I have seen both movies (SIL and SPR) over 10 times each. I think Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg are the best . . .GOATS. My #1 movie of all time is Schindler's List. However, I honestly feel Shakespeare In Love was totally deserving of best picture as a cinematic, sprawling "movie of old" on the genera of Gone With the Wind. at 17:22 my comment is separate from any dirty tricks and campaigning by Weinstein, and as you say in 19:08, SIL is a great movie. Finally, you are correct; since the 1950's we have been watching hundreds of WWII movies. SPR was just another (great) movie, but there have been many. And I hated American Beauty and believe it didn't deserve any of the wins.
Well, much as I respect your right to have an opinion, I wholeheartedly disagree with it. Shakespeare absolutely deserved that Oscar. After the first 20 minutes, I found saving private Ryan to be boring. I think war movies are unfairly attributed a sense of prestige and weight that they don’t automatically deserve. Saving private Ryan, in my opinion falls apart after its impressive opening, and never finds another moment of storytelling as realistic or powerful as the opening sequence. I do agree that Cate Blanchett should’ve won and I would sooner agree to Elizabeth winning best picture than SPR.
Dude this Indian guy is yapping. Shakespeare in Love literally won more precursors than SPR prior to the Oscars winning best film at the BAFTA, Golden Globes and best cast ensemble at SAG meanwhile SPR had only won best film at the critics choice and golden globes, It was clear that Shakespeare in Love was the favorite to win even before the ceremony.
@@zzz7103 When you say, no one cares about Shakespeare in love, you’re wrong. Because I’m here defending it because I love it. So I care about Shakespeare in Love. And when they voted, so did the Academy, as proven when, at the end of the day, the Oscar went to Shakespeare in Love. Doesn’t matter if you don’t like it or find it average or weak. It won.
It’s funny how Peter Jackson’s crew modeled one of the ugliest characters in Lord of the Rings after Harvey Weinstein himself bc he told Peter Jackson he would only allow the series to be made if it was condensed into a singular film
Lol, it's one of my favorite tidbits. The Weinstein brothers almost ruined LOTR on a number of occasions. One was, as you mentioned, making a single film. The other was that Bob Weinstein wanted them to kill off some of the Hobbits (and I think he admitted to not even reading the book). They also threatened to replace Jackson with Tarantino. Thank goodness Jackson found New Line Cinema.
That's a shame. Given how Cate Blanchett and Fernanda Montenegro's performances were an excellent mix of charm, guarded pragmatism, and desperate fear, it's frustrating to see their work overshadowed by Weinstein's deep pockets.
Dude this Indian guy is yapping. Shakespeare in Love literally won more precursors than SPR prior to the Oscars winning best film at the BAFTA, Golden Globes and best cast ensemble at SAG meanwhile SPR had only won best film at the critics choice and golden globes, It was clear that Shakespeare in Love was the favorite to win even before the ceremony.
Also, Gwyneth Paltrow for best actress? Fernanda Montenegro, from Brazil, did a fantastic job. But Weinstein was in control back then. Thankfully, he is rotting in jail now.
Dude this Indian guy is yapping. Shakespeare in Love literally won more precursors than SPR prior to the Oscars winning best film at the BAFTA, Golden Globes and best cast ensemble at SAG meanwhile SPR had only won best film at the critics choice and golden globes, It was clear that Shakespeare in Love was the favorite to win even before the ceremony.
I don't think Weinstein is as bad as the people who never said a word about his behaviour. They kept quiet out of fear of loosing jobs, I.e money and fame. All out there saying the same story....we never saw shit ...and they did liars .
It's crazy because Joseph Fiennes was in BOTH Elizabeth and Shakespeare In Love yet in my opinion, he really shined the most with Cate Blanchett onscreen. They both had amazing chemistry, whereas in the latter film it's like he carried majority of the scenes between Will and Viola. Also i do remember reading not too long ago that Fiennes himself got into a feud with W*instein during those days......so i think the fact that nearly everyone in Shakespeare in Love got Oscar nods except the actor playing the titular character meant something
I feel like The Prince of Egypt should've been nominated for Best Picture instead of Shakespeare in Love. But we all know how the Academy feels about animated movies.
Fantasy, sci-fi, and animation often get the short end of the stick when it comes to the awards. I don't think Best Animated Feature was even a thing at that point. Sentiment has changed more recently, but I think it's safe to say that animated movies are as good as, if not better than, most live actions films at this point. Across the Spider-Verse and the TMNT Mutant Mayhem were 2 of the best last year.
@@Syntopikon Best Animated Feature didn't become a thing until 2002. Infact one of the studios that encouraged the Academy to make the category was DreamWorks who at the time was one of Disney's huge competitors in Animation.
@@Syntopikon Agreed. That is because whatever limitation Action/Hero films has in Live Action, can easily be done in animation. No restrictions AND killer story for the audience.
Spielberg loves making films. Genuinely. I bet the only reason he does any of the schmoozing at all is bc he knows he gets the freedom to make more of the films he wants to make if he gets more money & fame. Weinstein loves being the bigshot. He loves power. His money + fame serviced his power. I think films were incidental; a vehicle to power. He would've been a monster in real estate or advertising or any field he went into. But Spielberg is a filmmaker.
@@donotworryatall because Terry Gilliam is not really a good person. He's called Schindler's List "jewish propaganda" in the past. Also Gilliam's films are absolutely terrible when compared to Spielberg's.
Saving Private Ryan, Elizabeth or Fargo are considered classics today, while no one is talking about Shakespeare in Love or The English Patient anymore.
Make no mistake Shakespeare In Love and The English Patient are absolutely classics and great movies. Weinstein's bullshit doesn't take anything away from those movies.
Which is a pity. The English Patient is a beautiful movie. I think. Maybe it's just "too beautiful" and "too romantic" for today's taste. LA Confidential was also a great movie and lost to Titanic. Though it's not talked about (has no technical extravaganza in it like Titanic) still a massively great movie which deserves much more love. Maybe it has something to do with Titanic had Leo.and Kate, LA conf had Kevin Spacey in it (and he was brilliant, but his press hasn't been good lately).
I watched Saving Private Ryan in a theater showing double features (the other movie was the Wesley Snipes starrer Blade). I remember Saving was such a depressing film but Blade was fucking fantastic.
@@chuckselvage3157 A wonderful quote that comes from the talents of Salome Jens of the Star Trek franchise, but from September 27, 1985-present, which she wrote for today's audiences and fans alike: "So don't be afraid to show off!" And she did masterfully well to give the people what they want.
Yes, they even got the Presidential candidates involved. That's how dirty this campaign was. Saving Private Ryan altered the culture. Shakespear in Love was a quirky movie people watch once and forget about. The movie didn't even make sense if you thought about its plot for too long. It's a stain on the Oscars to this day
And will remain one. One to note about the award is that the writer, Marc Norman, who was also a producer, didn't get to speak. When he tries to approach the mic, Weinstein gets on it and hogs it until the time is up.
“Saving Private Ryan” was far and away the better film. The invasion scene at the beginning was so realistic that veterans that actually fought there were sickened by the realism. If it had actually won, Shakespeare would be a forgotten footnote in cinematic history. In fact, it STILL is.
I actually did forget shakespeare in love. Ok film, but not among great films. But Saving private Ryan felt a bit cliche and I am not that fan of Tom Hanks.
Ryan has a great opening and then falls off a cliff. It wasn't even the best war film of the year - that was Thin Red Line. I feel Shakespeare is very underated and I love that movie, not taking away that Weinstein is obviously a mionster...
Having a decent opening 20 minutes isn't all it takes to be the best movie of the year. SVR sucks and isn't realistic. The end of the movie has someone distracting a tank with a motorbike. The movie is dumb
The only thing i know about Shakespeare in Love is my high school English teacher got so frustrated trying to show it in class bc of all the scenes she had to keep skipping
Was she skipping bc historical inaccuracies? It couldn't be anything else. I don't remember anything in SiL that would need skipping if you were reading + teaching Shakespeare. Those plays have every kind of violence, vice, & biological act in them. Inescapable if you're being taught Shakespeare properly, thoroughly, & honestly.
As a Brazilian we feel robbed. All the other actresses deserved more but Fernanda Montenegro is a household name, one of the most iconic actres of our country and she was ROBBED of the best actress award.
@@djquinn11 I'm Canadian. OC is right. Montenegro deserved that award that year. Her performance was stunning & it was an incredible role. You're the ignorant one here.
Your video ignores one other factor that was running against "Saving Private Ryan": "The Thin Red Line" was a surprise nominee that was also about war and siphoned off votes, especially since it had been Terrence Malick's first film in 20 years. Scorsese had even added that film to his list of the best films of the entire 90s when he made a list for Ebert's TV show, so it's fair to say voting members who preferred auteur-driven films about war were split, allowing "Shakespeare" to divide and conquer, with the help of Weinstein's aggressive tactics which you lay out quite well.
True, however The Thin Red Line was a completely different film than Saving Private Ryan. The Thin Red Line, like most of Terrence Malik's output, is dreamlike and philosophical while Saving Private Ryan throws you into the carnage and brutality of war like no movie had ever done up to that point. Literal bullets whizzing over your head. I still don't understand to this day how someone can win Best Director but their film not win Best Picture. In my opinion, the two categories go hand in hand.
@@gregmeyer1805 very recently, Jane Campion deservedly won as Best Director for The Power of the dog, that should have also won as Best Picture. Instead, the Best Picture went to Coda, an unremarkable, forgettable, and forgotten movie, a remake of a much better French movie, and a box office super bomb. I think that, in that case, the Academy simply did not want to award a Netflix movie?
@@vins1979I will disagree with you because I believe that The Power of the Dog is more unremarkable than Coda. Direction wise, sure we can say that TPOTD is superior. But Coda is elevated by so many other factors including great performances from the entire cast which some being people with real disabilities. Funny how that case is similar to Saving Private Ryan vs Shakespeare in Love, since TPOTD is about a dark story vs a story of fighting for your dreams in Coda. For the record I will say that I consider Saving Private Ryan to be a superior movie over Shakespeare in Love, and it should have won best picture 100%.
Watching how an Oscar bait film like maestro lost to a masterpiece like Oppenheimer, I’d say that the 2024 Oscar awards are showing signs that good movies will earn the awards.
Yup. This was a solid slate compared to other years. They're rerunning several Nolan films like The Dark Knight, Inception, Interstellar, and Dunkirk at my local Regal, so I'm looking forward to rewatching his filmography (as much as possible).
I can see why some would think that, but I'm not so sure. Oscar bait movies (at least in recent times) usually get a release later in the year (and sometimes get a limited run to meet the bare minimum qualification). Oppenheimer, meanwhile, was released in the middle of summer (around the same time Saving Private Ryan came out in 1998) and was marketed more like a blockbuster than anything else (which it ended up being). It's a serious biopic, but it strikes me as something Nolan would do anyways instead of an affectation that he's putting on to just win Oscars. @@cadenadelreino1442
@@Syntopikon Don‘t get my wrong - I liked it but you know it’s still kind of a WWII/historical movie and as you said a bit of a biopic. Might be my personal preference but I wished movies like Perfect Days would be more popular at the Oscars. Original stuff about normal human beings. Oppenheimer did not raise my spirit, did not make me THINK, did not make me question sth etc. It could have been way more controversial as well but Nolan wasn’t bold enough IMO. It felt like he went the safe route with this one after Tenet kind of „flopped“.
@@cadenadelreino1442I think it’s just a matter of preference. From a filmmaking perspective, Oppenheimer was pretty bold. It’s cinematography, sound, score, and editing make a screenplay of mostly just people talking larger than life. Couple that with great performances from RDJ and Murphy, it was just made really well. He managed to take a complex moment in US history and make it digestible and entertaining for general audiences. That’s pretty talented in my opinion. I don’t think every movie needs to be thought provoking which is something Nolan typically goes for, but I think he took back a step because Oppenheimer was technically still an adaption. Does this mean adaptations still can’t be thought provoking? Of course not, which is probably why Oppenheimer didn’t win best adapted screenplay. I thought if the screenplay did anything well, it reminded audiences of a very significant moment in human history and the cascading effect that follows into today. Yes it was a biopic but it certainly wasn’t filmed like traditional biopics. Nolan’s style is what elevates the story and it’s why I think he deserved best director. Seeing it win best picture was icing on the cake.
Gwyneth Paltrow winning because she likely slept with Harvey is the biggest scandal in recent memory. Her nomination for her above average performance was already questionable to begin with. But you know, sleeping with Harvey does wonders for one's career.
You can see at 9:38 that Olivia Coleman and Jessie J are leaning away from Harvey because they're not comfortable sitting next to him. Even then his lewd behaviour was an open secret in the industry.
Edward Zwicks body language when he won the Oscar says it all about how he feels about Weinstein. Weinstein basically took the movie away him him and almost tried to get zwick off the project.
Saving Private Ryan should have won Best Picture, Cate Blanchett should have won Best Actress for Elizabeth and Edward Norton should have won Best Actor for American History X. Miramax distributed Life is Beautiful in America, and while Weinstein’s name isn’t on the film as any kind of producer, that films wins can still be seen as wins for Weinstein as his company distributed the film.
That is preposterous. Meryl Streep is responsible for Meryl Streep’s nominations. Clearly, you are concussed. I recommend avoiding saving private Ryan, as you’re not supposed to fall asleep if you’re concussed
@@aysadatalented actresses get overlooked all the time, it is conceivable that she got a boost of support from him and it’s widely known he campaigns heavily for his movies. Two things can exist at once.
@@Attmay was that supposed to be an insult? Some meaningless term that tells more about your lack of originality that it does about me… go to the other room with the children. Grown-ups are talking here.
I always believed this happened because the vote was split between _Saving Private Ryan_ and _The Thin Red Line._ And ranked choice voting was introduced to prevent that from happening again.
Judi Dench’s body of work is so good and there are so many other roles she deserved to win for. I’m honestly shocked she won with so little screen time. Saving Private Ryan should have won best picture. It was and still is such an incredible film.
That was the year I lost all respect for the Oscars and stopped watching regularly. A few years later I stopped watching altogether, as it was clear the Oscars were no longer based on merit, but on dirty politics, agendas, and selfish ego appeasement. When SIL won, me and most of my family, friends, and co-workers were disgusted that SIL and gp won over Saving Private Ryan and Cate Blanchett! How anyone even watches this idiotic ceremony anymore is beyond me. It is more of a “look at me” vapid cocktail party than a sophisticated merit-based award ceremony.
Thanks for your public service advisory! I had watched a bunch of these movies (English Patient, Shakespeare in Love, etc.) and didn't know this background. I was kind of like "Okay, artsy movie with some nudity with really an unmemorable plot." I didn't know a lot of this politicking/shady activity. I love that Godzilla Minus One won a best visual effects Oscar with a total budget of $10-12 million.
Glad you found it useful! And yes, the Godzilla win had be very excited. Probably my favorite win of the night. I wish Japan had submitted it for Best International Feature as well.
I saw both Saving Private Ryan and Shakespeare In Love in the cinema when they came out. I thought the first was great and the second was terrible. I also saw Elizabeth and thought Cate Blanchett deserved the Oscar for Best Actress.
Crash winning Best Picture wasn’t anywhere close to thievery that went down in March of ‘99, Saving Private Ryan is a classic, it’s one of the few movies that people see on TV and no matter where it’s at during the film, whether it just started or it’s almost over, watch the rest of it. It has a high rewatch factor to where as no one goes out of their way to re watch or even see for the first time, Shakespeare in Love, literally no channels carry that or syndicate it, I would be shocked if Netflix ever picked it up.
As much as I love Judi Dench, she should not have won for supporting actress. Lynn Redgrave was the standout in that category and should have won for Gods and Monsters
Okay, it IS arguable that Pulp Fiction could've won best picture over Forrest Gump. Or Shawshank, obviously (if anyone had seen it yet, it didn't find an audience until after the fact). All three movies left a lasting mark on cinema... Shawshank and FG for the storytelling (and FG for the at-the-time groundbreaking sfx), and Pulp Fiction for not just the storytelling, but for influencing a decade of movies that followed. It's still a 3-way tie in my mind.
I wonder how much Shawshank’s inability to find a commercial audience impacted its awards chances? As you mentioned, it didn’t find its audience until later.
Very well put together 🙌 yeah, I hate the idea of aggressive, loathsome competition over good art. The best can never win, it’s always those with the most power. Quantity over quality to them
Thanks! And yeah, I mostly agree. I can understand wanting to market the thing you make (otherwise people won't hear about it), but at a certain point, it gets to be excessive. At that point, you have to ask "If it's so good, why're you being so aggressive about it?" Spielberg wanted to let Saving Private Ryan speak for itself, whereas Weinstein just wanted to give the speech (he didn't even let the writer, Marc Norman, speak).
Shakespeare in Love winning was in my opinion Hollywood's "Jethro Tull Moment". (For those who don't know what I'm referring to, the first year that the Grammys introduced Heavy Metal as a category, the finalists were: - Iggy Pop - Metallica's "And Justice for All" - Jane's Addiction - Jethro Tull I remember the shock when Jethro Tull won. In my math class the next day, we had a Substitute teacher and the first words out his mouth were "Before I begin, I want to know Who the F**k is Jethro Tull?"
Shakespeare in love was and is a regular movie. There is nothing special in it and didn't sustained in time. Those Oscars it got will be forever a shame.,
Many of them. Oscar almost always does Not goes to the best movie. In this movie, there is definitely one that was sumply the brst these years - exactly Pulp fiction
I was in a turning lane waiting for a green light in Perth, West Australia, when I heard news on the car radio which implanted that moment on my memory forever. Cate Blanchett had not won the Oscar. Luckily, Australian acting has been honoured by the Academy a few times in the last 30 years, but that omission was really telling. The best part of SIL was of course Geoffrey Rush's performance, so Gwyneth's win was not without irony. The thing is, Oscar loves young American actresses way too much. Normally I have nothing against an American winner, because to get an Oscar nod means you've done a good job. This decision was blatantly corrupt however. Now Cate has two Oscars and is subject to what I call the Day Lewis / Streep effect, by which that third Oscar will require an instantly recognised phenomenal performance or perhaps a dozen unsuccessful nominations. Its water under the bridge now, but boy, at the time we were somewhat vexed over here.
