hides all other terrible ones. But at least we got a strong Best Picture choice. That’s nice. That’s not always a guaranteed.

BEST PICTURE – 1993

And the nominees were…

The Fugitive (Warner Bros.)

In the Name of the Father (Universal)

The Piano (Miramax)

The Remains of the Day (Columbia)

Schindler’s List (Universal) Read the rest of this page »

Ah, 1994. I love seeing people get upset at this. This year gives me no trouble whatsoever. Yet when everyone points to questionable decisions in recent years, this and 1998 are almost always the first two to come up (2005 has also crept into that conversation). Yet to me — it makes perfect sense. The Academy will always be the Academy.

Outside of Best Picture, Forrest Gump wins Best Actor for Tom Hanks (talked about here), which on its own is a good decision (the category sucked and he was great. The only really questionable part was him having won the year before this, which I feel shouldn’t have happened), and Best Director for Robert Zemeckis (talked about here), which was a given based on the Best Picture win. Best Actress was Jessica Lange for Blue Sky (talked about here), which is a bad decision, but makes sense knowing that Lange was considered heavily overdue, and the Academy didn’t want to give Jodie Foster a (deserved) third Oscar in seven years. Best Supporting Actor was Martin Landau for Ed Wood (talked about here), which was a really good decision. I just had to stand by Sam Jackson there. And Best Supporting Actress was Dianne Wiest for Bullets Over Broadway (talked about here), which I think was a bad decision (Jennifer Tilly was much better in that same film).

As for this category — look, when Forrest Gump, Pulp Fiction and The Shawshank Redemption (let’s also not forget Quiz Show) are nominated for Best Picture, there are going to be strong opinions. Gump is clearly the most Academy-friendly of the bunch, therefore it stands to reason it won. End of discussion. It makes sense. So there’s no point in saying it shouldn’t have won, because it’s a great film, and the Academy will always vote for something like this. Your opinion may be different (as mine is), but it doesn’t make this that terrible a decision.

BEST PICTURE – 1994

And the nominees were…

Forrest Gump (Paramount)

Four Weddings and a Funeral (PolyGram Filmed Entertainment, Working Title)

Pulp Fiction (Miramax)

Quiz Show (Hollywood Pictures)

The Shawshank Redemption (Columbia, Castle Rock Entertainment) Read the rest of this page »

1995 is one of the strangest years in recent Academy history. Because seemingly, Apollo 13 was the film this year. It won all the major precursors — the PGA, the DGA (this is one of the only 6 times in history where the DGA and Oscar winner differed), SAG — and yet was almost completely shut out here. Must have been a real interesting race, that’s for sure.

Aside from this category, Braveheart also wins Best Director for Mel Gibson (talked about here), which is a good decision by virtue of the fact that Ron Howard wasn’t even nominated in the category. Then Best Actor was Nicolas Cage for Leaving Las Vegas (talked about here), a decision I love. (It was him or Anthony Hopkins, and Hopkins had one already.) Best Actress was Susan Sarandon for Dead Man Walking (talked about here). I don’t like this decision, I felt Elisabeth Shue was much better in Leaving Las Vegas, but Sarandon was going to win one anyway, so this was as good a time as any. Best Supporting Actor was Kevin Spacey for The Usual Suspects (talked about here). I can’t be objective on this category, so I just say good for him. And Best Supporting Actress was Mira Sorvino for Mighty Aphrodite (talked about here), which was a perfect decision. She was amazing in that movie.

But this category — I wonder what it is that led to such a drastic change in voting. Was it that Braveheart was more emotional for the voters? Actually, what I bet it was is that people saw Apollo 13 as more of a populist film without any heart, whereas the Academy can never turn down an actor-director. (By the way, I also see this category as directly responsible for what happened in 2001.)

BEST PICTURE – 1995

And the nominees were…

Apollo 13 (Universal, Imagine Entertainment)

Babe (Universal)

Braveheart (Paramount, Icon)

Il Postino (Miramax)

Sense and Sensibility (Columbia) Read the rest of this page »