MovieChat Forums > Ragtime (1981) Discussion > Ragtime and the Pointless 1981 Academy A...

Ragtime and the Pointless 1981 Academy Awards(my personal thoughts)

posted 9 years ago by brtndr
9 replies | jump to latest

The 54th annual Academy Awards was such an outrageous joke and a sham in 1981 that it's hardly worth talking about. But, that's not going to prevent me from talking about it.

I was 12-years old when I first saw the movie "Ragtime" on the big screen back in 1981. Not only was I visually mesmerized by Milos Forman's recreation of early 20th century America, while experiencing a very real emotional connection with every single character in the film. I also really admire how the film strung together a lot of seemingly disconnected story lines into one complete - emotionally gratifying journey by the films end. Something that's often attempted in movies, but is rarely achieved.

So, after the Academy of Motion Pictures failed to even nominate "Ragtime" as one of the best movies in 1981. Or, at least toss a courtesy nomination to Milos Forman for Best Director. It really set the tone for just how utterly pointless the 54th Annual Academy Award ceremony was going to be that year. Or, should I say.... the 54th Academy Awards would prove to be more utterly pointless than "Usual" that year?

My brilliant 12-year old opinion about the futility of the 54th Academy Awards would later be confirmed when Oscars were eventually awarded to movies and performances which never should have even been nominated in the first place.

Like, the Best Picture winner "Chariots of Fire" for example. Even though, all the movie had going for itself was a beautifully shot slow motion scene of a group of guys running on a beach to Vangelis great soundtrack at the very beginning of the film. Then, after that brief moment... there was no movie. Nothing happened that was of any interest to anyone with a pulse.

Yet, the Academy actually nominated that pretentious, boring, self-important movie with a total of 7 Oscar considerations. Only to later award it with an Oscar for Best Picture while completely ignoring far superior movies like, "Ragtime" for instance. WTF, was up with that 54th Academy?!?

For these reasons, I believe that 1981 was the official year the Academy Awards confirmed once and for all that a secret alien cabal is in control of a computer generated Matrix that's hidden right in front of our eyes, but we are too brainwashed to see it. And, it is truly indifferent to our human experience.

Anyways, another undeserving Oscar that year went to John Gielgud for Best Supporting Actor in the movie "Arthur". I mean, C'MON MAN! Arthur was a great movie, and John Gielgud was terrific in that movie. But, obviously it's a Lifetime Achievement Award that isn't worthy of an Oscar for being the best supporting performance in a movie released that year.

The other nominees in the same category - who by the way - all got robbed by the Academy simply because Gielgud was an old gay English actor who gave a fine, but rather pedestrian performance in a hugely popular movie that year.(but I digress)

The other nominees for best supporting actor were:

Ian Holm – Chariots of Fire
James Coco – Only When I Laugh
Jack Nicholson – Reds
Howard E. Rollins, Jr. – Ragtime

Clearly, it should have been a contest between Nicholson and Rollins to win the Oscar with John Gielgud not even in the conversation. While, one could make an argument that Jack Nicholson was just as deserving of an Oscar for his performance in 'Reds', as Howard E. Rollins was for 'Ragtime'. Simply because he's Jack Nicholson, and the other nominees aren't. However, I personally would have chosen Rollins over Nicholson for the Oscar. But, that's just an incredibly biased opinion from an avid "Ragtime" fanboy.

Finally, another really awful decision by the Academy (but to a lesser extent) was the Oscar awarded to Henry Fonda for Best Actor in "On Golden Pond". Clearly, another Lifetime Achievement Award the Academy decided to handout under the guise of the Best Actor category.

The other actors who were nominated that year, and wound-up robbed by the Academy as well:

Dudley Moore – Arthur
Warren Beatty – Reds
Burt Lancaster – Atlantic City
Paul Newman – Absence of Malice

Hey, now don't get me wrong here, I've always been a big Henry Fonda fan and I certainly don't blame Fonda for the Academy's decision to give him an award that he didn't deserve to win. However, if Henry Fonda wasn't nominated that year then, Dudley Moore as Arthur Bach clearly should've been the Oscar winner that year. With Warren Beatty's performance in 'Reds' coming in a distant second.

Unfortunately, despite Dudley Moore's brilliant comedic performance in 'Arthur', the Academy at that time almost always ignored comedy performances. Often choosing to award the Oscar to far inferior dramatic performances instead, simply because they where "serious" performances, and therefore perceived to be more "important" by the Academy of self-important film critics.

So, Warren Beatty more than likely is awarded the Oscar for Best Actor if Henry Fonda wasn't nominated that same year. Despite Dudley's performance as one of the most uniquely outrageously funny characters to ever appear on screen. Yet, despite all of that, as soon as the Academy finished announcing the nominations for Best Actor weeks prior to the award ceremony, Dudley Moore was like.... a dead actor walking on the red carpet, while wearing a tuxedo.... and, on his way to the award show gallows. At least that's the way I see it.

I wonder if Dudley realized at the time that he never had a chance of winning the Oscar that year because, the movie 'Arthur' was just too damn funny for the Academy? I wonder.

