Disney animated movies that should of gotten an oscar or....

[Dr Frankenollie]

Like many have suggested, the scores for the majority of the DACs (especially the first few and those from the Renaissance era) deserved to have been nominated.

Snow White not only deserved to have been nominated for Best Picture, but also should have won; either Pinocchio or Fantasia should have won Best Picture in 1940 (as much as I love Hitchcock, Rebecca isn't as good as either of these); Dumbo should have been nominated; Lady and the Tramp should have been nominated; The Jungle Book should have been nominated (it arguably even deserved to win); The Rescuers should have been nominated; and both The Little Mermaid and Aladdin should have won Best Picture.

Mary Poppins was nominated for Best Picture in 1964, but should have won.

DisneyAnimation88, yes, THANK YOU! I think Cinderella should also have been nominated and maybe have won but I know few will share that opinion.

What about Sunset Boulevard? What about All About Eve? Also, am I alone in thinking that Cinderella is the weakest of the 1950's Disney movies?

[slave2moonlight]

Mary Poppins didn't win? I was sure it DID win for some reason!

[tsom]

Nope, My Fair Lady won in 1964. And I think it was fair that it won. I'd say if Mary Poppins came out the year before, it would have won. Or if it came out two years after in 1966.

Cinderella the weakest 1950s film? How? In terms of what? Compared to Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan, Sleeping Beauty, which were all theatrical flops.

[DisneyAnimation88]

Also, am I alone in thinking that Cinderella is the weakest of the 1950's Disney movies?

I don't think its the weakest but I also wouldn't say its the strongest. For me, Lady and the Tramp is the strongest of the 1950's DAC's and the one I think has the strongest case to be considered for an Academy Award nomination. I think Cinderella is a very good film and can see why some say it's good enough for a nomination.

[estefan]

You have to remember that Shrek was HUGE, when it opened. Monsters Inc was beloved, too, but at the time, Shrek was the animated film everybody was talking about. For a lot of Oscar wins, you have to look at them in an historical context.

Um, they're not supposed to judge them like that.

But I'm sure if we travelled back in time to 2001 and asked a bunch of people which film they prefer, most of them would say Shrek. Shrek was even nominated for adapted screenplay, so it was certainly more well-liked by the writers branch of the Academy.

[tsom]

I agree with estefan. That's just how life works.

[Dr Frankenollie]

Cinderella the weakest 1950s film? How? In terms of what? Compared to Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan, Sleeping Beauty, which were all theatrical flops.

In terms of animation, music, and overall quality.

For me, Lady and the Tramp is the strongest of the 1950's DAC's and the one I think has the strongest case to be considered for an Academy Award nomination.

Agreed.

[ProfessorRatigan]

Hi all! New to the boards (But I've been reading for over a year now. I came here initially to find information about upcoming blu-ray releases, having just gotten into Disney again)

I just wanted to post my two-cents... I agree with several people who've mentioned that Snow White deserved Best Picture of 1937. I mean, for one, look how well it has held up compared to other films from that year (The Life of Emile Zola sure ain't on anybody's top films list, I guarantee it) Not only was this film revolutionary at the time, it was also at that point the highest grossing film ever. (Which, if you look at the Academy Awards' track record, they usually valued over actual critical merit) Snow White should have won this year. In 1940, Pinocchio and Fantasia either could have won and would have deserved it, but Grapes of Wrath is my pick for that year. Bambi for 1942, easily. But it isn't until much later that a Disney animated film, in my opinion, was truly THE best film of its year. While Cinderella might be a very beloved animation, it is not, at least to me, comparable to Rashomon. Or All About Eve. Or Sunset Blvd. which all were released that same year.

Sleeping Beauty, though, I would say was the best of 1959. Edging out Some Like It Hot jusssttt barely. Now, Little Mermaid would be a wonderful choice for 1989's Oscar...if Do The Right Thing hadn't been released that same year. Beauty and the Beast would also win...if it wasn't for The Silence of the Lambs, which happens to be my all time favorite film. Now, 1995, Toy Story easily deserve the win for that year. 95 was a weak year and Toy Story was so very important, being the first fully computer animated film, in addition to being just a wonderful film all around. And 1996, Hunchback should have won in my opinion. (The English Patient and Fargo don't hold a candle to Hunchback as far as I'm concerned) and it is quite frankly criminal that Hunchback didn't get a single Best Song nomination. Hellfire, Out There, Bells of Notre Dame all should have been nominated, and Hellfire should have won. And the score deserved the Oscar, too.