Personally, this was the only year in which I saw all five movies nominated. Had a been a member of the academy, I would have voted for Life is Beautiful as Best Picture.
@@Syntopikon I have not seen every movie nominated for best picture in any other year. I only saw every best picture nominee for the 1999 Oscars. So that is why I don’t feel like I can comment on other years
Meanwhile, an animated movie about Moses got bubkes. Is it me or were the Jews who founded the studios actually less hostile to the Christian families who paid their bills with movie tickets than the boomers who took over the studios in the 1960s?
Very informative. I watched SPR & SIL in theatre. SPR is the one that deserved the Best Picture award, totally surprised it lost. Then all these dirty tactics came out & we had an idea why SPR lost. Thank you for a good video! I have to turn on CC bc there are times you are inaudible or talking too fast. But overall a good video. Subscribed.
Yes but the lack of Academy Awards for Terrence Malick is important in maintaining his position as the “underrated” connoisseur’s choice. (I mean this as an unironic compliment, I’m a fan of most of his films especially TTRL)
Wait, so the best acted, best written, and most technically polished film (based on all the awards it won) wasn’t deserving to win Best Picture? Make it make sense.
Glad you enjoyed it! Yeah, campaigns had happened before but Weinstein took them up to 11 and it's not really come down since. No one is as aggressive as he was now, but there's a LOT more money in the campaigning (sometimes more than the movie cost to make).
Are you sure no one went over the top? I heard back in the 60's when Chill Wills was nominated for his performance in The Alamo, things were really crazy like having buttons passed out and even a magazine ad saying: "We, the cast of The Alamo, are praying even more than the people in the Alamo prayed for their lives that Chill Wills win the Oscar." Peter Ustinov won!
I think that's more tacky than anything else (especially by current standards). Weinstein would try to convince people staying at the Academy retirement home that had voting rights to vote his way (which is more tacky than corrupt) as well as filling out peoples ballots on their behalf (which is definitely plain corrupt) and trying to get journalists to drag his opponent. It's interesting to compare it to The Alamo campaign you're talking about, though, because I think it does illustrate how reactions to campaigning have changed over time. People thought of it as tasteless for the time, but seemingly in that it was "ungentlemanly" to want an award so desperately (to the point of invoking the dead at the Alamo). Whereas with Weinstein, despite running afoul of Academy rules (or papering over them at the last minute), and his campaigning being an open secret, people, though miffed, seemingly turned a blind eye (especially in votes - whereas The Alamo was nearly shut out at the awards and John Wayne apologized for Chill Wills, Shakespeare In Love won plenty).
@@SyntopikonThe Oscar rivalry between *Spartacus* and *The Alamo* settled itself when *The Apartment* won Best Picture even though Shirley MacLaine lost best actress to Liz Taylor.
honestly, I'm just glad that shakespeare in love left the consciousness of humanity and is only remembered by people who want to throw shade at the academy for making the wrong choice
I clicked on this video just to see if I was right. I knew this was about Shakespeare In Love. Any time anyone asks me why I think the Oscars are BS is because of this. No effing way should Saving Private Ryan have lost to that movie. They're rigged, always have been.
Reminder that Richard Attenborough believed that Spielberg deserved the Best Picture Oscar for "E.T. The Extra Terrestrial" over his film "Ghandi." As a favor to him, he would go on to play John Hammond in "Jurassic Park."
The merit vs money question is why I just can’t get invested in who wins beyond checking the winners list the next day. I haven’t watched the awards show in years and have no plans to do so in the future no matter how inventive they get with it.
The only time I have ever truly gotten emotional during the Academy Awards was when Everythig Everywhere All At Once took home all those Oscars. That was a film that i knew deserved those wins, but i did not actually expect it to win due to how off-the-walls it was. Especially Ke Huy Quan's speech was a tear-jerker!
Everything Everywhere All at Once winning best picture is a good sign but I’m not sure how much A24 did campaigning wise. TBH I wasn’t sure it would wind but glad it did and especially glad Ke and Michelle won for acting
While I do think Saving Private Ryan definitely deserved Best Picture instead (Need to rewatch it also), I feel bad that Shakespeare In Love gets dumped on so much because of this controversy. I rewatched it recently and it's absolutely delightful! Should it have been won or even nominated? No, but I think if that POS, Weinstein, hadn't been associated with the project and thus caused the controversy, I think the film would be more fondly remembered today.
I'm in wholehearted agreement. It's a solid film in its own right and its unfortunate association with Weinstein is the biggest knock against it. It would've done well even without Weinstein; his involvement just tainted it (like it's done for so many great films).
If no art is bad then a lot of what people call art isn't art or there is no bad anything. The truth as far as I see it is that art created in innocence (children's art) cannot be bad but most things that are called art are not art.
It's an interesting topic and worth exploring further. My sentiment is that art is a personal thing and what one thinks is good, another might think is bad. JRR Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings is my favorite book of all time but I've met people that are bored to tears by it. I don't understand why and I think they feel the same way about me liking it. It's undoubtedly art (I consider literature, film, video games, music, and pretty much any creative endeavor to be art of some kind) but it's difficult to make an objective statement. We could go the route of whatever is most popular is objectively better, but that has it's own issues. But your sentiment that art created in innocence cannot be bad is interesting and not a POV I've heard before.
There absolutely is good and bad art. Example, Raphael was objectively a great painter. Picasso was objectively abysmal, but a product of good marketing and hype culture.
You'd have to make an argument for the objective qualities you're judging on, though, and establish those as the basis for all art. Plus, Raphael's patron was the Pope. That's as much hype and marketing as anything with Picasso. @@alexman378
@@Syntopikon There are qualities that we can agree on in terms of good art versus bad. Essentially art is a form of expression from the artist to the recipient. Great art manages to communicate a lot very effectively, from more basic concepts to more complex ones, simultaneously. Thus something like the LOTR can easily be considered high art, as can Raphael, Picasso can not. Most modern art communicates nothing but the artist's ephemeral feelings about themselves (or their mental illness). Dostoevsky on the other hand shows us the parts of ourselves we didn't know existed and perhaps didn't want to admit they exist. In short, there are very good reasons why Shakespeare is the most performed playwright 400 years after he died, and art is a lot less subjective than people think.
I’m really into the music awards more than the motion picture awards but I’m getting more and more into all these types of stories and it’s just like… woah. It’s the same in all these mediums. There’s always a slimeball
Yup. What's hard to figure out is: does the entertainment industry have an above average rate of slimeballs, or, because they're public figures, do we just know about more of them?
@@Syntopikon I would argue they had more. Money gives you opportunities that you wouldn’t have otherwise. Plus, very rarely do people get filthy rich without giving up something 🤷🏽♀️ - these people opt to give up integrity seems like.
I’m still on team Gwyneth Paltrow. - a difficult role with crazy lines to say and she made them sing. Lots of lil moments and looks like the one to Will backstage when she’s onstage is thrilling. And Elizabeth was Dull.
Lol , it's Entourage Season 2, Episode 7 - The Sundance Kids. The character, Harvey Weingard, was modeled on Harvey Weinstein. Cameron didn't like Weinstein either because of how he treated Guillermo del Toro, who was pretty good friends with Cameron (Cameron let del Toro stay at his place while they edited movies - I think it's del Toro that got Cameron into anime & manga).
@@Syntopikon Thank you, man. I read about their friendship:) Even though Jim had quite the „reputation“ as well he still seems to be a good human being.
Yup. About the worst people say about Cameron is that he's a hard taskmaster on set, but they're usually happy to work with him on future films.@@cadenadelreino1442
When I saw Shakespeare in love win best picture, it permanently changed my attitude towards Hollywood and the Oscars. I knew something wrong happened. I’ve never watched the Oscars after that. It’s not a legit award. Hell, it’s not even a popularity contest.
The Academy was tired of wartime movies like Braveheart, The English Patient, Schindler's List, Platoon and others winning Best Picture, so Shakespeare in Love was their response. Also, The Thin Red Line and Life is Beautiful, two other WWII films, may have split the votes with SPR, allowing SIL to win.
@@Syntopikon Very few are interested in the legacy 20th century centralized Hollywood entertainment model anymore. Based on recent comments from legacy entertainment execs, it’s clear they still have no idea why nobody is willing to pay $$ to watch 2 hrs of their "educational", ham fisted, and overt social engineering messages/lessons, delivered by uninteresting, one dimensional characters. They continue to blame Covid somehow, which is hilarious bc that should have been the time that they made even more $$.. it's anything and everything else but not the thing everyone else can see as plain as day
I like Shakespeare In Love decently enough, but unlike a lot of Best Picture winners, I don’t particularly like to rewatch it. As you say, it’s “frothy.” As a viewer completely unconnected to The Academy, it’s particularly random. I would be much more interested in a straightforward biopic of William Shakespeare. Funnily enough, I think that is a movie Steven Spielberg could direct to major Academy Awards success.
