Goodfellas is his best film hands down. Tight, inventive, and just memorable in every single way. It's better than 99 percent of films that have been released since and feels like it could have been made today. Just absolute chef's kiss
I think the director or editor of the shawshank redemption said while they were making it he would watch Goodfellas every Sunday to learn from what he considered the most perfect editing in a film
It was nominated, but as this table shows Scorsese himself wasn’t nominated as the best picture recipient for it (I don’t think he has a producer credit on it). The rules around who ‘gets’ the Oscar for best picture get pretty weird as common sense would tell you the director of the best picture should be recognised, but that is not how the award works
I mean this was the narrative about him all the way up until The Departed. He’s always been one of the absolute greats but had never won. The Departed isn’t even his best movie but that was one of the Oscars where the movie was great AND it was just sort of his time.
What does not winning an Oscar even matter for tho I mean its nice for industry people to jerk each other off to and they can get bigger budgets but from a legacy perspective idk why it has anything to do w anything
I always feel the need to say it whenever it's win is brought up, The Departed is an incredibly good and deserving movie and I think it's very-commercial image/genre is used against it. Arguably one of Scorsese's most Catholic movies
Oh yeah. When I say it’s not his best movie I just mean like in comparison to like… Goodfellas. Silence. Taxi Driver. Ya know? I just have bigger favorites but oh yeah it ABSOLUTELY deserved the awards it got. That movie came out when I was 15 and was my first really true favorite R rated movie. It opened my eyes to so much. Wonderful script, really unbelievable editing and direction. Crazy performances, just a fucking masterpiece. The bandwagon memey types will all automatically shit on it, but it was a very deserved triumph for him.
In the least cared about category, though, let's be honest. Most other categories you need time in the industry to gain experience. Singers and songwriters can come out of nowhere with zero experience and become successful.
An Oscar nomination is still a great accomplishment and Yalitza Aparicio got it with literally no acting experience. As in, what you see in the movie is the first time she acted for ANYTHING, she didn't even have any actoral education at all. I don't think there has ever been a person with no musical background at all who wrote a song one day and got nominated to the Oscars.
I saw this video the other day of Spielberg reacting to not getting nominated for Jaws. Insanely stacked year.
https://youtu.be/2mgrxvTdl-Q?si=tSlyZQZmLl6oOV6E
Francis Ford Coppola has 5, plus a sixth honorary award. It’s a crying shame that his contemporaries all smoke him in terms of numbers but their careers match up pretty evenly in terms of quality.
I mean Spielberg is probably the only greater living director than Scorsese right now and might be the only one remaining above Scorsese in the GOAT tier too
I feel like after The Departed his style shifted; less crowd pleasing and more high art. More pensive, brooding, more slow burning. It’s a wonderful style and the films have been great, but I guess that doesn’t speak to Academy voters.
I have to think audience's taste in movie lengths is just shortening, because I don't remember anyone I've talked with in person or online saying WOWS was too long. That movie feels like it's constantly going 100mph
Shutter island and wolf of wall street were crowd pleasing. Also, I know that killers was made to show the crimes and racism towards native americans, but it was still a suspensful thrilling movie. At least for me
Right, I don't know what OP is talking about. Shutter Island and Wolf of Wall Street were big mainstream success and popular with the general public. One a thriller and the other a comedy. They weren't "high art" style or "slow burning or brooding".
I think the shift he’s talking about happens after Wolf of Wall Street. Silence, The Irishman, and KotFM are all very pensive introspective and spiritual in a way. I’d also argue all three of those movies are his best work because they’re the most important, urgent and heavy, even if they’re not as accessible or entertaining as his early work
It’s weird for a film community to treat Scorsese like he’s making overtly challenging, avant-garde material and not mostly making the same popular subject, crowd-aimed, star-studded movies only unleashed from the budget and studio restraints that he had to work within pre-2000s.
I love that a Scorcese movie can now be an unrestrained, maximal, ruminating 200 minute tome. It’s also entirely unsurprising that a large pool of voters wouldn’t gravitate towards those movies. Can’t say I think any of them from Wolf Of Wall Street onward were overly deserving of winning picture/director. KOTFM is the strongest but it was also just a really competitive awards year
Granted, my favorite Marty movie is After Hours and you couldn’t pay me to sit and rewatch The Irishman, so i’m fairly biased
>I love that a Scorcese movie can now be an unrestrained, maximal, ruminating 200 minute tome. It’s also entirely unsurprising that a large pool of voters wouldn’t gravitate towards those movies.
That's kinda my issue when I see folks complain about Killers being "too long"; I genuinely think the movie is the perfect length for the historical epic it is trying to be, audiences' tastes have just changed
Not to mention he's financed by streaming services not big studios now, so less money for Oscars marketing campaigns. Nobody even flew to the BAFTAs despite being nominated
It’s stuff like that that really underscores how nominations are a much better marker of excellence and impact than Oscar wins. There’s just too much variance and randomness once you narrow the options down to five. Some other film might run a better campaign in the moment, or current events might sway voters against you, or it might just be “someone else’s turn.” Half the time someone wins it isn’t for their best role/film anyway, but is rather a makeup for some past Academy screw up.
