MovieChat Forums > Saving Private Ryan (1998) Discussion > Why this lost the Best Picture Oscar.

Why this lost the Best Picture Oscar.


I do agree that this should have won the Oscar for best picture of 1998. This was far better than Shakespeare In Love. But I did some analyzing and here are the reasons (I think) SPR lost. (These are mostly reasons why )

-Saving Private Ryan is extremely brutal and violent. You can understand why some Academy members would not vote for this. But that didn't stop them from Braveheart or Platoon!

-Saving Private Ryan has no complexity. It is just a simple, straight-forward story of a platoon trying to capture a private. Despite being amazing as heck, this had one of the weakest stories of the year.

-Thin Red Line. Thin Red Line is another WWII epic from 1998 that rivalled Saving Private Ryan. Twin movies like these are always feuding. It wouldn't have been fair to award won but not the other.

-Shakespeare In Love was worthy of winning the gold. If Saving Private Ryan did not come out in 1998, Shakespeare In Love would have been a very worthy winner.

-Shakespeare In Love has more to it. Despite Saving Private Ryan begin better, Shakespeare In Love had the better dialogue, better music, a wider range of emotions, stronger character development, better sets, better costumes, awesome allusions.

-Look at how many WWII movies came out before Saving Private Ryan that won the gold. Look at how many Shakespeare movies have won the gold.

-It is rare for the Best Picture and Best Director Oscars to go out to different films. While Saving Private Ryan was easily the hardest film to make, voters wanted Shakespeare In Love to take something home too.

reply

The technical achievement of this movie was great. But the story was pretty pedestrian. I can see why it didn't win best movie.

Not that I'm the biggest fan of Shakespeare in Love. I didn't particularly like any of the 1999 nominees for best picture.


Working in the movie business since -92

reply

It lost because it was originally released during summer, as opposed to the more viable release window of late December for Oscar bait films. By the time the voting began, people had forgot about it.

Also, Spielberg had won an Oscar for another WW2-related film (Schindler's List) only 5 years prior, and that was a superior film.

"You keep him in here, and make sure HE doesn't leave!"

reply

[deleted]

I'm VERY HAPPY it didn't win Best Picture Oscar and Racist Tom Hanks didn't win Oscar for Best Actor.

Black American soldiers (the 320th Anti-Aircraft Barrage Balloon Battalion and the 327th Quartermaster Service Company) were involved in the D-Day Invasion (Omaha and Utah beaches) on June 6, 1944, https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/13638358-black-soldiers-on-d-day-we-were-there (Black soldiers on D-Day: “We Were There.”). White photographers who were there refused to film and take photos of black fighting men in the Invasion of Normandy and Battle of Iwo Jima.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btGARwERj5I&t=13s

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mO__qae2DgI (Go to 1:10 on the video).

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvGGFRGLZUQ (Click on "SHOW MORE")

Racist Steven Spielberg and Racist Tom Hanks were told black American soldiers (the 320th Anti-Aircraft Barrage Balloon Battalion and the 327th Quartermaster Service Company) were there on D-Day, June 6, 1944. They wanted to make hero out of white American soldiers in combat in World War 2 and the racist thinking of majority of white people in the U.S. don't want to see black soldiers or black people in World War 2 movies and tv mini-series ("Band of Brothers" and "The Pacific" on HBO) based on true historical events. Racist Clint Eastwood deliberately left out black American soldiers in his movie "Flags of our Fathers". The movie is about Iwo Jima. Racist Clint Eastwood said he wanted "to honor WHITE fathers".

reply

"-Shakespeare In Love has more to it. Despite Saving Private Ryan begin better, Shakespeare In Love had the better dialogue, better music, a wider range of emotions, stronger character development, better sets, better costumes, awesome allusions."

Better sets, better costumes!?
Have you actually seen SPR? oO

reply

It just wasn't great. Having good bullet sounds whizzing through the air and showing more blood and guts than most war movies doesn't make this film superior.

reply

History will remember that Harvey Weinstein bought the Shakespeare in Love Best Picture Oscar. That's even more cringeworthy now than it was in 1999.

reply

I guess we are lucky Saving Private Ryan won best Director.

reply

Shakespeare In Love Sucks at every level --- Weinstein payed a lot of money for his votes

reply

Yeah this is also the same academy that picked Kramer vs. Kramer over Apocalypse Now and Forrest Gump over Pulp Fiction.

reply