[–] wylierichardson-966-922691 9 years ago

My thoughts about this post:

1) Yes, "Ragtime" was a good film, but didn't do to well at the box office. That might have been a factor in why it didn't get noms for Best Picture or Best Director. If you look at the awards section for this film, it didn't clean up too much in that department. It's not like the Oscars were the lone hold-out in honoring it.

2) Henry Fonda was a well-regarded career actor, when he won. He had gone a full 40 years between Oscar nods (he was up for "The Grapes of Wrath", before) and he was the clear sentimental favorite. "On Golden Pond" was a big box-office hit, too - always helps in the final ballot. Would Warren Beatty have won Best Actor, if Henry had lost? Hard to say; the Academy might have been content with just giving Warren Best Director.

3) Dudley Moore was pretty good in "Arthur", but he had to be content with his Golden Globe award for the role. I think that Burt Lancaster actually won most of the critics' awards, that year.

4) For my money, "Reds" was the year's best. But like "Ragtime", it struggled at the box office.

[–] brtndr 9 years ago

Thanks for the feedback. A lot of interesting information included with your comment and analysis. Thanks.

[–] Piperson 9 years ago

I just watched Ragtime for the first time in 20 years. I thought it was brilliant and that Harold Rollins Jr. was particularly brilliant.

I agree that the Academy Awards were pretty skewed that year and I don't think they have improved. I'm not sure this would be a popular viewpoint but I think Harold should have been nominated for Best Actor and won Best Actor.

I am a big fan of the movie Reds also and thought Jack Nicholson was great in it.

[–] spikenavis-48-882050 9 years ago

I recently just watched Ragtime for the first time since it was released. It still holds up as a stunning cinematic achievement that unfortunately appears to have slipped though the cracks into the dustbin. Nobody I know remembers it all, there's not even a Blu-Ray released yet.

I heard that O.J. Simpson lobbied HARD for the Coalhouse Walker part.

[–] Piperson 9 years ago

The ESPN broadcast of The Five-Part documentary about OJ Simpson has a segment where OJ talks about wanting the role of Coalhouse Walker. Simpson felt that he could understand Coalhouse Walker better than anyone because he had lived a similar life.

Simpson made these statements about the parallels between his life and Coalhouse Walker's while his career was still on it's upward trajectory.

[–] mark.waltz 9 years ago

I went to see this on Christmas day 1981, and it remains in my mind to this day, because of the holiday the only film that old where I remember the exact day and theater going to see it. I was 18, very impressionable, and the story stuck with me. I identified with the Brad Dourif character of "Younger Brother" who risked his life to aid Howard E. Rollins' character over the injustices that only a young man could see, one who had not been jaded in life and still facing the foundation of his ideals. In the Broadway musical, that character is given a powerful part in the Emma Goldman song "He Wanted to Say" where the characters of Coalhouse and Younger Brother go back and forth with what they really were thinking and how their human fears and insecurities formatted what really came out. "I know how to blow things up" was the result, and it is a reminder that as limited as it may have seemed, white people with a conscience did step up to help black Americans in their fight for freedom long before civil rights really became a regular daily headline.

The scene where Debbie Allen, as Sarah, begs the vice president for help and pays dearly for it was quite upsetting for me, and to add music to it years later with the phenomenal Audra McDonald playing the role added a truckload of tears for me when I saw it, as well as the revival back in 2008. I can't help but listen to the cast album where Audra and Brian Stokes Mitchell sing "Wheels of a Dream" and then go to the finale were they come back as their spirits and reprise the song as "mother" (a very noble white character) prepares to raise their son with her own son very accepting of his new adopted brother.

I agree that in 1981, the Oscars was going either for sentiment or honoring veteran performers, and while "Chariots of Fire", "On Golden Pond" and "Arthur" are certainly very good films, they don't compare with "Ragtime" or "Reds" or even "Raiders of the Lost Ark" (all Paramount films by the way) as movies which have left a lasting stamp on me. Howard E. Rollins in my opinion deserved a Best Actor nomination, and as great as Henry Fonda was, he really only won because it would be his last movie and he had lost (to James Stewart) the Oscar he deserved for "The Grapes of Wrath" and hadn't been nominated since. Elizabeth McGovern was excellent as Evelyn Nesbit, but the really great supporting female performance was Mary Steenburgen as mother. Having won the Oscar the year before, she got overlooked, but at least managed a Golden Globe nomination.

I'm upset that this isn't on DVD (out of print and very expensive), but I've found a discounted VHS copy which I've added to my collection to transfer to DVD, and even if it isn't as crisp as the DVD is, that doesn't matter. I simply have to have it.

"Great theater makes you smile. Outstanding theater may make you weep."

[–] maxman-5 8 years ago

At 12 years old the only thing I would have been "visually mesmerized" by would have been Elizabeth McGovern's bare breasts.

[–] rudeboymurray (3281) 5 years ago

If On Golden Pond had not existed (and I wish it didn't) the likely winner would have been not Beatty, certainly not Moore, but Burt Lancaster, who swept the critics awards for his superb performance in Atlantic City. He should have won the Oscar in a walk.

I agree the Rollins vs. Nicholson for Supporting Actor over Gielgud, who could have played his part in his sleep. I'd give the edge to Rollins - I thought he was riveting and immensely charismatic in Ragtime.

[–] liscarkat (18977) 4 years ago

"Ragtime" was good, but "Chariots of Fire" was far better.