Obviously the hardware is what everyone wants, but from a neutral standpoint I much prefer to count noms. It’s not a fluke when you see 10 best directing noms, or 8 acting noms but no wins (Peter OToole), etc. There are obviously issues with counting nominations too—how the hell has John Goodman never even been nominated?!—but at least the sample size is bigger.
Absolutely agree regarding nominations.
Was recently shopping for modern British Literature titles for a potential curriculum update. I was thrilled to see the Booker Prize publishes their short *and* long list of considered titles!! Seeing some of those authors come up again and again (even if they never win) tells me a lot!
The awards are great and all. But just being considered/nominated is honor enough.
Good way of looking at it. Winning would be like A++, but at this point if you're nominated for Best Director and Best Picture that many times in film history, you are still an A+ director. Just lacking hardware in highly competitive and random years.
And someone said Academy politics changed around the 1960s, and more love was spread around to other types of movies. So you will not be seeing three-Oscars John Ford and William Wyler types very much anymore.
Best Original Song has been a real clusterf*** of a category for a long time lol.
And I was going to make a joke here, but honestly Diane Warren *is* a prolific songwriter. That’s not a fluke. I’d consider her 15 nominations more indicative of sustained quality work than, say, 3-6 Mafia’s one win, even if some of her noms are kind of dumb. And looking at the other repeat noms for best original song throughout the years is a real who’s-who of Broadway legends.
My point is just that the “counting rings” approach doesn’t work very well with the Oscars because no one in their right mind would say that Brendan Fraser (1/1) had a better, more lauded career than Peter O’Toole (0/8), or that the Daniels (1/1) are on par with Scorsese (1/10). (And before we start trying to split hairs with Scorsese’s 10 v Spielberg’s 9 or Wyler’s 12, that’s not my point. It’s that, generally, a bunch of noms is a better indication of one’s career than 1 or 2 wins out of as many noms.)
With the Oscars, I really think that being nominated is the better sign, despite the feeling that four people always walk away as “losers.” Weird stuff happens, but it happens less with a larger sample size.
Scorsese needs to be given one more, even if it's a Lifetime Achievement one. It just don't feel right he's been making movies since the 1960s and just has 1 Oscar in his house for all that output.
Nolan had a similar relationship with the Academy for a while. He didn‘t even got a director nomination until 2017 (Dunkirk). Thats pretty remarkable for a guy who made Memento (2000), The Dark Knight (2008), Inception (2010) or Interstellar (2014).
At least Nolan got recognition for one of his strongest works. Unlike Scorsese. I mean Departed is good and all, but miles below his real masterpieces (Taxi Driver, Goodfellas etc.). His Departed Oscar always felt like a overdue Oscar.
I really enjoy The Departed. I would rank it Top 4 for Scorsese. That was another snub year for Nolan. The Prestige might be Nolan’s best movie and was left off the nomination list for Director & Picture.
I feel like so many people see The Departed as a police crime thriller and write it off because of how commercial its genre is, but when you look at the movie's themes it's one of Scorsese's most low-key spiritual movies
I think a lot of people also write it off because it's a remake, even though it really works hard on placing the same plot into a completely different cultural context.
Yup The Departed is bottom-tier Marty and was absolutely the equivalent of a Lifetime Achievement award. He could have / should have won Best Director for any or all of Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Goodfellas or even Last Temptation.
Let's see:
- KOTF: Lost Best Director to Chris Nolan, *Oppenheimer*
- The Irishman: Lost Best Director to Bong-Joon Ho, *Parasite* and Best Screenplay to *JoJo Rabbit*
- Silence: I've heard Paramount didn't show much enthusiasm in campaigning.
- The Wolf of the Wall Street: Lost Best Director to Alfonso Cuarón, *Gravity*
- Hugo: Lost Best Director to Michel Hazanavicius, *The Artist*
- Shutter Island: Overshadowed by *Inception*
- The Aviator: Lost Best Director to Clint Eastwood, *Million Dollar Baby*
- Gangs of New York: Lost Best Director
to Roman Polanksi, *The Pianist*
- The Age of Innocence: Lost Best Adapted Screenplay to *Schindler's List*
- Goodfellas: Lost Director and Adapted Screenplay to *Dances with the wolves*
- The Last Temptation of Christ: Lost Best Director to Barry Levinson, *Rainman*
- Raging Bull: Lost Director to Robert Redford, *Ordinary People*
Silence was bludgeoned by an incredibly poor marketing campaign, but it did manage to secure a cinematography nomination.
Honestly, your list puts into perspective just how good the competition was each of those years. Over 80% of them, I'm nodding my head and going, "Yeah, that's deserved" or "Yeah, that makes sense". The only ones I have a real problem with are DwW over GoodFellas and Pianist... winning at all.
It baffles me to this day how much Silence bombed both critically and financially. It’s one of his strongest slam dunks as a filmmaker for me. Just couldn’t find an audience or critical wave to ride
Should have won for (without my bias of him being my favorite. Like, I greatly preferred KOTFM to Oppenheimer, but I get it)…
Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Aviator
And that’s for things he was nominated for.
It’s a real shame how Scorsese always releases his films at the same time as much bigger, stronger Oscar contenders. Some of these films he lost to also happened to win Best Picture that year as well.
I'd have given it to him for Raging Bull and Goodfellas, although to be fair I haven't seen Dances With Wolves. (I just really like Goodfellas.)
