2008 Woodie Awards
Settleling the Scorcese
MCT Campus
Issue date: 2/26/07 Section: Arts & Entertainment
- Page 1 of 2 next >
All right, all right...it is the worst crime in all of cinema. Worse than Alfred Hitchcock
never handling directorial Oscar gold. More appalling than Stanley Kubrick's 1 for 13 Academy batting average (he received one for
"2001's" special eff ects???). Over the course of his highly praised career, Martin Scorsese, a true American auteur, has never won the big prize. Granted, he's still considered a fi lmmaking genius. But for many, that's not good enough. Instead of letting him rest on his considerable laurels,
fans and faux well-wishers want him to walk down that red carpet and pick up the industry's biggest reward. It won't affect his status as a legitimate legend (just ask Jean Renoir, Akira Kurosawa, or any other renowned director who had to wait around for "honorary" recognition). But for many, it would be vindication after decades of being purposefully passed over.
Some of his slights have been pretty heinous. For the record, Scorsese has been nominated six times for Best Director, all for films made after 1980, none for anything prior to "Raging Bull." He also has two screenplay nods as well. Of the movies he's been recognized for, two are hailed as modern masterworks _ 1980's "Bull" and 1990's "Goodfellas." How ironic is it then that both efforts lost to first time directors(Robert Redford for "Ordinary
People" and Kevin Costner for "Dances with Wolves," respectively) both of who were superstar actors first, distinguished filmmakers a far distant second (quick,
name another noteworthy film either has made since).
One of the strongest arguments defenders make about Scorsese's snubs is that, in a system that quickly rushes to celebrate
the flavor of the moment, the Academy often fails to look at the bigger motion picture picture. And Marty is that man out of time.
No one would argue that "People" (which is still amazing) is better than "Bull." It's merely a matter of artistic degrees. Similarly, it's a shame that the overblown
never handling directorial Oscar gold. More appalling than Stanley Kubrick's 1 for 13 Academy batting average (he received one for
"2001's" special eff ects???). Over the course of his highly praised career, Martin Scorsese, a true American auteur, has never won the big prize. Granted, he's still considered a fi lmmaking genius. But for many, that's not good enough. Instead of letting him rest on his considerable laurels,
fans and faux well-wishers want him to walk down that red carpet and pick up the industry's biggest reward. It won't affect his status as a legitimate legend (just ask Jean Renoir, Akira Kurosawa, or any other renowned director who had to wait around for "honorary" recognition). But for many, it would be vindication after decades of being purposefully passed over.
Some of his slights have been pretty heinous. For the record, Scorsese has been nominated six times for Best Director, all for films made after 1980, none for anything prior to "Raging Bull." He also has two screenplay nods as well. Of the movies he's been recognized for, two are hailed as modern masterworks _ 1980's "Bull" and 1990's "Goodfellas." How ironic is it then that both efforts lost to first time directors(Robert Redford for "Ordinary
People" and Kevin Costner for "Dances with Wolves," respectively) both of who were superstar actors first, distinguished filmmakers a far distant second (quick,
name another noteworthy film either has made since).
One of the strongest arguments defenders make about Scorsese's snubs is that, in a system that quickly rushes to celebrate
the flavor of the moment, the Academy often fails to look at the bigger motion picture picture. And Marty is that man out of time.
No one would argue that "People" (which is still amazing) is better than "Bull." It's merely a matter of artistic degrees. Similarly, it's a shame that the overblown
Be the first to comment on this story