That's an interesting idea. On further reflection, it does seem like something Steven Spielberg could direct. I know a lot of people drag him because they think he's just "mass entertainment", but he's probably one of the few directors with such a wide range over his career.
@@Syntopikon I agree with you, with the qualifying statement that a lot of people mistake Spielberg as only a “mass entertainment “ director. He is a “mass entertainment director,” but that is only one arrow in his quiver. He is arguably the most versatile ingenious director of our time. This is a person who has shown the ability to deliver such a wide range as ET The Extra-Terrestrial, to Schindler’s List and the film under discussion Saving Private Ryan. He is a popular director, I think because he is a master of his craft and seems to be a kind, wise person.
Gwyneth Paltrow should never won, everyone agrees that she didn't deserve it. The ones who should won in her place is Fernanda Montenegro or Cate Blanchett, both amazing actress, they were robbed. Damn you Weinstein!
That was truly a real WTF moment when Saving Private Ryan did not grab the trophy that day. Whatever that other movie was that won was an absolute slog to watch and is no one talks about any more as it tarnished by that that terrible Miramax guy
@@Syntopikon no, he didn’t and you have to be pretty small minded to think that way. You can’t separate between the work of directors, actors and crew and the head of the studio that produced the movie? Because he had nothing to do with what made those movies great. Regardless of your insinuation, that he touched the movies, and whether that was an intentional pun or not, his funding and later campaigning are not why those movies were nominated or won. That’s offensive to those filmmakers, and regardless of whether you agree with their win, claiming any of those movies is tarnished by him and his actions is just childish and stupid.
The other movie was called Shakespeare in love, and it was a wonderful movie that deserved to win. Sorry that you think a war movie has to win because it makes it more prestigious or some such shit but it doesn’t.
Without knowing all this - saw Saving Private Ryan and Academy Shakespeare in Love never beckoned to me in the least - even when it won the Academy Award - nah
I have never cared at all about The Oscars or any of the seemingly endless Hollywood/ Entertainment Industry Awards Shows, and I am finding it pretty funny that the viewership numbers for ALL of the Awards Shows are down considerably, and has been trending that way for almost 15 years... and it shows no signs of slowing down, either.
“No inherent value”? Even as much as Academy Awards may be corrupt and distrusted by critics and fans, they have a big cultural and financial value, and they still do.
@@alexroselle I'd politely suggest they have a limited cultural value, but yes, they do occasionally provide an 'oscar bump' in revenue for a film. I doubt that happens that much these days with streaming and such, but historically I'd agree. The problem is that the campaign in this video accidentally did the opposite of what was intended: if you buy an award that is unwarranted then you de-value the award (both culturally and financially). If a studio can just buy an award, then what exactly does the award mean? You might as well have studios giving themselves the awards and saying they're winners. Thus, it has no inherent value, because that is effectively what happens.
Shakespeare shouldn't have won Best Picture or even Actress. Cate in Elizabeth was much better than Gwyneth.
I have seen both movies (SIL and SPR) over 10 times each. I think Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg are the best . . .GOATS. My #1 movie of all time is Schindler's List. However, I honestly feel Shakespeare In Love was totally deserving of best picture as a cinematic, sprawling "movie of old" on the genera of Gone With the Wind. at 17:22 my comment is separate from any dirty tricks and campaigning by Weinstein, and as you say in 19:08, SIL is a great movie. Finally, you are correct; since the 1950's we have been watching hundreds of WWII movies. SPR was just another (great) movie, but there have been many. And I hated American Beauty and believe it didn't deserve any of the wins.
Well, much as I respect your right to have an opinion, I wholeheartedly disagree with it. Shakespeare absolutely deserved that Oscar. After the first 20 minutes, I found saving private Ryan to be boring. I think war movies are unfairly attributed a sense of prestige and weight that they don’t automatically deserve. Saving private Ryan, in my opinion falls apart after its impressive opening, and never finds another moment of storytelling as realistic or powerful as the opening sequence. I do agree that Cate Blanchett should’ve won and I would sooner agree to Elizabeth winning best picture than SPR.
@@esciteach7997no one care about Shakespeare in love and it is telling. It is average movie, pretty weak for the best picture
Dude this Indian guy is yapping. Shakespeare in Love literally won more precursors than SPR prior to the Oscars winning best film at the BAFTA, Golden Globes and best cast ensemble at SAG meanwhile SPR had only won best film at the critics choice and golden globes, It was clear that Shakespeare in Love was the favorite to win even before the ceremony.
@@zzz7103 When you say, no one cares about Shakespeare in love, you’re wrong. Because I’m here defending it because I love it. So I care about Shakespeare in Love. And when they voted, so did the Academy, as proven when, at the end of the day, the Oscar went to Shakespeare in Love. Doesn’t matter if you don’t like it or find it average or weak. It won.
Gwyneth’s Best Actress win is definitely the most tainted win in Oscar history. Fernanda Montenegro or Cate Blanchett should have won it.
I was shocked by her win. I just knew Cate would win it. I definitely did not expect Shakespeare In Love to win best picture. Craziness
It’s funny how Peter Jackson’s crew modeled one of the ugliest characters in Lord of the Rings after Harvey Weinstein himself bc he told Peter Jackson he would only allow the series to be made if it was condensed into a singular film
Lol, it's one of my favorite tidbits. The Weinstein brothers almost ruined LOTR on a number of occasions. One was, as you mentioned, making a single film. The other was that Bob Weinstein wanted them to kill off some of the Hobbits (and I think he admitted to not even reading the book). They also threatened to replace Jackson with Tarantino. Thank goodness Jackson found New Line Cinema.
It was new info for me! I actually paused the video to marvel at the resemblance.
i thought Grishnakh looked familiar but never made the connection until i read your comment
Ironically, that "advice" might have worked on "The Hobbit".
@@perfectallycromulentummm gothmog, lieutenant to witch king in rotk
That's a shame. Given how Cate Blanchett and Fernanda Montenegro's performances were an excellent mix of charm, guarded pragmatism, and desperate fear, it's frustrating to see their work overshadowed by Weinstein's deep pockets.
AND his bullying tactics!!
Yup. It was a mix of the money, aggressiveness, and the frank bullying (and out and out corruption where applicable).
@@Syntopikon He forced women to wear his wife's dress brand, Marchesa, he was basically a mob boss.
Dude this Indian guy is yapping. Shakespeare in Love literally won more precursors than SPR prior to the Oscars winning best film at the BAFTA, Golden Globes and best cast ensemble at SAG meanwhile SPR had only won best film at the critics choice and golden globes, It was clear that Shakespeare in Love was the favorite to win even before the ceremony.
@@ZackBryan357 omg, cant you understand that is also part of campaign? all of these awards you mentioned works just like oscars.
Gwyneth Paltrow should NEVER have won for best actress. Cate Blanchett was robbed!
* Fernanda Montenegro
I was sooooo upset that GP won and not KB.
Fernanda Montenegro, actually
Well care surely wasn’t robbed of the admiration everyone has for her and her talent
Montenegro was stunning in Central Station. Unbelievable.@@alinesodre334
At the Oscars party at my house, everyone was screaming " bullshit!"
Oscars House party???!!! 😂
How could you say that?
Also, Gwyneth Paltrow for best actress? Fernanda Montenegro, from Brazil, did a fantastic job. But Weinstein was in control back then. Thankfully, he is rotting in jail now.
Dude this Indian guy is yapping. Shakespeare in Love literally won more precursors than SPR prior to the Oscars winning best film at the BAFTA, Golden Globes and best cast ensemble at SAG meanwhile SPR had only won best film at the critics choice and golden globes, It was clear that Shakespeare in Love was the favorite to win even before the ceremony.
Yea, finally paying for this awful decision. Just a horrible man
I highly doubt that guy is actually in jail.
He is!@@SalveRegina8
I don't think Weinstein is as bad as the people who never said a word about his behaviour. They kept quiet out of fear of loosing jobs, I.e money and fame. All out there saying the same story....we never saw shit ...and they did liars .
It's crazy because Joseph Fiennes was in BOTH Elizabeth and Shakespeare In Love yet in my opinion, he really shined the most with Cate Blanchett onscreen. They both had amazing chemistry, whereas in the latter film it's like he carried majority of the scenes between Will and Viola. Also i do remember reading not too long ago that Fiennes himself got into a feud with W*instein during those days......so i think the fact that nearly everyone in Shakespeare in Love got Oscar nods except the actor playing the titular character meant something
But who's table did he sit at during the Oscars, Shakespeare in Love or Elizabeth ?
Loved the maestro clips playing while you talk about Oscar bait
Makes sense considering how try hard and pretentious it is
@@shawklan27yeah I couldn’t even get 30 minutes in but I have a feeling it doesn’t get better from that
And funnily enough, it got absolutely nothing at this year’s ceremony
Maestro was shockly bad. Bradley Cooper went full Simple Jack.