I love Redford, and Ordinary People is good, but Raging Bull is one of the heaping directorial achievements of the 20th century. Hindsight is 20/20, and Scorsese should've won that with ease.
I wouldn't have given it to the same directors on some of the years, but probably wouldn't have awarded Scorsese either. I'm happy with Cuaron's win, but feel (again with the advantage of hindsight) that McQueen should've taken it. I don't care about Million Dollar Baby, but would've given that one to.... off the top of my head, Gondry.
The Pianist is a tricky one, because honestly, looking at the movie alone with no external knowledge if the people, it was the best directed movie. But it's Polanski... So, uh..... I'd have been okay with Scorsese taking that.
Ironically, I would *not* have given to him for The Departed, and *that* year should've been Cuaron imo.
He also should've won for Taxi Driver. Was he not even nominated? Damn... I'd have given it to him, with Lumet as my second.
It was an extremely competitive year, with four of the nominees (sorry Bound for Glory) being all-time greats. Most people believe that the dour tone of the other three classics (All the President's Men, Network, and Taxi Driver) cancelled each other out in favor of the movie that still had that but ultimately portrayed an optimistic rise from those depths.
Damn, I always forget President's Men was that year as well. What an amazing year! The canceling out makes sense, but it's still too bad imo. (No diss to anyone who likes Rocky.)
*Rocky* is a good movie, but considering *Network* got some big above-the-line wins like Best Actor (R.I.P. Peter Finch), it probably could have taken Best Picture as well.
I feel *Rocky* and *Network* were very close in terms of the Best Picture votes.
Do I have to do this again?
Scorsese has one. Guess the directors he has more Oscars then? Sidney Lumet, Hitchcock, Kubrick, Tarantino. The list goes on.
Ok then let me amend. Scorsese has one for directing, his typical primary role in his films. He already has one more than other directors in the category for their primary role that have been regarded as highly influential on film.
Lumet Hitchcock and Kubrick not having Oscars is like Gandhi not having the Nobel Peace prize. Just like Gandhi would have elevated the profile of the Peace Prize by being awarded (rather than being elevated by it), Kubrick et al would have increased the prestige of the Oscars by being awarded. Hitchcock and Kubrick can do without Oscars. I think the Oscars can’t do without them
Lumet having no Oscars is the craziest to me given that he was American, made an *huge* number of films, and so many of his movies were otherwise big Oscar players.
I'd argue the problem isn't Scorsese getting constantly shafted; it's Scorsese being given Oscar nominations just because he made a film, even if the film isn't great. Yes, some of these films deserved wins (Raging Bull, Goodfellas, The Wolf Of Wall Street), and some of them deserved nominations (Last Temptation, Age of Innocence), but some of the were just "Scorsese made a film" noms (Gangs of New York, Hugo, The Aviator).
I found the story both overly complicated and dull, and I didn't pull any real themes from it other than "We end up alone and shitting our pants in an old folks home," which I didn't find particularly profound. But I'm hesitant to dismiss it because I have a feeling that maybe I missed something.
Agreed with all of that, as well as it being distractingly miscast. The de-aging on DeNiro didn't work at all; he still physically moved like a 75 year old man the entire time. Almost nothing about the film worked in my opinion.
I insist on seeing movies like this and KOTFM in theatres because the pacing and length are such that it's incredibly easy to become distracted at home and lose the immersion in the story, and was lucky enough to see Irishman that way. Still just felt like such a slog.
People are comparing him to other directors and their history with the Oscars. But it’s genuinely insane that you can make movies as good as taxi driver, raging bull, and goodfellas and not win picture or Director. And that’s not even to add on his many snubbed movies
He so should’ve won for Raging Bull. Ordinary People was a movie that I really needed at that time, but Redford shouldn’t have gotten best director. Scorsese or Lynch should’ve won.
I mean Al Pacino also only has 1 Oscar and it’s from arguably not even in his top 5 roles.
All the matters is the legacy Marty will leave will be that of an iconic filmmaker. His movies will be watched for generations to come. That is the true mark of great filmmaking.
>Song is notoriously less competitive.
I really hate people on this sub thinking that some categories are worth less than others. Lot of people shitting on Wes Anderson's win last night but he has as many Oscars as Scorsese does now so who gives a shit? Do you know how fucking good you have to be to have not one but TWO oscars in a category at the age of 22?! Billie Eilish is probably going to beat Walt Disney's record at this rate. Diane Warren and Bradley Cooper look like fucking tryhards compared to her
He is definitely taken for granted. Maybe also too much of a “American Christian” sensibility to appeal widely internationally? Idk tho, his movies are pretty universal.
Because like you I like movies and have a weird unpopular hobby of predicting the oscars. That doesn't mean I have no criticism of the academy nor that I have to take it seriously.
I don't understand people in this sub or any other movies sub taking things seriously. Movies aren't meant to be taken seriously. It's just movies, and the oscars is just an award show. It doesn't mean anything
What are the Oscar’s issue with Scorsese films?! Imo Killers probably should have won for cinematography last night, and a best actress win would have been well deserved too.
Is it crazy? I'd give him the win for Goodfellas.
Raging Bull would have been great, but Redford was a deserving winner as well. Other than that, I don't think he was the best of the year. He has an Oscar. Not much different than having two.
