Awards presented April 11, 1983
The nominees were ...
... when they should have been ...
And the Oscar went to ...
Gandhi. Today it's possible to ask if the Academy voters even saw this movie, when it's so difficult to sit through now. Did they perhaps vote for it out of some feeling that it was big and long and serious, and that it would affirm their commitment to peace and non-violence and anti-imperialism? Today, some suspect that they were punishing Steven Spielberg for being too successful too fast, and Dustin Hoffman for being a difficult perfectionist. It also had the advantage of being a late-season release, which made it the movie freshest in the voters' minds as they filled out their Oscar ballots: E.T. had been a summer release, and Tootsie, well, no comedy had won best picture since Annie Hall in 1977. No matter the reason, it still looks like one of the Academy's major goofs.
... when it should have gone to ...
 |
| Blade Runner |
At one time I would have chosen either E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial or Tootsie for this honor. And while I still love both films, they have lost some of their freshness on repeat viewings, whereas I can watch Blade Runner and discover something new each time. I can watch Elliott's parting from E.T. with a dry eye, whereas Rutger Hauer's death in Blade Runner still makes me tear up. It's a film with a sure grasp on a great theme: what it means to be human. The Academy gave it two nominations, for art direction and special effects, but both nominations omitted mention of the contribution of the film's "visual futurist," Syd Mead, who was largely responsible for the concept of a future Los Angeles as based on twentieth-century New York City. (The film is set in the year 2019. We still have a long way to go in six years, though in many ways it seems closer to the mark than the predictions of 2001: A Space Odyssey were.) Director Ridley Scott, screenwriters Hampton Fancher and David Peoples, and composer Vangelis went unnominated.
No comments:
Post a Comment