The funny thing is Rocket Raccoon is one of Bradley Cooper's best roles, better than almost any Oscar bait film he's done. @@My20GUNS
I feel like The Prince of Egypt should've been nominated for Best Picture instead of Shakespeare in Love.
But we all know how the Academy feels about animated movies.
Fantasy, sci-fi, and animation often get the short end of the stick when it comes to the awards. I don't think Best Animated Feature was even a thing at that point. Sentiment has changed more recently, but I think it's safe to say that animated movies are as good as, if not better than, most live actions films at this point. Across the Spider-Verse and the TMNT Mutant Mayhem were 2 of the best last year.
@@Syntopikon Best Animated Feature didn't become a thing until 2002. Infact one of the studios that encouraged the Academy to make the category was DreamWorks who at the time was one of Disney's huge competitors in Animation.
@@Syntopikon Agreed. That is because whatever limitation Action/Hero films has in Live Action, can easily be done in animation. No restrictions AND killer story for the audience.
Personally, I thought Pleasantville should've gotten a Best Picture and Director nod
In an ideal world. Prince Of Egypt should have been. As big as Lion King.
I Have to Give Big Respect to Steven Spielberg, he Stuck to his Guns and NEVER Went as LOW as Harvey Weinstein did.
Spielberg loves making films. Genuinely. I bet the only reason he does any of the schmoozing at all is bc he knows he gets the freedom to make more of the films he wants to make if he gets more money & fame.
Weinstein loves being the bigshot. He loves power. His money + fame serviced his power. I think films were incidental; a vehicle to power. He would've been a monster in real estate or advertising or any field he went into.
But Spielberg is a filmmaker.
Well, he is called Steven Stealberg by colleagues (e.g. by Gilliam). Do you wonder why?
@@donotworryatallSpielberg wasn't the one endangering Sarah Polley's life with a multimillion dollar set piece.
@@donotworryatall because Terry Gilliam is not really a good person. He's called Schindler's List "jewish propaganda" in the past. Also Gilliam's films are absolutely terrible when compared to Spielberg's.
Yeah thats not really a surprise though is it? Steven is a filmmaker and Harvey is sludge.
Saving Private Ryan, Elizabeth or Fargo are considered classics today, while no one is talking about Shakespeare in Love or The English Patient anymore.
Make no mistake Shakespeare In Love and The English Patient are absolutely classics and great movies. Weinstein's bullshit doesn't take anything away from those movies.
I’ve only heard about The English Patient from Seinfeld, but I’ve never heard of that Shakespeare in Love thing
Which is a pity. The English Patient is a beautiful movie. I think. Maybe it's just "too beautiful" and "too romantic" for today's taste. LA Confidential was also a great movie and lost to Titanic. Though it's not talked about (has no technical extravaganza in it like Titanic) still a massively great movie which deserves much more love. Maybe it has something to do with Titanic had Leo.and Kate, LA conf had Kevin Spacey in it (and he was brilliant, but his press hasn't been good lately).
Classics by who? Maybe Saving Private Ryan, the pther two only by Blanchett’s fans who are still mad for that Oscar loss.
I watched Saving Private Ryan in a theater showing double features (the other movie was the Wesley Snipes starrer Blade). I remember Saving was such a depressing film but Blade was fucking fantastic.
Looking at it now, Harrison looks low key angry reading the title “Shakespeare In Love.”
Ford was never afraid of showing his displeasure lol.
@@chuckselvage3157 A wonderful quote
that comes from the talents of Salome Jens
of the Star Trek franchise, but from
September 27, 1985-present, which she
wrote for today's audiences and fans
alike: "So don't be afraid to show off!"
And she did masterfully well to give
the people what they want.
Yes, they even got the Presidential candidates involved. That's how dirty this campaign was. Saving Private Ryan altered the culture. Shakespear in Love was a quirky movie people watch once and forget about. The movie didn't even make sense if you thought about its plot for too long. It's a stain on the Oscars to this day
And will remain one. One to note about the award is that the writer, Marc Norman, who was also a producer, didn't get to speak. When he tries to approach the mic, Weinstein gets on it and hogs it until the time is up.
@@Syntopikon What a weasel. I did not know that.
“Saving Private Ryan” was far and away the better film. The invasion scene at the beginning was so realistic that veterans that actually fought there were sickened by the realism. If it had actually won, Shakespeare would be a forgotten footnote in cinematic history. In fact, it STILL is.
It didn't deserve Best Picture but it is still a decent film.
I actually did forget shakespeare in love. Ok film, but not among great films. But Saving private Ryan felt a bit cliche and I am not that fan of Tom Hanks.
Ryan has a great opening and then falls off a cliff. It wasn't even the best war film of the year - that was Thin Red Line.
I feel Shakespeare is very underated and I love that movie, not taking away that Weinstein is obviously a mionster...
Having a decent opening 20 minutes isn't all it takes to be the best movie of the year. SVR sucks and isn't realistic. The end of the movie has someone distracting a tank with a motorbike. The movie is dumb
You can’t tell me that “Shakespeare In Love” is better…
The only thing i know about Shakespeare in Love is my high school English teacher got so frustrated trying to show it in class bc of all the scenes she had to keep skipping
Was she skipping bc historical inaccuracies? It couldn't be anything else. I don't remember anything in SiL that would need skipping if you were reading + teaching Shakespeare. Those plays have every kind of violence, vice, & biological act in them. Inescapable if you're being taught Shakespeare properly, thoroughly, & honestly.
Why show that instead of any of the many good adaptations of Shakespeare's work? She's The Man is a better movie and more relevant to Shakespeare ffs.
As a Brazilian we feel robbed. All the other actresses deserved more but Fernanda Montenegro is a household name, one of the most iconic actres of our country and she was ROBBED of the best actress award.
Era dela ou da Cate.
Yeah, they should have based the Oscar winner on the actor’s nationality. You sound really smart…
@@djquinn11 I'm Canadian. OC is right. Montenegro deserved that award that year. Her performance was stunning & it was an incredible role. You're the ignorant one here.
@@djquinn11 you sound like the american school aystem failed you
Your video ignores one other factor that was running against "Saving Private Ryan": "The Thin Red Line" was a surprise nominee that was also about war and siphoned off votes, especially since it had been Terrence Malick's first film in 20 years. Scorsese had even added that film to his list of the best films of the entire 90s when he made a list for Ebert's TV show, so it's fair to say voting members who preferred auteur-driven films about war were split, allowing "Shakespeare" to divide and conquer, with the help of Weinstein's aggressive tactics which you lay out quite well.
True, however The Thin Red Line was a completely different film than Saving Private Ryan. The Thin Red Line, like most of Terrence Malik's output, is dreamlike and philosophical while Saving Private Ryan throws you into the carnage and brutality of war like no movie had ever done up to that point. Literal bullets whizzing over your head.
I still don't understand to this day how someone can win Best Director but their film not win Best Picture. In my opinion, the two categories go hand in hand.
@@gregmeyer1805 very recently, Jane Campion deservedly won as Best Director for The Power of the dog, that should have also won as Best Picture. Instead, the Best Picture went to Coda, an unremarkable, forgettable, and forgotten movie, a remake of a much better French movie, and a box office super bomb. I think that, in that case, the Academy simply did not want to award a Netflix movie?
Wasn't the voting for best picture ranked-choice? So, there wouldn't have been any vote-splitting.
@@lfricmunuc4534 The Oscars didn't start using rank choice voting until 2009.
@@vins1979I will disagree with you because I believe that The Power of the Dog is more unremarkable than Coda.
Direction wise, sure we can say that TPOTD is superior. But Coda is elevated by so many other factors including great performances from the entire cast which some being people with real disabilities.
Funny how that case is similar to Saving Private Ryan vs Shakespeare in Love, since TPOTD is about a dark story vs a story of fighting for your dreams in Coda.
For the record I will say that I consider Saving Private Ryan to be a superior movie over Shakespeare in Love, and it should have won best picture 100%.
You’re telling me “Shakespeare in Love” was directed by John Madden, yet at no point is there drawing on the screen showing how the players move?
Watching how an Oscar bait film like maestro lost to a masterpiece like Oppenheimer, I’d say that the 2024 Oscar awards are showing signs that good movies will earn the awards.
Yup. This was a solid slate compared to other years. They're rerunning several Nolan films like The Dark Knight, Inception, Interstellar, and Dunkirk at my local Regal, so I'm looking forward to rewatching his filmography (as much as possible).
