My opinion, 2009
2008.
Well, I can think of The Last Emperor (1987), and possibly Schindler’s List in ‘93. Though I’m not a huge fan, and it isn’t my favorite Spielberg film, it’s fair to say that for him, it was his masterpiece.
Certainly the film he wishes to be remembered for.
Slumdog Millionaire, a masterpiece? Whoa.
I liked No Country, but I can’t say it’s even phenomenal as a Coen Brothers film. Would not consider it one of the greatest films of all time. I would say this of Amadeus.
The only way a masterpiece could win in 2008 would be if we time traveled, and forced the Academy to vote for There Will Be Blood.
Crash definitely.
No Country for Old Men, I think, was a masterpiece. Before that probably American Beauty. The problem is all films need the benefit of time and reflection to truly become masterpieces. Perhaps one day hindsight will show us that a movie like Crash, which I personally think is overrated, is the root of a new movement in art. Probably not, but then, most people hated Vertigo when it first came out, so we’ll have to just wait and see.
For the last , I would have to say either Silence of the Lambs or The Last Emperor. There were other good films (Schindler’s List, The Departed, No Country), but I wouldn’t call them masterpieces.
To be honest i have a low opinion of best picture winners for Oscars in its entirety. Im not even sure how accurate it would be to assume that there has been some sort of quantifiable decline in recent winners, I’m not saying they are bad films, but not a masterpiece. From Here to Eternity from (1953) or even the Sting (1973) I would hardly consider masterpieces. Enjoyable films yes….and definitely well made, but hardly a masterpiece imo. There have definitely been a few films I consider masterpieces that won, but as an overall trend I never saw it as such.
To answer the question at hand though, Id probably say The Silence of the Lambs back in 91. Its probably one of the few Oscar winners in the past two decades I still watch regularly, and find nearly flawless.
All a matter of opinion, Patrick. I also consider E.T. a masterpiece although that’s likely not a majority opinion with this crowd. I loved everything about the film and the opinion seemed shared as the audience in my theater applauded not only after the movie but after the dance sequence at the end. I consider a movie that moves people like that and provides such a high level of escapism and visceral thrills to be a masterpiece. And for me, Boyle’s style is brilliant and perfect for the kind of stories he’s trying to tell. Amadeus I consider an all-time classic, without a doubt.
No Country for Old Men. before that, Schindler’s List.
Also I’m not sure your argument holds water. They were relevant up until the 80’s but now are irrelevant? They’ve always been hit or miss with the lowest point probably being the 30’s (Cavalcade, Cimarron, The Life of Emile Zola?) and the high point being the late 60’s to early 70’s (Midnight Cowboy, Godfather I and II, One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest).
Crap Monster… it may be a matter of taste, but I would certainly take The Sting over American Beauty, Gladiator, Braveheart, Forrest Gump, Crash, or Shakespeare in Love. Easily. Maybe I just like old movies….. but when I look at the roster of best picture winners pre-1980, I see a number of genuine masterpieces, while, like I said, I’ve seen none since Amadeus. The show has always been about hype, but I think there were certain standards observed that went out the window after the 1970s, and hype and television began to account for much more of the voting process. Influence peddling has reached new levels, elevating films that would have been laughed at years ago.
I’m puzzled and ecstatic, though, that the academy didn’t fall for Revolutionary Road this year….. which comes close to Crash in its awfulness.
Just last year. No Country for Old Men, and then three years before that with Million Dollar Baby, then after that it’s slim pickings I’d say none until all the way back to Annie Hall, but I haven’t seen all of them. I have a dislike for Amadeus because it’s so inaccurate, though.
I was looking back, though, and the first ten awards (Wings, Broadway Melody, All Quiet on the Western Front, Cimarron, Grand Hotel, Calvacade, It Happened One Night, Mutiny on the Bounty, The Great Ziegfeld, The Life of Emily Zola) other than a few films none of those are true classics. I’d say the number of great films picked by the oscars is no more then that it is today. It’s a reflection of the times, if people are in the mood for musicals then those are, more often than not, going to win best picture, if they want true great films then great films will be selected. All this talk about how the good old days of films were so much better than today is ridiculous, there are no more great films made then than there are today, and the terrible films are at the same amount, too. It’s all relative, if we make more films today, by sheer numbers, we have more awful films, and more great ones, too, but the percentage is the same.
Chariots of Fire. Amadeus could have been one of the best films of all time if the dialogue had been spoken in German.
1999 American Beautty
I’m with Brandon on “Last Emperor” and Schindler’s List." Brokeback Mountain should have one over Crash.
I would have to say Amadeus. Factually embellished? Sure thing! Masterpiece? Sure thing!
I would go with The Last Emperor or Amadues. The past couple of years have had great films, but not to the point of masterpiece, or at least yet.
I don’t quite know how you’re defining “masterpiece,” but nobody’s yet mentioned UNFORGIVEN. You don’t get much better cinema than that.
