By Jamie Kanter
Arizona Daily Wildcat
March 26, 1998

Why "Titanic" should have sunk at the Oscars

So, the Oscars are now decided. After months of anticipation, we now know who won and who lost in their bids to reach the pinnacle of their respective crafts. In the end, a triumphant "Titanic" crew sailed away with an almost flawless sweep of the Academy Awards.

Their only disappointments came in the categories of Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress. The film garnered Best Picture, Director, Editing, Dramatic Score, Sound, Costume Design, Song, etc., etc. The night certainly did not hold much mystery as the "Titanic" folks streamed to the front to thank everyone in the world for making the highest-grossing movie ever.

My only question is this: Why did it win?

Sure, the film had a lot of merit. In terms of technical superiority, nothing even comes close to touching this one. In terms of historical integrity, this movie is tops. In terms of a passionate interplay between lovers, this one leads the field. And still I wonder why it won.

You see, the competition seemed so fierce this year. "L.A. Confidential," "Good Will Hunting," "As Good As It Gets" and "The Full Monty" all appeared as though they could have taken the top prize, yet somehow "Titanic" won the hearts of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

If I asked you right now what makes a great movie, most of you would tell me that a great story, great writing and great acting are among the top criteria. Great direction and cinematography are important, but the actors and the script really make any film what it is.

And how many of those important categories did "Titanic" win? None.

"As Good As It Gets" yielded both the Best Actor and Best Actress awards. "L.A. Confidential" gave us the Best Supporting Actress. And "Good Will Hunting" provided us the Best Supporting Actor.

"L.A. Confidential" also came away with the prize for Best Adapted Screenplay and "Good Will Hunting" added the Best Original Screenplay title to its credits.

Notice I have not yet mentioned "Titanic."

It seems clear that the other Best Picture nominees had better screenplays and better acting; that much is obvious from the Academy's picks. "Titanic" was not even nominated for its screenplay and only two of its actors even came into the Academy's consideration.

Of course, one could point out that other years have yielded such an odd winning combination. The Best Actor and Actress are not necessarily required to be in the Best Picture of the year. However, the Best Screenplay is almost always linked to the Best Picture.

I count about five instances in the last thirty years of the Academy Awards in which the Best Picture did not win Best Screenplay. In those years, however, we see a strong correlation between the acting categories and the picture category.

So movies have to achieve the right combination of writing and acting to become strong contenders for Best Picture. As the Academy has shown us this year, "Titanic" had neither one. Yet it won and won big.

Perhaps Hollywood is trying to tell us something with its pick. Perhaps it is saying that a little film simply cannot win in these days of high-technology, high-budget, low-thinking films. They tell us that the flash and the glamour of such a glossy epic should dazzle us as it has them, that a $200 million movie is worth the pain because it reaffirms Hollywood's notion that we want to see glitz without substance.

Now, don't get me wrong, even I was amazed by the boat movie. It shares a nice little tale of passion and true love on a really cool sinking ship. (Kate Winslet's presence didn't hurt, either). I liked the movie a lot. I even came close to crying at one point.

However, the Best Picture should maybe be something more than a formula plot stuck on a technological masterpiece. Perhaps it should dive a little deeper into the human condition to produce a truly meaningful piece of work. Perhaps it should be incisive and real rather than superficial and romantic.

"Titanic" was good, but there was far better. "L.A. Confidential" was gritty and raw, "As Good As It Gets" is supposed to be fantastic and "Good Will Hunting" is one of the best films that this guy has seen in a long time. And I see a lot of movies.

That one really did make me cry.

Jamie Kanter is a senior majoring in Spanish and psychology. His column, "On the Flip Side," appears every other Thursday.