Compared to other films Oppenheimer was quite Oscar baity as well…
I can see why some would think that, but I'm not so sure. Oscar bait movies (at least in recent times) usually get a release later in the year (and sometimes get a limited run to meet the bare minimum qualification). Oppenheimer, meanwhile, was released in the middle of summer (around the same time Saving Private Ryan came out in 1998) and was marketed more like a blockbuster than anything else (which it ended up being). It's a serious biopic, but it strikes me as something Nolan would do anyways instead of an affectation that he's putting on to just win Oscars. @@cadenadelreino1442
@@Syntopikon Don‘t get my wrong - I liked it but you know it’s still kind of a WWII/historical movie and as you said a bit of a biopic. Might be my personal preference but I wished movies like Perfect Days would be more popular at the Oscars. Original stuff about normal human beings. Oppenheimer did not raise my spirit, did not make me THINK, did not make me question sth etc. It could have been way more controversial as well but Nolan wasn’t bold enough IMO. It felt like he went the safe route with this one after Tenet kind of „flopped“.
@@cadenadelreino1442I think it’s just a matter of preference. From a filmmaking perspective, Oppenheimer was pretty bold. It’s cinematography, sound, score, and editing make a screenplay of mostly just people talking larger than life. Couple that with great performances from RDJ and Murphy, it was just made really well. He managed to take a complex moment in US history and make it digestible and entertaining for general audiences. That’s pretty talented in my opinion. I don’t think every movie needs to be thought provoking which is something Nolan typically goes for, but I think he took back a step because Oppenheimer was technically still an adaption. Does this mean adaptations still can’t be thought provoking? Of course not, which is probably why Oppenheimer didn’t win best adapted screenplay. I thought if the screenplay did anything well, it reminded audiences of a very significant moment in human history and the cascading effect that follows into today. Yes it was a biopic but it certainly wasn’t filmed like traditional biopics. Nolan’s style is what elevates the story and it’s why I think he deserved best director. Seeing it win best picture was icing on the cake.
Gwyneth Paltrow winning because she likely slept with Harvey is the biggest scandal in recent memory. Her nomination for her above average performance was already questionable to begin with. But you know, sleeping with Harvey does wonders for one's career.
It's certainly the most insidious thing he's done. I know he got a lot of people to work with him by promising them Academy Award wins & nominations.
Don’t forget Jennifer Lawrence
Did nothing for mine.
Weinstein gave her his goop.
Thought Brad threatened to punch the sh/t out of Him for mashing on Gwyneth.
You can see at 9:38 that Olivia Coleman and Jessie J are leaning away from Harvey because they're not comfortable sitting next to him. Even then his lewd behaviour was an open secret in the industry.
The irony of Harvey telling a future Oscar winner that he doesn't know how to direct a movie
To this day I’ve never seen Shakespeare in love, but seen saving private ryan at least 20 times
You really did not miss anything. Callow tedious film.
anything where they are involved is stolen and corrupt. Free Palestine!!!
Well, SPR is peak American war propaganda so that makes sense.
Horrible, I always wondered how Shakespeare in Love won the academy award over such an epic film as Saving Private Ryan.
Lofe is beutiful was alot better movie then saving private ryan. Thats my pick
Same here! Shakespeare in love was so cliche on an unbelievable level and it was something a hack romance novelist conjured up out of pure laziness.
Saving Private Ryan was clearly the better movie.
Don’t forget The Thin Red Line.
@@gujonteitur4853 then your pick is really shit .
This is why they call it a campaign for an Oscar. You have to sell it.
That much is true. Some of these campaigns are more expensive than political campaigns. It's an industry unto itself.
True in some but not all cases.Jessica Chastain & Jamie Lee Curtis were in no magazine covers or fashion shows but they got their Oscars.
Cate Blanchett was robbed
Saving Private Ryan robbed.
Fast forward, Stallone was robbed.
These campaigns are ridiculous.
@@stardustboy94JLS was already famous with the Halloween franchises
Well, "The Piano" deserved all its 10 nominations and 3 wins. It's a masterpiece.
Edward Zwicks body language when he won the Oscar says it all about how he feels about Weinstein. Weinstein basically took the movie away him him and almost tried to get zwick off the project.
Saving Private Ryan should have won Best Picture, Cate Blanchett should have won Best Actress for Elizabeth and Edward Norton should have won Best Actor for American History X. Miramax distributed Life is Beautiful in America, and while Weinstein’s name isn’t on the film as any kind of producer, that films wins can still be seen as wins for Weinstein as his company distributed the film.
He is also responsible for most Meryl Streep nominations. Her acceptance speech: “I wanna thank god, and when I say god I mean Weinstein”
That is preposterous. Meryl Streep is responsible for Meryl Streep’s nominations. Clearly, you are concussed. I recommend avoiding saving private Ryan, as you’re not supposed to fall asleep if you’re concussed
@@aysadatalented actresses get overlooked all the time, it is conceivable that she got a boost of support from him and it’s widely known he campaigns heavily for his movies. Two things can exist at once.
@@aysadaok boomer
@@Attmay was that supposed to be an insult? Some meaningless term that tells more about your lack of originality that it does about me… go to the other room with the children. Grown-ups are talking here.
I always believed this happened because the vote was split between _Saving Private Ryan_ and _The Thin Red Line._
And ranked choice voting was introduced to prevent that from happening again.
IMO, the Thin Red Line was rather disjointed and poorly edited,the acting though not bad was however kind of forced and lack nuance…
@@54blewisbro said mallick lacked nuance gotta be a smooth brain mcu enjoyer
Thin red line isn’t close to being in the same league as Saving Private Ryan
@@DaltonNichols-lu9ub agreed 👍
@DaltonNichols-lu9ub Neither are perfect but the Thin Red Line is a much better film and specially anti war film than Saving Private Ryan.
Judi Dench’s body of work is so good and there are so many other roles she deserved to win for. I’m honestly shocked she won with so little screen time.
Saving Private Ryan should have won best picture. It was and still is such an incredible film.
Her win was well deserved..
@@percyweasley9301no.
Beatrice Straight won Best Supporting Actress for *Network* with very little screen time.
It is very good, but I found it no better than Malick's Thin Red Line.
That was the year I lost all respect for the Oscars and stopped watching regularly. A few years later I stopped watching altogether, as it was clear the Oscars were no longer based on merit, but on dirty politics, agendas, and selfish ego appeasement.
When SIL won, me and most of my family, friends, and co-workers were disgusted that SIL and gp won over Saving Private Ryan and Cate Blanchett!
How anyone even watches this idiotic ceremony anymore is beyond me. It is more of a “look at me” vapid cocktail party than a sophisticated merit-based award ceremony.
I used to call it "the gay Super Bowl," but frankly the Super Bowl has hotter guys.
Thanks for your public service advisory!
I had watched a bunch of these movies (English Patient, Shakespeare in Love, etc.) and didn't know this background.
I was kind of like "Okay, artsy movie with some nudity with really an unmemorable plot."
I didn't know a lot of this politicking/shady activity.
I love that Godzilla Minus One won a best visual effects Oscar with a total budget of $10-12 million.
Glad you found it useful! And yes, the Godzilla win had be very excited. Probably my favorite win of the night. I wish Japan had submitted it for Best International Feature as well.
I saw both Saving Private Ryan and Shakespeare In Love in the cinema when they came out. I thought the first was great and the second was terrible. I also saw Elizabeth and thought Cate Blanchett deserved the Oscar for Best Actress.
The academy needs revoke harvey weinstein awards
What about Return of the King?
@@Segadrome hmm that too
@@CrazyPlatinum92 Curious. Lotsa people love the Peter Jackson LotR films. What would you have replaced them with?
Everyone winning for a Tarantino movie other than Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, that should be included, too.
They already revoked him. Expelled from the Academy.
The short film George Lucas In Love was better than the film it parodied.
Crash winning Best Picture wasn’t anywhere close to thievery that went down in March of ‘99, Saving Private Ryan is a classic, it’s one of the few movies that people see on TV and no matter where it’s at during the film, whether it just started or it’s almost over, watch the rest of it. It has a high rewatch factor to where as no one goes out of their way to re watch or even see for the first time, Shakespeare in Love, literally no channels carry that or syndicate it, I would be shocked if Netflix ever picked it up.
Crash and Brokeback both sucked. A bury your gays melodrama made by heterosexuals versus a Canadian rapist calling Americans racist.
“Weinstein pursued the Oscar’s relentlessly.” Hm. It’s like he doesn’t take no for an answer.
😬 Nope, unfortunately.
this could really hurt harvey weinstein’s reputation
Nah he be will be fine ;)
@@Micke12312the Oscars has long lost all credibility since then
As much as I love Judi Dench, she should not have won for supporting actress. Lynn Redgrave was the standout in that category and should have won for Gods and Monsters
We appreciate how well you’ve articulated your insights. You’ll always have our support.
Okay, it IS arguable that Pulp Fiction could've won best picture over Forrest Gump. Or Shawshank, obviously (if anyone had seen it yet, it didn't find an audience until after the fact). All three movies left a lasting mark on cinema... Shawshank and FG for the storytelling (and FG for the at-the-time groundbreaking sfx), and Pulp Fiction for not just the storytelling, but for influencing a decade of movies that followed. It's still a 3-way tie in my mind.
I wonder how much Shawshank’s inability to find a commercial audience impacted its awards chances? As you mentioned, it didn’t find its audience until later.