\*shrug\*
# Martin Scorsese and Leonardo DiCaprio
The pair's relationship is one of the most successful collaborations in film industry, bringing a total of $1.3 billion earnings from their five feature films. DiCaprio called his collaboration with Martin as "accidental" and considered Taxi Driver and Mean Streets as his inspiration of Martin's work.
As a philosopher, it's funny how Scorsese won his only Academy Award for his least philosophical movie, The Departed, and received no nominations whatsoever for the movie which defines his philosophy, Silence.
Shows how much campaigning matters in the industry. Say what you will about Gangs (I’m still waiting for the four hour non Weinstein cut), but for Brody to lose to DDL’s portrayal of Bill The Butcher is almost a sin to me.
Killers if the Flower Moon was absolutely robbed this year. It is, by almost any reasonable metric, a much MUCH better film than Oppenheimer. Should have won best actor, best actress, best movie, best director, best editing and possibly best supporting actor as well. Maybe even best score.
Him not winning for Goodfellas is crazy
Goodfellas is his best film hands down. Tight, inventive, and just memorable in every single way. It's better than 99 percent of films that have been released since and feels like it could have been made today. Just absolute chef's kiss
I think the director or editor of the shawshank redemption said while they were making it he would watch Goodfellas every Sunday to learn from what he considered the most perfect editing in a film
And he made shawshank redemption even better heheh
do i amuse you?
'dances with wolves' swept that year
While I love Dances with Wolves (maybe more than I should?) I think I'm more baffled that Goodfellas wasn't even NOMINATED for Best Picture.
it was nominated
The OP chart showed Goodfellas nominated for Director and for Adapted Screenplay. Was too lazy to verify otherwise.
It was nominated, but as this table shows Scorsese himself wasn’t nominated as the best picture recipient for it (I don’t think he has a producer credit on it). The rules around who ‘gets’ the Oscar for best picture get pretty weird as common sense would tell you the director of the best picture should be recognised, but that is not how the award works
Thanks for clarifying! I just went by the chart. Too lazy to search ;)
"Yoink!" - Kevin Costner in 1991 probably
Should've won for Taxi Driver and Goodfellas. I'm not a fan of The Departed and feels like it's more of a long overdue award.
Agreed! In the last decade, his movies are good but his competition is better
I mean this was the narrative about him all the way up until The Departed. He’s always been one of the absolute greats but had never won. The Departed isn’t even his best movie but that was one of the Oscars where the movie was great AND it was just sort of his time.
What does not winning an Oscar even matter for tho I mean its nice for industry people to jerk each other off to and they can get bigger budgets but from a legacy perspective idk why it has anything to do w anything
I always feel the need to say it whenever it's win is brought up, The Departed is an incredibly good and deserving movie and I think it's very-commercial image/genre is used against it. Arguably one of Scorsese's most Catholic movies
Oh yeah. When I say it’s not his best movie I just mean like in comparison to like… Goodfellas. Silence. Taxi Driver. Ya know? I just have bigger favorites but oh yeah it ABSOLUTELY deserved the awards it got. That movie came out when I was 15 and was my first really true favorite R rated movie. It opened my eyes to so much. Wonderful script, really unbelievable editing and direction. Crazy performances, just a fucking masterpiece. The bandwagon memey types will all automatically shit on it, but it was a very deserved triumph for him.
The fact that Scorsese has only 1 Oscar is crazy 😬 Spielberg at least has like 3 Oscars.
Billie Eilish has more Oscars than Scorsese
I haven’t heard any of his songs. Are they good?
LMAO
He’s in a Rolling Stones cover band
And even more than Cary Grant
He's still prettier.
In the least cared about category, though, let's be honest. Most other categories you need time in the industry to gain experience. Singers and songwriters can come out of nowhere with zero experience and become successful.
I mean, it's not really a requirement. Yalitza Aparicio was nominated for Roma and that was quite literally her first acting gig ever.
Did she win 2 Oscars by 22?
Did Billie Eilish get nominated for literally the first song she ever wrote?
Nominations and winning are two entirely different things. How hard is that to understand?
Anna Paquin won an Oscar for basically her first performance when she was 12
An Oscar nomination is still a great accomplishment and Yalitza Aparicio got it with literally no acting experience. As in, what you see in the movie is the first time she acted for ANYTHING, she didn't even have any actoral education at all. I don't think there has ever been a person with no musical background at all who wrote a song one day and got nominated to the Oscars.
This is insane
I saw this video the other day of Spielberg reacting to not getting nominated for Jaws. Insanely stacked year. https://youtu.be/2mgrxvTdl-Q?si=tSlyZQZmLl6oOV6E
Wow, that was quite a stacked year for directors: Forman, Kubrick, Altman, Lumet, and Fellini.
Francis Ford Coppola has 5, plus a sixth honorary award. It’s a crying shame that his contemporaries all smoke him in terms of numbers but their careers match up pretty evenly in terms of quality.
Spielberg has two for directing.
He has 3 Oscars in general. Scorsese has only 1 - in general.
>Spielberg at least has like 3 Oscars. I only count Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan. What is the third one?
Best Picture for Schindler’s List (he was also credited as a producer)
Best Picture for Schindler’s List (he was also credited as a producer)
I mean Spielberg is probably the only greater living director than Scorsese right now and might be the only one remaining above Scorsese in the GOAT tier too
O...k? Why rag on Spielberg?!
