MovieChat Forums > The Great Santini (1979) Discussion > 1980 Oscar noms for 1979 film?

1980 Oscar noms for 1979 film?

posted 13 years ago by DemonPazuzu
6 replies | jump to latest

Both IMDb and John Willis' Screenworld list USA release dates as October/November 1979.
Robert Duvall and Michael O'Keefe were both nominated for Oscars for this film in 1981 for the 1980 film year. Oscar rules : film must be released between Jan 1 and December 31 in at least New York or L.A. for the year being considered.
This would mean that The Great Santini would have qualified for 1979 Oscar nominations---not 1980.
I double checked Robert Osborne's History of the Oscars book and sure enough, it was nominated for 1980.
Did the Academy goof or is the 1979 release date incorrect??

[–] biggiesized 13 years ago

Same thing happened with The Hurt Locker (2008). I believe the movie was produced in the year it's listed, but released the following year.

[–] buby1987 13 years ago

I saw Great Santini in Los Angeles in September 1980 (the month I moved to L.A. to attend college). It might have opened in a few non-California venues in 1979, but the year a film is released in L.A. is the year it is eligible for Academy Award consideration. It definitely opened in Los Angeles in either August or September 1980.

I think the film was tested out in a few regions in 1979, and then was held back. Then Orion put it out in 1980 -- right after O'Keefe had appeared in the hit comedy Caddyshack. Perhaps that gave Santini a second chance.

So in sum, I don't consider Great Santini a 1979 release. I go by Oscar eligiblity year. Same goes with Polanski's Tess, which is often listed as a 1979 release (and probably played in Europe in 1979), but didn't get released in Los Angeles until late in 1980.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jrcjohnny99 9 years ago

Replying to this 4 years after the fact so not sure you'll see it, but I came to this page and I was discussing this with a friend re HBO
So the film was released in a test run in the Carolina's in late 79 but it was a disaster numbers wise (these kinds of releases were not unusual back then before blanket releases or platform releases were the norm);
It was then tested in some other markets with some other titles (I know that really sounds weird but again, surprisingly, I can list a bunch of other films that tried this method);
The producer finally got Orion to give it a limited run in both New York and LA in 1980; in the fall of 1980 it showed on HBO (while it was still in theatres) and the result was a lot more people saw it that way than in theatres (this was before screeners became the norm)and that resulted in the Oscar noms.
Despite the 79 screenings, because it did not play in LA or NYC until 1980 it was still eligible for the 80 Oscars.

Hope that explains it!

[–] hockeyhrs 8 years ago

Duvall was great, of course, but nobody was beating DeNiro for Raging Bull.

If Timothy Hutton had been nominated in the proper category (Best Actor instead of Best Supporting Actor), then Michael O'Keefe would've had a much better shot at winning.

[–] liscarkat (19427) 2 years ago

The movie was originally made for cable tv and airline showing only. There was a delay before a decision was made to release it in theaters.