Go to Ask.com


enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by normdepalma
Congrats academy for making a pick that will live in the same infamy as 98's Shakespeare in Love, or 56's Around the World in 80 Days. While There Will Be Blood will make the AFI top 100 within 10 years, No Country will become a punchline.
Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by thebin

The AFI's top 100 is itself a joke of a list. Shakespeare in Love beating Elizabeth and I think LA Confidential was bad, but Crash still stands out as the worst Best Picture winner since probably 1990 when Dances with Wolves bear Goodfellas.

Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by tjcerveza

If I'm not mistaken, Shakespeare in Love also beat out Saving Private Ryan, which I found to be a much more moving film. I liked Shakespear in Love and Elizabeth, but Saving Private Ryan was much more powerful. The Academy seems to have a weakness for anglophile costume extravaganzas.

But I guess that's the point. It is all subjective, and means little. People like what they like.

Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by thebin

I thought Private Ryan was pretty good at first, then I saw Band of Brothers. Once you have seen Brothers, Ryan really pales in comparison as mediocre stuff.

Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by progressivebulldog
thebin:

I thought Private Ryan was pretty good at first, then I saw Band of Brothers. Once you have seen Brothers, Ryan really pales in comparison as mediocre stuff.

I haven't seen band of brothers but if it is better then saving Private Ryan which is, in my opinion, the greatest war film ever made then it must be very good indeed.

Nevertheless the fact that Ryan lost to the lightweight Shakespeare in love is still a travesty.

Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by maroci
Uh, no. No Country was by far the better film, and that's from a P.T. Anderson fan.
Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by pfire
So, so glad There Will be Blood didn't win. Honest, I don't know what critics were raving about this year. I don't think ANY of these movies will be remembered even 5 years from now. TWBB had great cinematography, but serious flaws. The main character was a psychopath. Makes for good scenery chewing (DDL's forte), but not much in the way of understanding a character's motivation. Saw Michael Clayton, and it was okay, but doesn't it seem that territory's been done to death? I thought Damages, the FX series, mined the same issues, but with more complexity and ambiguity. Didn't see NCFOM, but from what I understand, it's another psychopathic character, Atonement sounded depressing as well, and while I want to see Juno, I'll wait for DVD.
Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by Mondegreen

maroci:
Uh, no. No Country was by far the better film, and that's from a P.T. Anderson fan.

I think they were pretty close in terms of quality, and I really liked them both. In most years, There Will Be Blood would have taken top honors, but this was a good year.

My only hope is that we keep seeing this kind of quality from Hollywood.

Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by Paula26

So are you saying that in ten years' time, TWBB will drink NFCOM's milkshake?

[Sorry. I had to.]

<link>

Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by tjcerveza

Band of Brothers was an excellent series, and with a series on HBO, you can take time to develop characters, which viewers become invested in. Tom Hanks and Speilberg produced Band, after making Ryan, so it makes sense they would build on the success of the movie. But when comparing theaterically released films, Saving Private Ryan, in my opinion, was one of the best war movies ever made, and was far more memorable then the other movies made that year.

Re: No Country for Shakespeare in Love
by lucabrasi

As I recall, Harvey Weinstein outhustled Spielberg's Oscar-vote husting team with "Shakespeare in Love" thus depriving "Saving Private Ryan" of an expected win for Best Picture in 1998 (How expected? Spielberg crony Harrison Ford was the Best Picture presenter, and a millisecond of a look on his face when he opened the envelope and saw the "wrong" winner foretold his shock.)

Spielberg won Best Director, however.

The battle was joined. Dreamworks would not be outhustled by Miramax again! Extreme ass-kickings were applied and Dreamworks beat Harvey the next two times out: "American Beauty" (1999) and "Gladiator" (2000.)

"L.A. Confidential" was beaten for Best Picture by "Titanic" for 1997, alas. For most of the past 20 years, "LAC" would have easily beat the Best Picture winner of that year (like "Gladiator" or "A Beautiful Mind," though Russell Crowe was in all three.) Such is the bad luck of coming out in the wrong Oscar year.

View as RSS news feed in XML