You all need to go and read the history of the Academy Awards. For years they were insider prizes for those who were to be considered doing “a good job” within the industry. In other words, who either was bringing in a lot of dough to the studios, then who showed great potential to do so, and then anybody everybody liked. Any kind of real analysis based on artistic merit was hardly ever given a thought.
Then they became a political tool, for both the right (all of John Ford’s wins, and especially when his HOW GREEN WAS MY VALLEY beat CITIZEN KANE), and the left (when HAMLET took the award in 1948, the “Academy” was almost dissolved by the studio heads — it was supposed to give prizes to make THEM money, not some nobody actor from England).
Don’t take them so damned seriously. The only ones with even a little merit are the lifetime achievement awards, and then only because there has to be a record of merit.
For the record, I rather like THE LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA! I think that IS one of the early ones that really holds up pretty well, and it’s well made to boot!1928, it was all down hill from there.
I dont know Patrick, I understand where you are coming from and agree I prefer the very films I mentioned to newer winners….but I think it comes down to a factor of time.
For example, even if we agree that better films were simply made pre-1980, that still doesn’t really provide any insight into whether or not the Oscar’s simply made poor choices in their awarding process. Maybe films in general have declined, if that is the case, then the Oscars don’t really have those better films of years past to even pick from.
I was simply stating that in relation to their own years, I always found the Academy to a little inaccurate in their awarding for the very reasons you mention. Its simply a large promotion for those involved, and I don’t think this was ever not the case.
Isn’t the fact that a film wins a best picture Oscar proof that it is mediocre? It’s a glamor award by democracy, after all.
The great films that have won are exceedingly the exceptions that prove the rule (“An American in Paris” (51), “On the Waterfront” (54), “Lawrence of Arabia” (62), “The Godfather” (72), “The Deer Hunter” (78), “Amadeus” (84)).
While there are plenty of exceedingly wonderful films that have won in other years, the great films of that year have been overlooked:
1941: “How Green Was My Valley” won over “Citizen Kane” and “The Maltese Falcon”
1950: “All About Eve” won over “Sunset Boulevard”
1969: “Midnight Cowboy” won over “Z”
1971: “The French Connection” won over “A Clockwork Orange”
1975: “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” won over “Chinatown”
1980: “Ordinary People” won over “The Elephant Man” ** I don’t think “Ordinary People” is really even an exemplary movie, I just hate that “The Elephant Man” was overlooked.
1999: “American Beauty” won over “The Insider”
2003: “LotR: RotK” won over “Master and Commander”
2007: “No Country…” won over “…Blood”
Then there are the years where the winner was complete drivel compared to the runners-up (“Shakespeare in Love” over “The Thin Red Line”WTF).
The AMPAS is just an organization created to pat itself on the back and justify another season of over-budgeted, over-blown pieces of mediocrity.
That having been said, the best element of the Oscars is the moment when something true happens—I’m not talking about the unexpected award to, say Sean Penn, but the thing that is said: Penn’s and Black’s statement this year, Moore’s from 2002, Brando’s rejection from 72. Other than that, it’s only the dresses that look pretty.
The absolute masterworks rarely ever stand a chance. If they did, society would be a better place than it is now.
another vote for 2008
I was thinking on the lines of 99 American Beauty
going back before that 74 Godfather Part II was a great choice.
75 had an amazing line up of Dog Day Afternoon, Nashville and Barry Lyndon apart from the winner One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
some of the major disappointments which happen to be my favorites -
76 Taxi Driver
79 Apocalypse Now
94 Pulp Fiction
96 Fargo
04 Aviator
Schindler’s List
Schindler’s List
American Beauty
The Deer Hunter
Schindler’s List
Slumdog Millionaire
I can imagine a lot of people would disagree with me on the last one, but thats how I feel about it.
Schindler’s List, hands motha-fucking down was a masterpiece! since then, i think No Country comes the closest, but i wouldn’t say its a masterpiece (its my second favorite Coen film, my first being Barton Fink NOT Fargo [though Fargo was quite good!]).
also, why the hate towards Rocky? it really was a good movie! was it a “masterpiece” as we know it? no…but it had serious staying power, and was actually a well-written, well-acted film about a loser over coming odds BEFORE every year had its own movie with same plot plaguing the big screen (either taking place in sports or in schools, usually). i really don’t think Rocky was a dud…i’m just saying.
No Country for Old Men and English Patient.
English Patient is, in my opinion, one of the best adaptations ever done.
Patrick
It’s amazing how irrelevant they’ve become….. think of all the masterpieces from the 1930s through the 1980s that were given the highest award. Sure, there were huge duds….. Rocky, Around the World in 80 Days….. but there was, more often than not, a great number of genuinely great films that were granted the award. For a million reasons (Miramax for one) this is no longer the case. We can go into why, certainly, but right now I’m interested to hear what people say is the last truly Great Film to win the statue.
I believe that Amadeus, in 1984, was the last masterpiece to be given the award.
Anyone else?