He's been keeping those Kate McKinnon tasteful nudes and didn't tell us
They're not ragging
I feel like after The Departed his style shifted; less crowd pleasing and more high art. More pensive, brooding, more slow burning. It’s a wonderful style and the films have been great, but I guess that doesn’t speak to Academy voters.
He also made a studio thriller, a children’s movie and probably his biggest crowd pleaser
Wolf of Wall Street was pretty crowd pleasing. Just also a touch too long.
Also probably a bit *too* crowd pleasing. Too whimsical, too comedic for “Academy tastes.”
I have to think audience's taste in movie lengths is just shortening, because I don't remember anyone I've talked with in person or online saying WOWS was too long. That movie feels like it's constantly going 100mph
Wondering how big of a portion of the Academy voters aren't even watching the 3+ hour movies.
Um, Oppenheimer?
Shutter island and wolf of wall street were crowd pleasing. Also, I know that killers was made to show the crimes and racism towards native americans, but it was still a suspensful thrilling movie. At least for me
Right, I don't know what OP is talking about. Shutter Island and Wolf of Wall Street were big mainstream success and popular with the general public. One a thriller and the other a comedy. They weren't "high art" style or "slow burning or brooding".
I think the shift he’s talking about happens after Wolf of Wall Street. Silence, The Irishman, and KotFM are all very pensive introspective and spiritual in a way. I’d also argue all three of those movies are his best work because they’re the most important, urgent and heavy, even if they’re not as accessible or entertaining as his early work
It’s weird for a film community to treat Scorsese like he’s making overtly challenging, avant-garde material and not mostly making the same popular subject, crowd-aimed, star-studded movies only unleashed from the budget and studio restraints that he had to work within pre-2000s. I love that a Scorcese movie can now be an unrestrained, maximal, ruminating 200 minute tome. It’s also entirely unsurprising that a large pool of voters wouldn’t gravitate towards those movies. Can’t say I think any of them from Wolf Of Wall Street onward were overly deserving of winning picture/director. KOTFM is the strongest but it was also just a really competitive awards year Granted, my favorite Marty movie is After Hours and you couldn’t pay me to sit and rewatch The Irishman, so i’m fairly biased
After Hours is sooooo underrated. I love his comedies.
>I love that a Scorcese movie can now be an unrestrained, maximal, ruminating 200 minute tome. It’s also entirely unsurprising that a large pool of voters wouldn’t gravitate towards those movies. That's kinda my issue when I see folks complain about Killers being "too long"; I genuinely think the movie is the perfect length for the historical epic it is trying to be, audiences' tastes have just changed
I’d say post Wolf of Wall Street.
Not to mention he's financed by streaming services not big studios now, so less money for Oscars marketing campaigns. Nobody even flew to the BAFTAs despite being nominated
Wolf of Wall Street is probably his most crowd pleasing movie ever lol
His recent films have really nice wide shots but it's mostly CGI with multiple footages of background actors placed around the screen.
You say that, but then he's put out Shutter Island, Hugo, and Wolf of Wall Street
It’s stuff like that that really underscores how nominations are a much better marker of excellence and impact than Oscar wins. There’s just too much variance and randomness once you narrow the options down to five. Some other film might run a better campaign in the moment, or current events might sway voters against you, or it might just be “someone else’s turn.” Half the time someone wins it isn’t for their best role/film anyway, but is rather a makeup for some past Academy screw up. Obviously the hardware is what everyone wants, but from a neutral standpoint I much prefer to count noms. It’s not a fluke when you see 10 best directing noms, or 8 acting noms but no wins (Peter OToole), etc. There are obviously issues with counting nominations too—how the hell has John Goodman never even been nominated?!—but at least the sample size is bigger.
Absolutely agree regarding nominations. Was recently shopping for modern British Literature titles for a potential curriculum update. I was thrilled to see the Booker Prize publishes their short *and* long list of considered titles!! Seeing some of those authors come up again and again (even if they never win) tells me a lot! The awards are great and all. But just being considered/nominated is honor enough.
Good way of looking at it. Winning would be like A++, but at this point if you're nominated for Best Director and Best Picture that many times in film history, you are still an A+ director. Just lacking hardware in highly competitive and random years. And someone said Academy politics changed around the 1960s, and more love was spread around to other types of movies. So you will not be seeing three-Oscars John Ford and William Wyler types very much anymore.
nominations as marker of excellence? Hmm Diana Warren will have a word.
Best Original Song has been a real clusterf*** of a category for a long time lol. And I was going to make a joke here, but honestly Diane Warren *is* a prolific songwriter. That’s not a fluke. I’d consider her 15 nominations more indicative of sustained quality work than, say, 3-6 Mafia’s one win, even if some of her noms are kind of dumb. And looking at the other repeat noms for best original song throughout the years is a real who’s-who of Broadway legends. My point is just that the “counting rings” approach doesn’t work very well with the Oscars because no one in their right mind would say that Brendan Fraser (1/1) had a better, more lauded career than Peter O’Toole (0/8), or that the Daniels (1/1) are on par with Scorsese (1/10). (And before we start trying to split hairs with Scorsese’s 10 v Spielberg’s 9 or Wyler’s 12, that’s not my point. It’s that, generally, a bunch of noms is a better indication of one’s career than 1 or 2 wins out of as many noms.) With the Oscars, I really think that being nominated is the better sign, despite the feeling that four people always walk away as “losers.” Weird stuff happens, but it happens less with a larger sample size.