Very well put together 🙌 yeah, I hate the idea of aggressive, loathsome competition over good art. The best can never win, it’s always those with the most power. Quantity over quality to them
Thanks! And yeah, I mostly agree. I can understand wanting to market the thing you make (otherwise people won't hear about it), but at a certain point, it gets to be excessive. At that point, you have to ask "If it's so good, why're you being so aggressive about it?" Spielberg wanted to let Saving Private Ryan speak for itself, whereas Weinstein just wanted to give the speech (he didn't even let the writer, Marc Norman, speak).
Shakespeare in Love winning was in my opinion Hollywood's "Jethro Tull Moment".
(For those who don't know what I'm referring to, the first year that the Grammys introduced Heavy Metal as a category, the finalists were:
- Iggy Pop
- Metallica's "And Justice for All"
- Jane's Addiction
- Jethro Tull
I remember the shock when Jethro Tull won. In my math class the next day, we had a Substitute teacher and the first words out his mouth were "Before I begin, I want to know Who the F**k is Jethro Tull?"
9:01 what clip is this from? Its weird seeing what i think is james cameron in a cameo role or something
Lol that's exactly what it is. It's from Entourage Season 2 Episode 7 - The Sundance Kids.
Shakespeare in love was and is a regular movie. There is nothing special in it and didn't sustained in time. Those Oscars it got will be forever a shame.,
Many of them. Oscar almost always does Not goes to the best movie. In this movie, there is definitely one that was sumply the brst these years - exactly Pulp fiction
I was in a turning lane waiting for a green light in Perth, West Australia, when I heard news on the car radio which implanted that moment on my memory forever. Cate Blanchett had not won the Oscar. Luckily, Australian acting has been honoured by the Academy a few times in the last 30 years, but that omission was really telling. The best part of SIL was of course Geoffrey Rush's performance, so Gwyneth's win was not without irony. The thing is, Oscar loves young American actresses way too much. Normally I have nothing against an American winner, because to get an Oscar nod means you've done a good job. This decision was blatantly corrupt however. Now Cate has two Oscars and is subject to what I call the Day Lewis / Streep effect, by which that third Oscar will require an instantly recognised phenomenal performance or perhaps a dozen unsuccessful nominations. Its water under the bridge now, but boy, at the time we were somewhat vexed over here.
Why does Gwenyth have an Oscar? Why?
Harvey’s fav casting couch occupier
Because her daddy produced *St. Elsewhere* and her mother was in *1776* so they think we give a shit about Blythe Danner's crotchfruit.
Personally, this was the only year in which I saw all five movies nominated. Had a been a member of the academy, I would have voted for Life is Beautiful as Best Picture.
What were your thoughts on the recent awards? General consensus seems to be it was better than most years.
@@Syntopikon I have not seen every movie nominated for best picture in any other year. I only saw every best picture nominee for the 1999 Oscars. So that is why I don’t feel like I can comment on other years
Really good video mate,no annoying voice wich is a big deal breaker for me,suscribed
Thanks! At least someone's alright with my voice 😭
Harvey was thanked more than god at the Oscar’s, remember that
Meanwhile, an animated movie about Moses got bubkes. Is it me or were the Jews who founded the studios actually less hostile to the Christian families who paid their bills with movie tickets than the boomers who took over the studios in the 1960s?
19:27 Please tell what music did you use for last section of the video?
Very informative. I watched SPR & SIL in theatre. SPR is the one that deserved the Best Picture award, totally surprised it lost. Then all these dirty tactics came out & we had an idea why SPR lost. Thank you for a good video! I have to turn on CC bc there are times you are inaudible or talking too fast. But overall a good video. Subscribed.
Glad you enjoyed it! Will try to speak slower + louder going forward.
Fantastic video. You earned a sub.
Glad you enjoyed it - and thanks!
worst is The Thin Red Line went home with nothing
Yes but the lack of Academy Awards for Terrence Malick is important in maintaining his position as the “underrated” connoisseur’s choice.
(I mean this as an unironic compliment, I’m a fan of most of his films especially TTRL)
Wait, so the best acted, best written, and most technically polished film (based on all the awards it won) wasn’t deserving to win Best Picture? Make it make sense.
Thanks for that explanation. I was amazed at the time, but thought it was just stupidity, not corruption. Makes sense now.
Glad you enjoyed it! Yeah, campaigns had happened before but Weinstein took them up to 11 and it's not really come down since. No one is as aggressive as he was now, but there's a LOT more money in the campaigning (sometimes more than the movie cost to make).
9:07, please tell me were this is from, this is the funniest shit I've seen in a while.
Lol it's Entourage Season 2, Episode 7 - The Sundance Kids.
@@Syntopikon Thanks a million, that scene is gold.
We all know how Paltrow “won” that award. Goop indeed.
no wonder she needs to steam down there 😂
Are you sure no one went over the top? I heard back in the 60's when Chill Wills was nominated for his performance in The Alamo, things were really crazy like having buttons passed out and even a magazine ad saying: "We, the cast of The Alamo, are praying even more than the people in the Alamo prayed for their lives that Chill Wills win the Oscar." Peter Ustinov won!
I think that's more tacky than anything else (especially by current standards). Weinstein would try to convince people staying at the Academy retirement home that had voting rights to vote his way (which is more tacky than corrupt) as well as filling out peoples ballots on their behalf (which is definitely plain corrupt) and trying to get journalists to drag his opponent.
It's interesting to compare it to The Alamo campaign you're talking about, though, because I think it does illustrate how reactions to campaigning have changed over time. People thought of it as tasteless for the time, but seemingly in that it was "ungentlemanly" to want an award so desperately (to the point of invoking the dead at the Alamo). Whereas with Weinstein, despite running afoul of Academy rules (or papering over them at the last minute), and his campaigning being an open secret, people, though miffed, seemingly turned a blind eye (especially in votes - whereas The Alamo was nearly shut out at the awards and John Wayne apologized for Chill Wills, Shakespeare In Love won plenty).
@@SyntopikonThe Oscar rivalry between *Spartacus* and *The Alamo* settled itself when *The Apartment* won Best Picture even though Shirley MacLaine lost best actress to Liz Taylor.
honestly, I'm just glad that shakespeare in love left the consciousness of humanity and is only remembered by people who want to throw shade at the academy for making the wrong choice
Rules have changed. Films need a one day qualifying run
It's a one week qualifying run before the end of the last week in December.
Good job putting this video together.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I clicked on this video just to see if I was right. I knew this was about Shakespeare In Love. Any time anyone asks me why I think the Oscars are BS is because of this. No effing way should Saving Private Ryan have lost to that movie. They're rigged, always have been.
Love the videos, man. Keep it up!!!
Thanks!
Reminder that Richard Attenborough believed that Spielberg deserved the Best Picture Oscar for "E.T. The Extra Terrestrial" over his film "Ghandi." As a favor to him, he would go on to play John Hammond in "Jurassic Park."
What a phenomenal fact. I didn't know this. Thanks!
The merit vs money question is why I just can’t get invested in who wins beyond checking the winners list the next day. I haven’t watched the awards show in years and have no plans to do so in the future no matter how inventive they get with it.
The Entourage clip was perfect 🤣🤣🤣
Lol glad you appreciated it. Always nice to see another Entourage fan in the wild.
The only time I have ever truly gotten emotional during the Academy Awards was when Everythig Everywhere All At Once took home all those Oscars. That was a film that i knew deserved those wins, but i did not actually expect it to win due to how off-the-walls it was. Especially Ke Huy Quan's speech was a tear-jerker!
Everything Everywhere All at Once winning best picture is a good sign but I’m not sure how much A24 did campaigning wise. TBH I wasn’t sure it would wind but glad it did and especially glad Ke and Michelle won for acting
Every post-Will Smith award and nomination is suspect.
While I do think Saving Private Ryan definitely deserved Best Picture instead (Need to rewatch it also), I feel bad that Shakespeare In Love gets dumped on so much because of this controversy. I rewatched it recently and it's absolutely delightful! Should it have been won or even nominated? No, but I think if that POS, Weinstein, hadn't been associated with the project and thus caused the controversy, I think the film would be more fondly remembered today.
I'm in wholehearted agreement. It's a solid film in its own right and its unfortunate association with Weinstein is the biggest knock against it. It would've done well even without Weinstein; his involvement just tainted it (like it's done for so many great films).
You feel bad for a movie full of millionaires just because people say bad things about it? Are you 12?
If no art is bad then a lot of what people call art isn't art or there is no bad anything. The truth as far as I see it is that art created in innocence (children's art) cannot be bad but most things that are called art are not art.
It's an interesting topic and worth exploring further. My sentiment is that art is a personal thing and what one thinks is good, another might think is bad. JRR Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings is my favorite book of all time but I've met people that are bored to tears by it. I don't understand why and I think they feel the same way about me liking it. It's undoubtedly art (I consider literature, film, video games, music, and pretty much any creative endeavor to be art of some kind) but it's difficult to make an objective statement.
We could go the route of whatever is most popular is objectively better, but that has it's own issues. But your sentiment that art created in innocence cannot be bad is interesting and not a POV I've heard before.