After Hunchback, I really don't think any of the films were the BEST of their respective year (though I do love alot of the films that came after)

One thing I do want to point out: have you all noticed that the Academy has NEVER nominated a single Villain Song for the Best Song Oscar? I *always* walk away with the impression that the villains song is usually the most clever in the film (think Poor Unfortunate Souls, Be Prepared, Hellfire, Friends on the Other Side and the more recent Mother Knows Best) Maybe it's just personal taste, but it's always struck me that these types of songs never get any love from the critics.

[ValenciaJoe]

Going back to Enchanted and the Best Song category... if you remember, three songs from the movie were nominated. The general consensus was that the vote was split amongst those three songs, and the eventual winner (Falling Slowly) won due to this.

[tsom]

I'm not sure I agree about Sleeping Beauty. Ben-Hur had it in the bag in my opinion.

I'm not sure if I agree about Hunchback either. When people who aren't Disney fanatics like us talk about Disney films they like, Hunchback is hardly ever mentioned, at least from what I've seen.

[estefan]

One thing I do want to point out: have you all noticed that the Academy has NEVER nominated a single Villain Song for the Best Song Oscar?

"Mean Green Mother from Outer Space" from Little Shop of Horrors was nominated, but I think that's about it. Although you could make the case that "Blame Canada" is antagonistic, I think Saddam Hussein is the only true villain of the movie.

[Disney's Divinity]

One thing I do want to point out: have you all noticed that the Academy has NEVER nominated a single Villain Song for the Best Song Oscar? I *always* walk away with the impression that the villains song is usually the most clever in the film (think Poor Unfortunate Souls, Be Prepared, Hellfire, Friends on the Other Side and the more recent Mother Knows Best) Maybe it's just personal taste, but it's always struck me that these types of songs never get any love from the critics.

That's a shame, too. While "Poor Unfortunate Souls" has stiff competition with nearly every other song from Mermaid, "Hellfire," "Friends on the Other Side" and "Mother Knows Best" are probably the best of their respective film soundtracks.

[Disney Duster]

I don't think animated films being revolutionary in special effects or animation should really be considered part of why they should be nominated. Only if the special effects and animation make you get more out of the film, like effects that make you believe in what's happening and feel from it. Otherwise that means things like Sleeping Beauty should be nominated just because it has pretty animation. The most it makes you feel is "this is exciting/scary/epic".

Snow White not only deserved to have been nominated for Best Picture, but also should have won; either Pinocchio or Fantasia should have won Best Picture in 1940 (as much as I love Hitchcock, Rebecca isn't as good as either of these); Dumbo should have been nominated; Lady and the Tramp should have been nominated; The Jungle Book should have been nominated (it arguably even deserved to win); The Rescuers should have been nominated; and both The Little Mermaid and Aladdin should have won Best Picture.

Mary Poppins was nominated for Best Picture in 1964, but should have won.

Oh look...you think you and Goliath's tastes should all have been nominated or won. What a surprise.

What about Sunset Boulevard? What about All About Eve? Also, am I alone in thinking that Cinderella is the weakest of the 1950's Disney movies?

I know Cinderella's my taste, too, but I've never known those movies or Rashoman to be great movies. I've just heard their names mentioned. If I saw them, maybe I'd feel different. But if a movie wasn't big enough for me to hear about and want to check out...that says something.

But I have seen the other 50's DAC's, and I think Cinderella really is the strongest. The last time you talked about Cinderella, if I remember, all you did was watch some clips of it and Sleeping Beauty? I will be getting to that post you made later and explain why I feel Cinderella's so much stronger.

I don't think its the weakest but I also wouldn't say its the strongest. For me, Lady and the Tramp is the strongest of the 1950's DAC's and the one I think has the strongest case to be considered for an Academy Award nomination. I think Cinderella is a very good film and can see why some say it's good enough for a nomination.

I kind of agree that Lady and the Tramp is the film that would be the Academy's "thing", but I really think Cinderella's better than it, overall.

[DisneyAnimation88]

One thing I do want to point out: have you all noticed that the Academy has NEVER nominated a single Villain Song for the Best Song Oscar?

I hadn't thought of that before but I definitely agree with you that those songs are often among the strongest in their respective films, Be Prepared and Hellfire particularly. Welcome to the forum by the way.