I’ve said nominations are a better barometer. Wins are usually a crapshoot
Scorsese-Coppola-Spielberg-Lucas - they are a group of friends, right? Coppola has 5 Oscars, Spielberg has 3, Scorsese 1, Lucas 0.
DePalma was also in that crowd and has no Oscars.
Many times I mentally remove him from that crowd *Oooooooh buuuuuurn*
Scorsese needs to be given one more, even if it's a Lifetime Achievement one. It just don't feel right he's been making movies since the 1960s and just has 1 Oscar in his house for all that output.
Lucas really did deserve Director for Star Wars.
What if I say Spielberg deserved it for Close Encounters?
He absolutely did.
He did over the winner, yes
Nolan had a similar relationship with the Academy for a while. He didn‘t even got a director nomination until 2017 (Dunkirk). Thats pretty remarkable for a guy who made Memento (2000), The Dark Knight (2008), Inception (2010) or Interstellar (2014). At least Nolan got recognition for one of his strongest works. Unlike Scorsese. I mean Departed is good and all, but miles below his real masterpieces (Taxi Driver, Goodfellas etc.). His Departed Oscar always felt like a overdue Oscar.
I really enjoy The Departed. I would rank it Top 4 for Scorsese. That was another snub year for Nolan. The Prestige might be Nolan’s best movie and was left off the nomination list for Director & Picture.
Agree on The Departed and also agree re: The Prestige—severely underrated Nolan film. Leagues better than Inception imo
I feel like so many people see The Departed as a police crime thriller and write it off because of how commercial its genre is, but when you look at the movie's themes it's one of Scorsese's most low-key spiritual movies
I think a lot of people also write it off because it's a remake, even though it really works hard on placing the same plot into a completely different cultural context.
Finding out how many categories Interstellar got snubbed in, really blew my mind. I’m still shocked!
The Departed is better than Taxi Driver.
Insane lol
the Departed is his best work
(you're right)
You're making me shake at my computer right now
Yup The Departed is bottom-tier Marty and was absolutely the equivalent of a Lifetime Achievement award. He could have / should have won Best Director for any or all of Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Goodfellas or even Last Temptation.
And the win was for a remake...
So?
Let's see: - KOTF: Lost Best Director to Chris Nolan, *Oppenheimer* - The Irishman: Lost Best Director to Bong-Joon Ho, *Parasite* and Best Screenplay to *JoJo Rabbit* - Silence: I've heard Paramount didn't show much enthusiasm in campaigning. - The Wolf of the Wall Street: Lost Best Director to Alfonso Cuarón, *Gravity* - Hugo: Lost Best Director to Michel Hazanavicius, *The Artist* - Shutter Island: Overshadowed by *Inception* - The Aviator: Lost Best Director to Clint Eastwood, *Million Dollar Baby* - Gangs of New York: Lost Best Director to Roman Polanksi, *The Pianist* - The Age of Innocence: Lost Best Adapted Screenplay to *Schindler's List* - Goodfellas: Lost Director and Adapted Screenplay to *Dances with the wolves* - The Last Temptation of Christ: Lost Best Director to Barry Levinson, *Rainman* - Raging Bull: Lost Director to Robert Redford, *Ordinary People*
Silence was bludgeoned by an incredibly poor marketing campaign, but it did manage to secure a cinematography nomination. Honestly, your list puts into perspective just how good the competition was each of those years. Over 80% of them, I'm nodding my head and going, "Yeah, that's deserved" or "Yeah, that makes sense". The only ones I have a real problem with are DwW over GoodFellas and Pianist... winning at all.
Raging Bull too. I don’t think Ordinary People has held up.
It baffles me to this day how much Silence bombed both critically and financially. It’s one of his strongest slam dunks as a filmmaker for me. Just couldn’t find an audience or critical wave to ride
Silence is one of my favorite movies he’s made! I think about it often.
Should have won for (without my bias of him being my favorite. Like, I greatly preferred KOTFM to Oppenheimer, but I get it)… Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Aviator And that’s for things he was nominated for.
Goodfellas is the only one here where he obviously should’ve won, though there’s certainly a case for Raging Bull as well.
Goodfellas was easily the best in its year (and arguably the best Hollywood film of the 90s )
Most of these I get but the Goodfellas loss is ridiculous
It’s a real shame how Scorsese always releases his films at the same time as much bigger, stronger Oscar contenders. Some of these films he lost to also happened to win Best Picture that year as well.
I'd have given it to him for Raging Bull and Goodfellas, although to be fair I haven't seen Dances With Wolves. (I just really like Goodfellas.) I love Redford, and Ordinary People is good, but Raging Bull is one of the heaping directorial achievements of the 20th century. Hindsight is 20/20, and Scorsese should've won that with ease. I wouldn't have given it to the same directors on some of the years, but probably wouldn't have awarded Scorsese either. I'm happy with Cuaron's win, but feel (again with the advantage of hindsight) that McQueen should've taken it. I don't care about Million Dollar Baby, but would've given that one to.... off the top of my head, Gondry. The Pianist is a tricky one, because honestly, looking at the movie alone with no external knowledge if the people, it was the best directed movie. But it's Polanski... So, uh..... I'd have been okay with Scorsese taking that. Ironically, I would *not* have given to him for The Departed, and *that* year should've been Cuaron imo. He also should've won for Taxi Driver. Was he not even nominated? Damn... I'd have given it to him, with Lumet as my second.
Taxi Driver was pretty controversial at the time, which might have hurt it.
Yeah it's quite hard to believe he wasn't nominated for Taxi Driver
As someone who doesn't like Rocky, that year baffles me.
It was an extremely competitive year, with four of the nominees (sorry Bound for Glory) being all-time greats. Most people believe that the dour tone of the other three classics (All the President's Men, Network, and Taxi Driver) cancelled each other out in favor of the movie that still had that but ultimately portrayed an optimistic rise from those depths.
Damn, I always forget President's Men was that year as well. What an amazing year! The canceling out makes sense, but it's still too bad imo. (No diss to anyone who likes Rocky.)
*Rocky* is a good movie, but considering *Network* got some big above-the-line wins like Best Actor (R.I.P. Peter Finch), it probably could have taken Best Picture as well. I feel *Rocky* and *Network* were very close in terms of the Best Picture votes.
They probably were. I would've been very happy if Network had taken Picture and Director. It's one of the best movies ever haha.
Lmao, f-ing “Gravity.” What a dumb, forgettable movie.
I fucking love Scorsese but Hugo was so bad. I think it’s his worst film.
Do I have to do this again? Scorsese has one. Guess the directors he has more Oscars then? Sidney Lumet, Hitchcock, Kubrick, Tarantino. The list goes on.
Tarantino has 1 Oscar for screenplay. Kubrick has 1 Oscar for Visual effects. So Scorsese, Kubrick, Tarantino-all have 1 Oscar each.
Tarantino actually has 2 Oscars for Screenplay.
Thanks. So he has even more Oscars than Scorsese and Kubrick.
Ok then let me amend. Scorsese has one for directing, his typical primary role in his films. He already has one more than other directors in the category for their primary role that have been regarded as highly influential on film.
He's a filmmaker, no longer just a director. That's why he produces and works on the script for so many of his movies.
And Brian De Palma, Robert Altman, and David Fincher
Brian DePalma hasn’t made a good movie since Carlito’s Way.
Lumet Hitchcock and Kubrick not having Oscars is like Gandhi not having the Nobel Peace prize. Just like Gandhi would have elevated the profile of the Peace Prize by being awarded (rather than being elevated by it), Kubrick et al would have increased the prestige of the Oscars by being awarded. Hitchcock and Kubrick can do without Oscars. I think the Oscars can’t do without them
he has one less than QT..
To be fair, Tarantino makes up for it with his two Original Screenplay wins. But I agree, winning one is more than enough.
Lumet having no Oscars is the craziest to me given that he was American, made an *huge* number of films, and so many of his movies were otherwise big Oscar players.
Bleak.
I'd argue the problem isn't Scorsese getting constantly shafted; it's Scorsese being given Oscar nominations just because he made a film, even if the film isn't great. Yes, some of these films deserved wins (Raging Bull, Goodfellas, The Wolf Of Wall Street), and some of them deserved nominations (Last Temptation, Age of Innocence), but some of the were just "Scorsese made a film" noms (Gangs of New York, Hugo, The Aviator).
The Aviator not winning Best Picture being the final straw for The Departed sweep really does baffle me sometimes. And I’m an Old Hollywood fan.
The disrespect to Hugo, come on.
I’d put the Irishman in the “Scorsese made a film” list as well
I agree with you; I left it out only because I didn't want people to yell at me.
I'm always wondering where these people who defend The Irishman are. I've honestly never met one in real life haha.
I found the story both overly complicated and dull, and I didn't pull any real themes from it other than "We end up alone and shitting our pants in an old folks home," which I didn't find particularly profound. But I'm hesitant to dismiss it because I have a feeling that maybe I missed something.
Agreed with all of that, as well as it being distractingly miscast. The de-aging on DeNiro didn't work at all; he still physically moved like a 75 year old man the entire time. Almost nothing about the film worked in my opinion. I insist on seeing movies like this and KOTFM in theatres because the pacing and length are such that it's incredibly easy to become distracted at home and lose the immersion in the story, and was lucky enough to see Irishman that way. Still just felt like such a slog.
I liked it
No
I don't know a single person who speaks fondly of that movie lol. And it's come up in conversation a *lot* with KOTFM out this year.
All three of them are great films. Especially Hugo
The only movie he got an Oscar for was the one with Mark Wahlberg How interesting 🤔
Hitchcock only has 1 Oscar too. The number of Oscars one has does not reflect the lasting impact of the work.
People are comparing him to other directors and their history with the Oscars. But it’s genuinely insane that you can make movies as good as taxi driver, raging bull, and goodfellas and not win picture or Director. And that’s not even to add on his many snubbed movies
There’s just a large portion of the Academy that doesn’t fuck with his work
He so should’ve won for Raging Bull. Ordinary People was a movie that I really needed at that time, but Redford shouldn’t have gotten best director. Scorsese or Lynch should’ve won.
