Skip to footer

Oscars: 5 films that should have been nominated

Oscar missed out on these 5 films that should have earned a nomination.

|
Jaap Buitendijk/HONS/Warner Bros. Pictures/AP
The Oscars should have awarded more nominations to the critically acclaimed finale to the Harry Potter series.
  • By John Hanlon Screen Rant

The Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences has a problem. Each year, it neglects or fails to appreciate some of the best films of the year. While it makes a lot of great decisions, often it overlooks certain genres or stories that don't appeal to them.

This year was no different. (Check out the 2012 Oscar Nominees.)

With that in mind, here are the five major films that the Academy undervalued in 2011. Although many of the films on this list received a few Oscar nominations, overall the Academy did not give them the credit they are due. Instead of a nod or two, these films deserved much greater recognition and appreciation from the Academy.

'The Ides of March'

The Ides of March, George Clooney's great political thriller only received one Oscar nomination this year. It is vying against The Descendants, Hugo, Moneyball and Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy for best adapted screenplay. But this film is worth so much more. It was actually my third favorite film of 2011.

In addition to the writing, the film deserved recognition for Clooney's steady direction and a best picture nomination. The acting was credible but no one performance stood out in this cast that included Clooney, Ryan Gosling, Marisa Tomei, Paul Giamatti and Philip Seymour Hoffman. I can understand why none of the performances were recognized - in a lesser year, they would have been - but the film itself deserved more recognition than it's getting.

'Super 8'

Super 8 was an epic summer movie that appealed to both critics and audiences alike. It had a phenomenal cast of young actors and a great story combined with wonderful visual effects. Written and directed by J.J. Abrams, this was a film that showed that summer blockbusters could still be intelligent and exciting, not just one or the other.

With no Oscar nods to its name, this film was completely overlooked by the Academy. It wasn't on my top ten list of the year but it should have been nominated for its great visual effects, wonderful score and maybe even its fine direction.

'50/50'

Like Super 8, 50/50 received zero Oscar nominations this year. The film tells the story of a young man (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who is diagnosed with cancer and given a 50/50 shot chance of surviving. Yes, the film includes some crude humor and off-putting jokes, but it's a great film with its heart in the right place.

In a lesser year, Gordon-Levitt would have been nominated for Best Actor for his performance, but the abundance of strong male performances in 2011 ruined his chances. Regardless, I still believe that either Anna Kendrick or Anjelica Huston should have been nominated for their brilliant supporting performances. And without a doubt, Will Reiser - who faced cancer in real life - should have been nominated for his honest and heartbreaking screenplay.

'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II'

Unlike a few of the films on this list, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II did receive a few Oscar nominations. It was nominated for Art Direction, Makeup and Visual Effects. But this epic finale to the "Harry Potter" series deserved more. It was an elegant and visually-stunning conclusion to a masterful series of films.

Many have argued that Alan Rickman deserved an Oscar nod for his supporting performance. His performance wasn't nominated and I can understand why in this year of great supporting male performances. I can't, however, understand why this film wasn't nominated for Best Picture. It was a critically-acclaimed blockbuster that appealed to adults and children alike. To not give it a best picture nod is an insult to those who loved the film as much as I did - and ignores the epic achievement that the series, as a whole, represents.

'Drive'

Drive, a dark film about a stunt driver who moonlights as a getaway driver, was a thought-provoking and brilliant film. Instead of relying on a lot of dialogue, its story was mostly told through great performances and unique direction. Critics will be talking about this movie for years to come. But how did the Academy recognize it? With one single nomination for Best Sound Editing.

This is the most surprising film to be on this list because not only did I think that it should be nominated for more awards, I also thought that it should win a few of them. Nicolas Winding Refn directed this film with an awe-inspiring fierceness and intelligence and Albert Brooks delivered a brilliant performance as the story's malicious villain. Both men should have been nominated and in my opinion, both should have returned home with statues. The lack of nominations is beyond disappointing.

John Hanlon blogs at Screen Rant.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to Oscars: 5 films that should have been nominated
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Culture-Cafe/2012/0227/Oscars-5-films-that-should-have-been-nominated
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe