Has RotK's Best Pic Win Worn Off?

[hectorberlioz]

Opinions on this question. I think perhaps it has...
Certainly the signifigance and glitz of the Best Picture wins has worn off for me.

[brownjenkins]

The Oscars have always been hit and miss on best picture, and just about everything else for that matter. But RotK was certainly one of the best films that year, a lot better than Seabiscuit. :p

Lost in Translation is the only runner up I can think of that came close.

[brownjenkins]

If you look at this list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Best_Picture), one could argue that the academy has actually gotten better over the years at picking best pictures.

[hectorberlioz]

You know, I thought it was a recent phenomenon that the Academy Awards went to movies that were basically "Oscar-made"...but if you think about it, most of the films chosen have been that way. Ghandi was a good movie, but it had that overly-zealously long feel. Patton was a good movie, but it has that overly Gee Golly Gen'ral feel.

I don't think RotK was the best LotR film, to me FotR or even TTT deserved it...and you can obviously tell the decision was made more on obligation than any feeling that RotK as a seperate film, deserved an award.

[GrayMouser]

You know, I thought it was a recent phenomenon that the Academy Awards went to movies that were basically "Oscar-made"...but if you think about it, most of the films chosen have been that way. Ghandi was a good movie, but it had that overly-zealously long feel. Patton was a good movie, but it has that overly Gee Golly Gen'ral feel.

I don't think RotK was the best LotR film, to me FotR or even TTT deserved it...and you can obviously tell the decision was made more on obligation than any feeling that RotK as a seperate film, deserved an award.

Agreed on FotR, but not on TTT, which I thought was far and away the worst.

I think the three were close enough together to be legitimately considered for overall achievement, not like those occasions (The Color of Money, Scent of a Woman) when it was clearly an apology for screwing up in past voting (The Departed?)

Made For Oscar contenders? How about Shakespeare in Love?

"Tell'em it's about Shakespeare so they'll think it's classy, but really make it about Hollywood so they'll get the jokes."

(Though Saving Private Ryan that same year was a prime candidate in the Gee Golly field. I mean, an American History teacher? With a nod to Kurt Vonnegut, how about a dispatcher of frozen custard trucks?)

[Rosie Gamgee]

When one looks at the other nominees that year, I suppose RotK was a viable contender for Best Pic. But I have qualms with the movie as a film, nevermind as an adaptation. If I had voted that year, I probably would have chosen Seabiscuit.

For me, the 'Best Pic' award has glitz and flash, but it's not much good other than to say that a certain number of important people in the Actor's Guild (or whoever it is that holds the Oscars) liked that movie best, or felt the person behind it deserved an award. Really, it's not much of an indication that the film named is a well-made film or not. Take 'Million Dollar Baby,' for instance.

So, as for the question: I didn't feel much excitement when RotK got the award.. I think it was Hollywood's nod to Peter Jackson and the fact that he had turned one of the best-selling novels of all time into one of the best-selling movie trilogies of all time; not an actual statement of the film's quality.

So, yeah. I think, in retrospect and after multiple viewings of the RotK, the Best Pic buzz has worn off--but it wasn't all that bright and warm and fuzzy to begin with.

[Jon S.]

I liked and still like the movies, appreciate that they were made, and despite all of their flaws believe we could have done far worse, for a director, than to draw PJ. That being said, with the passage of time, I'm finding myself increasingly sad that the full potential of what could have been was lost. Little things about the films that I glossed over at the time, unhelpful comic relief, unnecessary and distracting changes from the books, movement of actions and dialog from one character to another, cutting out characters entirely out of fear the audience would not "get it" if more were included: all of these things jump out at me know when I re-watch the films. Perhaps the day will come when any of us can, on our own with home equipment and technology, "fix" the films as we each see fit. Then each of us will own the version that speaks best to our own hearts.

[Rosie Gamgee]

That's pretty... sentimental? Hey, do you really think it would be possible to have home-movie-editing options available to the public?? That would be cool!

The thing about the Best Pic award is that it should not be given to a movie just because, "we really think the team deserved it" or "he's never won a Best Pic for his work" or "it's my favourite movie this year" or "they worked so hard on the last two films, we should give them something" etc. The Best Pic award should be given to the picture that is the best made. Which, some may say that is a matter of debate, but it's not much more complicated than a photography contest. You look for excellence in composition: in color, in line--in the case of a movie, in acting, in scheme, in direction, in story, in storytelling. I'm sorry, but RotK did not compete in those areas with Seabiscuit. Seabiscuit was better acted, better told, better composed than RotK had a hope to be. Mind, I enjoyed RotK from a movie standpoint--in fact, while I own the movie RotK, I do not own Seabiscuit--but I really don't think it deserved that Best Pic.

[hectorberlioz]

My thoughts too, Rosie...I felt that if any LotR film deserved it, it was FotR....after that, it just felt like they were trying to make up for something. Same with the recent win by Scorsese.

[Rosie Gamgee]

Hector... you and me agree on something?? What is the world coming to? :p

[hectorberlioz]

Hector... you and me agree on something?? What is the world coming to? :p
you're right: this could mean the Apocalypse:(...hurry! disagree with me!