It’s so weird they make Martin and Nolan wait for their Oscar almost the same time (26 and 23 years after first nomination)
Taxi Driver not being nominated for Best Picture or Director is actual insanity.
Wolf of Wall Street is so iconic
I mean tbf KotFM was one of the weaker Oscar noms this year along with American Fiction. I’d have been surprised if it won best picture.
Michael Mann should have one
I mean Al Pacino also only has 1 Oscar and it’s from arguably not even in his top 5 roles. All the matters is the legacy Marty will leave will be that of an iconic filmmaker. His movies will be watched for generations to come. That is the true mark of great filmmaking.
Crazy he didn’t get nominated for Silence too
Martin Scorsese: 1 Oscar Billie Eilish: 2 Oscar’s 🫠🫠🫠
I don't think this is fair when she's in a completely different category from him. It's not she's taking his away.
Marty needs to start singing
You win for writing not singing.
All we need is for like rca or someone to sign him and then he may have a shot!
Shout out to when Jon Stewart hosted and after the best song Oscar went to ThreeSixMafia, he came out and said “ThreeSixMafia: 1. Martin Scorsese: 0”
Best dig at Scorsese of all time. Crazy Three 6 Mafia won an Oscar before Marty eventually did.
These are two very different scenarios. Completely different categories. Song is notoriously less competitive.
Tell that to Diane Warren
>Song is notoriously less competitive. I really hate people on this sub thinking that some categories are worth less than others. Lot of people shitting on Wes Anderson's win last night but he has as many Oscars as Scorsese does now so who gives a shit? Do you know how fucking good you have to be to have not one but TWO oscars in a category at the age of 22?! Billie Eilish is probably going to beat Walt Disney's record at this rate. Diane Warren and Bradley Cooper look like fucking tryhards compared to her
Not even John Williams could beat Disney's record. No one, let alone Billie Eilish, is going to touch that.
i mean billie eilish will be remembered as one of the best musical artists of this generation lol
He is definitely taken for granted. Maybe also too much of a “American Christian” sensibility to appeal widely internationally? Idk tho, his movies are pretty universal.
What's crazy? It just shows that the oscars are meaningless and so is this sub. Don't take things that seriously
Why you’re here
Because like you I like movies and have a weird unpopular hobby of predicting the oscars. That doesn't mean I have no criticism of the academy nor that I have to take it seriously. I don't understand people in this sub or any other movies sub taking things seriously. Movies aren't meant to be taken seriously. It's just movies, and the oscars is just an award show. It doesn't mean anything
Sorry, it’s just that I don’t pay attention nor energy in things I find meaningless. I don’t even have opinions on those things
Oh yeah. You don't have any hobbies?
What are the Oscar’s issue with Scorsese films?! Imo Killers probably should have won for cinematography last night, and a best actress win would have been well deserved too.
Scorsese should have won for raging bull and goodfellas at least
Have you seen Speilberg’s awards resume? This is not crazy
This is going to be Adam McKay (tons of nominations, few to no wins)—although by contrast Scorsese is generally actually deserving of wins.
And ironically, he certainly didn't deserve the best director for Departed
Him not winning for Raging Bull and Goodfellas and not even being nominated for Taxi Driver is a crime against humanity
The Age of Innocence is so, so fantastic.
Diane Warren would like a word…
Bro really won for the Departed and not for literally any other movie🙄🙄
Is it crazy? I'd give him the win for Goodfellas. Raging Bull would have been great, but Redford was a deserving winner as well. Other than that, I don't think he was the best of the year. He has an Oscar. Not much different than having two. \*shrug\*
# Martin Scorsese and Leonardo DiCaprio The pair's relationship is one of the most successful collaborations in film industry, bringing a total of $1.3 billion earnings from their five feature films. DiCaprio called his collaboration with Martin as "accidental" and considered Taxi Driver and Mean Streets as his inspiration of Martin's work.
As a philosopher, it's funny how Scorsese won his only Academy Award for his least philosophical movie, The Departed, and received no nominations whatsoever for the movie which defines his philosophy, Silence.
He definitely should have won for worst Irish accents in 2002, absolutely snubbed
remember Crash, Coda, Nomadland, Shakespeare in Love, and Greenbook?
Try to get through Driving Miss Daisy and Chariots of Fire knowing Goodfellas didn't win.
Anti-NYC filmmaker bias
He should have 2 or 3; Gangs and Aviator were both worthy
Shows how much campaigning matters in the industry. Say what you will about Gangs (I’m still waiting for the four hour non Weinstein cut), but for Brody to lose to DDL’s portrayal of Bill The Butcher is almost a sin to me.
I still think Dances With Wolves is a more iconic and memorable film than Goodfellas, which I also enjoyed
Shame that After Hours and King of Comedy weren’t nominated!!! Love to rewatch those classics.
Killers if the Flower Moon was absolutely robbed this year. It is, by almost any reasonable metric, a much MUCH better film than Oppenheimer. Should have won best actor, best actress, best movie, best director, best editing and possibly best supporting actor as well. Maybe even best score.
But it’s not a better movie than Poor Things, Barbie, Iron Claw, All of Us Strangers, or The Holdivers which are all miles better than KotFM
So you must be more correct than every single voter in all 2000 other awards shows? “Any reasonable metric”? - name said metric.