I kind of agree that Lady and the Tramp is the film that would be the Academy's "thing", but I really think Cinderella's better than it, overall.

I agree on the first part. For me, Cinderella and Lady and the Tramp are very close in terms of quality; as I've been seeing clips of LATT ahead of its re-release on blu ray, I might choose that as the one I prefer right now but I haven't seen Cinderella for a while and if I did, I might change my mind. They're definitely both very good films so I can understand your love of Cinderella.

[Disney Duster]

I know this could be considered de-railing the thread but I have no idea where else to put this with existing threads.

I think I can describe why I think Cinderella is better than Lady and the Tramp. It is because Lady and the Tramp seems to me like a string of random events, put together very well, but not too related nontheless, and they aren't about the main characters' or the story's main goal. Like Aunt Sarah and the Siamese cats just come in for a spell. I know they lead to a moment with Tramp and Lady but don't they seem rather unecessary except for that fact? The cats get a song and it's almost like the Big Lipped Alligator song in All Dogs Go to Heaven, except Disney's films never have scenes that bad so this one isn't. The thing with the rat is like "the main villain battle" but it's really about protecting the baby than Lady's or Tramp's personal stories. And the ending is weird with the big thing being a side character getting hit by a car, it black out and you don't know what the heck happened to him, and it shoots roght to a happy scene, where you may still be worrying until you finally see him alive and well. Why is that the ending? Why was that even there? But in Cinderella, it's about Cinderella and her animal freinds going on an adventure and getting a much better life, and the film doesn't stray from that (even the mice scenes which are a little too much padding are about how they are trying to live in their horrible place and eventually live in a better place). It all feels like it's working towards a main goal and the ending is all about that and so I think it feels like a more satisfying journey and conclusion. Especially since I secretly wished Lady and Tramp would go over those mountains to that sunset together instead of just living at home. Walt told Eyvind Earle to make it look like a place the audience wanted more than the town homes. Why, when the happy ending in a home didn't feel as amazing as that great sunset?

[SpringHeelJack]

I know Cinderella's my taste, too, but I've never known those movies or Rashoman to be great movies. I've just heard their names mentioned. If I saw them, maybe I'd feel different. But if a movie wasn't big enough for me to hear about and want to check out...that says something.

..."Sunset Boulevard" and "All About Eve" weren't "big" enough for you to see?

[Dr Frankenollie]

I know Cinderella's my taste, too, but I've never known those movies or Rashoman to be great movies. I've just heard their names mentioned. If I saw them, maybe I'd feel different. But if a movie wasn't big enough for me to hear about and want to check out...that says something.

Yeah, the fact that both of them are in the top 20 of the AFI's Top 100 Movies list really says something bad about them.

It is because Lady and the Tramp seems to me like a string of random events, put together very well, but not too related nontheless, and they aren't about the main characters' or the story's main goal.

I disagree; I think the events shown are about the main characters and the story's main goal. In regards to the latter, I don't think either Lady or the Tramp have a specific goal, but in some ways the story has the goal of making them fall in love (it is after all a romance).

Like Aunt Sarah and the Siamese cats just come in for a spell. I know they lead to a moment with Tramp and Lady but don't they seem rather unecessary except for that fact? The cats get a song and it's almost like the Big Lipped Alligator song in All Dogs Go to Heaven, except Disney's films never have scenes that bad so this one isn't.

The Siamese Cats - and by extension, Aunt Sarah - exist to get Lady out of the house. The movie covers two themes: how dogs view humans (which is why Jim Dear and Darling have a baby) and how love can blossom between two people from entirely different walks of life (hence the title and the protagonists' names). The Cats were necessary so that Lady could go out into the world alone and fall in love with Tramp.

The thing with the rat is like "the main villain battle" but it's really about protecting the baby than Lady's or Tramp's personal stories. And the ending is weird with the big thing being a side character getting hit by a car, it black out and you don't know what the heck happened to him, and it shoots roght to a happy scene, where you may still be worrying until you finally see him alive and well. Why is that the ending? Why was that even there?

I understand why you might think that the rat appeared only to create suspense and conflict, but he's there to make Lady's owners accept Tramp after he saves the baby. Otherwise, Jim Dear and Darling may not have kept Tramp. As for the fact that Trusty gets injured...perhaps it's to show his heroism through a sacrifice for his friend Lady, but more likely it's just to make the audience sad. Even though he does turn out to be okay in the end, Trusty's injury is still saddening because earlier scenes made him very likable.

