MovieChat Forums > The Color of Money (1986) Discussion > Did Not Deserve Oscar

Did Not Deserve Oscar

posted 15 years ago by jamest155
35 replies | jump to latest

I am a big Paul Newman fan, but sorry guys, Bob Hoskins deserved the academy award for his performance in Mona Lisa. Paul Newman gave a good Paul Newman performance, but it was not in the same clas as Bob Hoskins who gave a tour de force performance, in a film which was also much better than Color of Money. Fair is fair and although Paul Newman gave a good performance, it could be argued that it did not even warrant a nomination. I can only guess that in Hollywood they believed that his performance was good enough to get the nod and they felt it would be his last best chance of winning. They probably also gave the oscar to Paul Newman, not just for that performance but for the complete body of his work. Paul Newman should have won the oscar for The Verdict. However, as a big Bob Hoskins fan also, Bob Hoskins deserved the oscar that night, just like he had won just about every other acting award that year for his performance. Now, who makes it right for Bob Hoskins.

[–] Mississippi20 15 years ago

Nothing new in Hollywood......was 'True Grit' really John Wayne's best performance? Probably not, but it was John Wayne in the twilight of his career and he had yet to win the award.

Pretty similar case with Newman.

That's not to say either weren't excellent in those roles, though. It doesn't really bother me that the Academy gave them the edge based on their reputations in Hollywood.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] KSzir 15 years ago

Absolutely superb observation! I've been saying the same thing for years. Even when the give the award to someone, there so reluctant to give him or her another that things continually get skewed. Take your example: in 2000 Russell Crowe wins Best Actor for Gladiator (good performance) over Tom Hanks for Castaway. Hanks carried that picture by himself and a volley-ball! He should have won a third Oscar, but instead it goes to Crowe. Then when Crowe turns in his best performance for A Beautiful Mind, they don't want to give him a second Oscar so the throw a pity Oscar to Denzel who should have won already for Malcolm X, only it went to Pacino because somehow in 1975 Art Carney wins Best Actor for a movie few remember over Pacino's brilliant Godfather 2 role.

[–] BrooklynsChosen718 14 years ago

Crowe was great in "Gladiator" and personally between him and Tom Hanks in "Castaway", Crowe had the edge. "Castaway" was actually kind of boring for the most part.

"The Dark Knight" - #1 CBM, "Iron Man" - #2 CBM

[–] leeds_manc 13 years ago

Jack Nicholson won the oscar in 1975 for one Flew Over The Cuckoos nest, where did you get Art Carney from? Pacino was nominated that year for Dog Day Afternoon

[–] MrSiegal 13 years ago

The 47th Academy Awards were presented April 8, 1975

Best Actor in a Leading Role

Harry and Tonto - Art Carney
Chinatown - Jack Nicholson
The Godfather Part II - Al Pacino
Lenny - Dustin Hoffman
Murder on the Orient Express - Albert Finney

How do the angels get to sleep when the Devil leaves his porch light on?

[–] KSzir 15 years ago

Just curious, which four movies do you think Newman should have won for?
My personal picks - 3: Cool Hand Luke, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof and The Verdict.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] KSzir 15 years ago

Wow, don't know how The Hustler slipped my mind, I just watched it and Color of Money last week! I'd add that to my list and give Newman #4.

[–] xpdracon 13 years ago

The Verdict for sure. He was great in Road to Perdition, as well.

[–] collins0302 15 years ago

The Academy is either playing Catch-up or just competely ignoring talent.

Back off Warchild, seriously

[–] HolyShackles 15 years ago

It's a time tested method done by the Academy as seen with the most blaring example being Bogart winning for The African Queen over Brando in Streetcar. They should be embarrassed about how predictable they are and especially over their lack of integrity and originality.

[–] shepardjessica-1 15 years ago

Newman should have won for The Hustler and Hud

He deserved nominations for Cat On A Hot Tin Roof, Cool Hand Luke, Nobody's Fool, The Verdict and The Color Of Money

[–] tlcarpenter 14 years ago

1986 was a weak year to begin with. Bob Hoskins in Mona Lisa (don't like the film at all), William Hurt in Children of a Lesser God (he had just won for a much better role the year before), James Woods in Salvador (yuck), Dexter Gordon in Round Midnight (snore), and Newman for Color of Money. With that line up it's not suprising Newman won. The fact that the Academy had given him an Honorary Oscar the year before took away from the excitement I felt at the time. But still I would have given it to him over any of the others.

[–] pmo1983 14 years ago

Paul Newman should have won for the Verdict a couple of years prior.

The best performance of 86 was Gary Oldman in Sid and Nancy but he wasnt nominated for any awards.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kevdun22 14 years ago

i agree James. The real travesty of 1986 when he didn't win for the verdict is that they gave it to Ben Kingsley for a one note performance. The range of emotions that Newman provided in "The Verdict" were outstanding. An acting clinic. It's hard to believe even the other guys up for the 1986 oscar got beat by Kingsley's lazy performance. Jack Lemmon in "The Missing" , Peter O'Toole in "My Favorite Year" and Dustin Hoffman in "Tootsie" . These four performances deserved it over Kingsley but somehow someway the Academy takes these British historical epics and throws oscars at them hand over fist.

[–] stickley85 14 years ago

It was a makeup oscar.Paul Newman should have won it for The Hustler.

[–] MuleDeer 13 years ago

I used to feel the way most do in this discussion, but after seeing it again tonight for the first time since 1986, I think Newman deserved every bit of that Oscar.

How many actors ever even get nominated in a sequel? His performance of Fast Eddie wasn't a rewind>replay. He added many, many layers. He was every minute the 25 years from 1961 to 1986. Newman was also very "courageous" -- in the acting sphere -- to allow his character to lose miserably on film, or as he said in the film, "show his @$$." Not many actors allow themselves to be stripped & humiliated emotionally on camera by the character's own hubris.

I don't know, maybe part of it is because I was 23 in '86 and 48 in '11 -- 25 years as well -- and can appreciate the mileage Newman brings to Fast Eddie. I like Bob Hoskins, as well, but rank many of his performances over that in Mona Lisa and even some of Newman's performances, but not Fast Eddie '86.