There absolutely is good and bad art. Example, Raphael was objectively a great painter. Picasso was objectively abysmal, but a product of good marketing and hype culture.
You'd have to make an argument for the objective qualities you're judging on, though, and establish those as the basis for all art. Plus, Raphael's patron was the Pope. That's as much hype and marketing as anything with Picasso. @@alexman378
@@Syntopikon There are qualities that we can agree on in terms of good art versus bad. Essentially art is a form of expression from the artist to the recipient. Great art manages to communicate a lot very effectively, from more basic concepts to more complex ones, simultaneously. Thus something like the LOTR can easily be considered high art, as can Raphael, Picasso can not. Most modern art communicates nothing but the artist's ephemeral feelings about themselves (or their mental illness). Dostoevsky on the other hand shows us the parts of ourselves we didn't know existed and perhaps didn't want to admit they exist. In short, there are very good reasons why Shakespeare is the most performed playwright 400 years after he died, and art is a lot less subjective than people think.
I’m really into the music awards more than the motion picture awards but I’m getting more and more into all these types of stories and it’s just like… woah. It’s the same in all these mediums. There’s always a slimeball
Yup. What's hard to figure out is: does the entertainment industry have an above average rate of slimeballs, or, because they're public figures, do we just know about more of them?
@@Syntopikon I would argue they had more. Money gives you opportunities that you wouldn’t have otherwise. Plus, very rarely do people get filthy rich without giving up something 🤷🏽♀️ - these people opt to give up integrity seems like.
What's that tv show with the James Cameron cameo and the fictional depiction of Harvey Weinstein?
The show is Entourage. Specifically: Season 2, Episode 7 - The Sundance Kids.
I think the only place to watch it is on HBO Max now.
@@Syntopikon thank you’
@@Syntopikon you do know one of the founders of Sundance Film Festival is a gr00mer? Not Robert Redford, the other one.
Russell Crow should have won back to back best actor awards
Can't believe Saving Private Ryan & Life Is Beautiful get robbed at that day...
I’m still on team Gwyneth Paltrow. - a difficult role with crazy lines to say and she made them sing. Lots of lil moments and looks like the one to Will backstage when she’s onstage is thrilling. And Elizabeth was Dull.
9:02 where is that from 😂
Lol , it's Entourage Season 2, Episode 7 - The Sundance Kids. The character, Harvey Weingard, was modeled on Harvey Weinstein. Cameron didn't like Weinstein either because of how he treated Guillermo del Toro, who was pretty good friends with Cameron (Cameron let del Toro stay at his place while they edited movies - I think it's del Toro that got Cameron into anime & manga).
@@Syntopikon Thank you, man. I read about their friendship:) Even though Jim had quite the „reputation“ as well he still seems to be a good human being.
Yup. About the worst people say about Cameron is that he's a hard taskmaster on set, but they're usually happy to work with him on future films.@@cadenadelreino1442
When I saw Shakespeare in love win best picture, it permanently changed my attitude towards Hollywood and the Oscars. I knew something wrong happened. I’ve never watched the Oscars after that. It’s not a legit award. Hell, it’s not even a popularity contest.
LOTR winning everything at the Oscars is probably its brightest point since the new century began.
The Academy was tired of wartime movies like Braveheart, The English Patient, Schindler's List, Platoon and others winning Best Picture, so Shakespeare in Love was their response. Also, The Thin Red Line and Life is Beautiful, two other WWII films, may have split the votes with SPR, allowing SIL to win.
They figured they already gave Spielberg the Oscar for *Schindler's List* so they didn't want to give him something for another World War II movie.
If they had the Oscars look like Harvey Weinstein no one would want a Oscar.
I am involved with Hollywood and specifically FYC Campaign events and most of this is very true.
Who would have thought that in just 25 or so years the academy would be bordering on total irrelevancy.
Pretty much a decline onwards from 1998 Awards, when Titanic won 11/13.
@@Syntopikon Very few are interested in the legacy 20th century centralized Hollywood entertainment model anymore. Based on recent comments from legacy entertainment execs, it’s clear they still have no idea why nobody is willing to pay $$ to watch 2 hrs of their "educational", ham fisted, and overt social engineering messages/lessons, delivered by uninteresting, one dimensional characters. They continue to blame Covid somehow, which is hilarious bc that should have been the time that they made even more $$.. it's anything and everything else but not the thing everyone else can see as plain as day
Fernanda Montenegro was stolen!
Super informative, sadly my misophonia due to the narrators voice is killing me 😭 thumbs up for your great effort
I appreciate it. Trying to improve the voice 😭
And yet we as a culture still value the Oscars and watch them on tv. Wake up already and cancel this bullshit
The Return of the King is the only movie in the last 20 years that I can confidently say deserved every Oscar it won.
18:31
Agreed. 11/11 - a perfect sweep. Shape of Water is second for me - I'm always glad to see fantasy movies get the recognition they deserve.
The Departed, No Country for Old Men, and Million Dollar Baby are others that come to mind.
Have you seen Parasite?
@@moviefan19S Fantastic film.
That's why tom cruise and johnny depp haven't won but their movies would remembered all time
Cruise not winning is a real shame. Probably the most iconic actor of the last 40ish years. I hope it changes with his upcoming Iñárritu film.
Johnny Depp doesn’t have an Oscar? 😮
No.
@@KDBetterhe was nominated for PotC
Haven't watched yet and knowing ONLY the title of the video, this HAS to be about Saving Private Ryan and Shakespeare In Love. Playing now...
🤦♂️
I like Shakespeare In Love decently enough, but unlike a lot of Best Picture winners, I don’t particularly like to rewatch it. As you say, it’s “frothy.” As a viewer completely unconnected to The Academy, it’s particularly random. I would be much more interested in a straightforward biopic of William Shakespeare. Funnily enough, I think that is a movie Steven Spielberg could direct to major Academy Awards success.
That's an interesting idea. On further reflection, it does seem like something Steven Spielberg could direct. I know a lot of people drag him because they think he's just "mass entertainment", but he's probably one of the few directors with such a wide range over his career.
@@Syntopikon I agree with you, with the qualifying statement that a lot of people mistake Spielberg as only a “mass entertainment “ director. He is a “mass entertainment director,” but that is only one arrow in his quiver. He is arguably the most versatile ingenious director of our time. This is a person who has shown the ability to deliver such a wide range as ET The Extra-Terrestrial, to Schindler’s List and the film under discussion Saving Private Ryan. He is a popular director, I think because he is a master of his craft and seems to be a kind, wise person.
I guarantee you that the campaign against "The Woman King" was worse.
Gwyneth Paltrow should never won, everyone agrees that she didn't deserve it. The ones who should won in her place is Fernanda Montenegro or Cate Blanchett, both amazing actress, they were robbed. Damn you Weinstein!
You know there were 2 films that took the top prizes at the first Oscars.
That was truly a real WTF moment when Saving Private Ryan did not grab the trophy that day. Whatever that other movie was that won was an absolute slog to watch and is no one talks about any more as it tarnished by that that terrible Miramax guy
Yup. Weinstein pretty much put an asterisk on every movie he touched.
@@Syntopikon no, he didn’t and you have to be pretty small minded to think that way. You can’t separate between the work of directors, actors and crew and the head of the studio that produced the movie? Because he had nothing to do with what made those movies great. Regardless of your insinuation, that he touched the movies, and whether that was an intentional pun or not, his funding and later campaigning are not why those movies were nominated or won. That’s offensive to those filmmakers, and regardless of whether you agree with their win, claiming any of those movies is tarnished by him and his actions is just childish and stupid.
The other movie was called Shakespeare in love, and it was a wonderful movie that deserved to win. Sorry that you think a war movie has to win because it makes it more prestigious or some such shit but it doesn’t.
Without knowing all this - saw Saving Private Ryan and Academy Shakespeare in Love never beckoned to me in the least - even when it won the Academy Award - nah
is that you Joe Pera?
I have never cared at all about The Oscars or any of the seemingly endless Hollywood/ Entertainment Industry Awards Shows, and I am finding it pretty funny that the viewership numbers for ALL of the Awards Shows are down considerably, and has been trending that way for almost 15 years... and it shows no signs of slowing down, either.
You forgot to mention that to be nominated actors and directors must be a members of directors or actors union.
Pleasantville was literally robbed in this year
If it’s rigged and the prize has no inherent value anyway, then what exactly is the point of the award?
“No inherent value”? Even as much as Academy Awards may be corrupt and distrusted by critics and fans, they have a big cultural and financial value, and they still do.
@@alexroselle I'd politely suggest they have a limited cultural value, but yes, they do occasionally provide an 'oscar bump' in revenue for a film. I doubt that happens that much these days with streaming and such, but historically I'd agree. The problem is that the campaign in this video accidentally did the opposite of what was intended: if you buy an award that is unwarranted then you de-value the award (both culturally and financially). If a studio can just buy an award, then what exactly does the award mean? You might as well have studios giving themselves the awards and saying they're winners. Thus, it has no inherent value, because that is effectively what happens.