Siskel & Ebert - Oscar Nomination Surprises (1998)

[@masteryogurt3788]

I love how they talk about Leo winning in a few years as a consolation prize but he would never actually win until both had died.

[@axr7149]

His Oscars path mirrored Al Pacino and Paul Newman (and even his co-star Kate Winslet) in a way. Multiple nominations and losses before FINALLY striking gold when the stars finally aligned. DiCaprio had a 22-year gap between first nomination and first win, putting him in a similar category as Pacino (20-year gap) and others who waited 20+ years between first nom and first win and score multiple nominations along the way.

[@paulpfannenstiel6409]

Loved the Sweet Hereafter.

[@Ryan07_20]

While I agree that DiCaprio should have been nominated, Matt definitely deserved his recognition. His final argument scene with Minnie was incredible.

[@joaoruyfaustino9392]

Are the thumbnails getting creepier?

[@footofjuniper8212]

No joke! It used to be just black dots on Siskel's eyes and mouth. In this one, he looks like he has lizard eyes.

[@cosplaytimecapsule]

they were so right about DeCaprio in Titanic. He carried that movie into a sensation

[@AndyBluebear-fi9om]

Unpopular opinion, but Leo wasn't robbed that year.

[@kd17Burger]

I wouldn't call it unpopular, it wasn't an Oscar Worthy performance

[@petermiesel31]

You can see Siskel already looked ill at that point

[@flaccidusminimus2170]

Maybe. He was diagnosed in May 1998, three months after this episode. He had been symptomatic for most of the year: severe debilitating headaches, irritability, confusion, slower speech, diminished energy. I wouldn't say he appears ill here, but he's certainly slower.

[@TheLolapuff]

Spike Lee’s “Four Little Girls” should’ve won the Academy Award. His best film imo. So powerful& beautifully done. First class all the way.

[@flaccidusminimus2170]

Agreed. That one and "When The Levees Broke" are among my favorite documentaries. It seems to me like hardly anyone who claims to love Spike Lee ever mentions those.

[@flaccidusminimus2170]

DiCaprio may have been responsible for much of "Titanic's repeat *business* as a sex symbol, but he isn't the most important element in its artistic success as a movie. The Academy's nomination of Winslet rather than DiCaprio looks more than appropriate with 20+ years of hindsight, and I thought it was correct at the time as well. Winslet's performance is what makes the whole thing gel, and she has a far more complex role as the film's emotional anchor and surrogate for the audience. It's her awakening, and the gradual revelation of how she learns to trust, love, and change that moves people (including me) so profoundly. DiCaprio is certainly dreamy, and exudes great pluck and tenacity, but there were easily five better male lead performances that year. Probably more than 20. While everyone was fussing over the DiCaprio omission that year, I kept wondering how they overlooked Ian Holm, Al Pacino, or Johnny Depp.

[@nikosvault]

Siskel had teenage daughters...so.

[@dsprenger13]

the special effects and the xtras were the stars of Titanic....leonardo and kate were both young and their performances were pretty green and just ok ...esp given the sappy, soap-opera drama plot line and dialogue they had to act and speak....let's get real......both actors even say so today.....kate said she was actually embarrassed by her performance in several scenes .....academy was right in this case and neither was deserving of a nomination.

[@ericryanyawl9401]

Never understood the Titanic love.

[@paulvoorhies8821]

Me either. Waaaay overhyped.

[@paulvoorhies8821]

Id’ve gone with LA Confidential that year.