But in Cinderella, it's about Cinderella and her animal freinds going on an adventure and getting a much better life, and the film doesn't stray from that (even the mice scenes which are a little too much padding are about how they are trying to live in their horrible place and eventually live in a better place). It all feels like it's working towards a main goal and the ending is all about that and so I think it feels like a more satisfying journey and conclusion.

The story of Cinderella's conflict with Lady Tremaine and her escape from her miserable life is interesting and compelling, because Cinderella is a somewhat likable character and Tremaine is an enjoyably detestable villain. However, it keeps being interrupted by the antics of the mice and the cat (aka Tom & Jerry 2.0). Some of Ward Kimball's gags with Lucifer and his foes are funny, but they are just padding between the main story. Besides some laughs, the only thing they provide is the sense that the Tremaine Chateau is huge. This is probably the best thing about the film's visuals - it gives everything a huge size. The size of the ballroom, the endless steps and long corridors in the palace, the stairs leading up to the trapped Cinderella, etc. As I've said before, the Prince is a really, really one-dimensional character, but I kind of forgive this; the movie is not about Cinderella falling in love with him, but more about her escaping Tremaine and the stepsisters.

I do like Cinderella, there a few scenes in it (the dress-ripping, the Fairy Godmother's appearance and Tremaine locking Cinderella's room) that are great, and one or two of the songs are memorable (in particular, I really enjoy 'Bibbidi Bobbodi Boo'). However, in comparison to the entertaining, eye-popping and hilarious Alice, the exciting and funny Peter Pan, the nostalgic, beautifully-animated and romantic Lady and the Tramp, and the suspenseful, captivating and visually magnificent Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella is the weakest.

[DisneyAnimation88]

It is because Lady and the Tramp seems to me like a string of random events, put together very well, but not too related nontheless, and they aren't about the main characters' or the story's main goal.

I disagree; the events in the film serve to establish the different worlds that Lady and Tramp come from and build up to their eventual romance. To be honest, I can't think think of one part of Lady and the Tramp that is random as you put it.

Like Aunt Sarah and the Siamese cats just come in for a spell. I know they lead to a moment with Tramp and Lady but don't they seem rather unecessary except for that fact?

No. They're part of the comfortable life Lady is used to being disrupted, leading her to eventually escape. If Aunt Sarah and the Siamese cats weren't in the film, why would Lady escape? As much as she is sidelined by the baby, I really don't think here owners would have neglected or mistreated her badly enough to cause her to want to run away.

The thing with the rat is like "the main villain battle" but it's really about protecting the baby than Lady's or Tramp's personal stories.

Again I disagree. If the rat hadn't been in the story, why would Tramp have returned after Lady rejects him?

And the ending is weird with the big thing being a side character getting hit by a car, it black out and you don't know what the heck happened to him, and it shoots roght to a happy scene, where you may still be worrying until you finally see him alive and well. Why is that the ending?

Yet again, I disagree. All through the film, Trusty has reminisced of the days he tracked criminals with his grandfather, yet Jock always doubts him. The end of the film is Trusty reliving those glory days and proving his heroism. He gets hurt but survives, what's the problem with that? It doesn't take away from anything that's happened in the film, just adds a bit more drama to the conclusion.

Why, when the happy ending in a home didn't feel as amazing as that great sunset?

Because Tramp decided he wanted a home and a family.

Fair enough you like Cinderella more so I understand what you're saying but I don't necessarily agree with your criticism of Lady and the Tramp.

[yamiiguy]

Snow White should definitely been nominated for Best Picture but it won an Honorary Award, which sort of offsets the loss. Pinocchio also should have been nominated but The Great Dictator should have won in 1940. And Who Framed Roger Rabbit? should definitely been nominated in some major categories.

The Oscars are pretty useless though, they never seem to get it right (in my opinion anyway). Historically, I agree with the BAFTAs much more often. The Oscars are pretty biased towards English-language films.

[Dr Frankenollie]

The Oscars are pretty useless though, they never seem to get it right (in my opinion anyway). Historically, I agree with the BAFTAs much more often. The Oscars are pretty biased towards English-language films.

Agreed. To name just a few examples of the Academy's idiocy: Hitchcock never won Best Director, Kubrick never won Best Director, Forrest Gump won over Pulp Ficiton, and Titanic won something like 11 Oscars. Who else can't wait for both The Artist and Hugo to lose to something like The Descendants in the Best Picture category?