Did 'Raging Bull' really deserve to beat 'Ordinary People' for best picture at the Oscars?
Film critics these days love to flail their chests and bemoan the outcome of the Oscars derby of 1980, when "Ordinary People" beat "Raging Bull" for best picture. However, the widespread modern view that film critics universally adored Martin Scorsese's bloodfest back then is a bit of revisionist film history.
While the Los Angeles Film Critics Association gave its best picture and actor awards to "Raging Bull" and Robert De Niro, "Ordinary People," "Tess" and "The Stunt Man" were close in the running for that top prize and John Hurt ("The Elephant Man") for best actor.
When the New York Film Critics Circle voted, "Raging Bull" came in third place for best pic (12 points) behind winner "Ordinary People" (31) and "Melvin and Howard" (22). De Niro won best actor (33 points) but only narrowly knocking out "The Great Santini" star Robert Duvall (29) and "The Stunt Man" contender Peter O'Toole (24).
At the National Society of Film Critics, "Melvin and Howard" won best picture and "Raging Bull" had to take the consolation prizes of best director for Scorsese and supporting actor for Joe Pesci, who had also been honored by the New Yorkers. The society voted Peter O'Toole best actor.
At the Golden Globes and National Board of Review, "Ordinary People" won best picture and director (Robert Redford) and De Niro took best actor. In the supporting race, Pesci won NBR and "Ordinary People" star Timothy Hutton took the Globe.
At the Academy Awards, "Ordinary People" had six nominations and won best picture, director, supporting actor and adapted screenplay. "Raging Bull" had eight noms, winning only best actor and film editing. The other nominees for best picture were "Coal Miner's Daughter," "The Elephant Man" and "Tess."
A few notable film critics didn't like "Raging Bull." Where you observe elipses in the snippet below from Pauline Kael's review, you can fill in with "f" bombs.
PAULINE KAEL, THE NEW YORKER: "I know. I'm supposed to be responding to a powerful, ironic realism, but I just feel trapped. Jake says, 'You dumb ...' and Joe says, 'You dumb …,' and they repeat it and repeat it. And I think, 'What am I doing here watching these two dumb ….?' "
DAVID DENBY, NEW YORK: "A monumental, crabbed, limited work. The film has distanced us so much from the hero that by the time Sugar Ray wipes him out with a haymaker — an overhand wallop that nearly takes Jake's face off — we're not much moved; it's just gruesome spectacle. 'Raging Bull' winds up punishing the audience with its integrity."
Photos: "Raging Bull," Robert De Niro. "Ordinary People," Mary Tyler Moore, Timothy Hutton.
Credits: Paramount, United Artists
Get Gold Derby on Twitter. Join the Gold Derby Group at Facebook. Become friends with Tom O'Neil on Facebook. Get Gold Derby RSS feed via Facebook. RSS Feedburner. RSS Atom.
I think 1980 was an extraordinary year for films and for performances. Thats why there were so many split awards. Ordinary People was an honest, compelling film not only for MTM's and Hutton's performance, but how about Donald Sutherland and Judd Hirsch? Raging Bull was a great movie but more for De Niro's performance then anything else. I think AMPAS got it right with Ordianry People. I would have voted for it for Best Picture, and Moore for Best Actress too.
Posted by: Joe Fierro | November 02, 2009 at 05:15 PM
Ordinary People was dramatic & the performances were exceptional....Ms Moore was robbed & Hutton was incrediable for a young man in such an emotionally torn performance. Ragin Bull was was powerful b/c of DeNiro's performance but lacked heart (ala Rocky) to connect with voters. Ordinary People has stood the test of time - and deserved its Oscar
Posted by: TORRENCE5 | February 20, 2009 at 09:33 AM
"Raging Bull" is a fine masterpiece. Kael was a contrarian fool in love with herself. "Ordinary People" should rot in a filmic hell-not for beating "Raging Bull" at some crumby American awards (sham) show, but for existing at all.
Posted by: Opie | February 17, 2009 at 06:11 PM
I just watched ORDINARY PEOPLE again after a number of years. It holds up beautifully and it is about people you really care about. RAGING BULL is a good film with superb acting but it is about a person that I dispise. BULL is a film you admire. PEOPLE is a movie you love.
Posted by: Mark Esposito | February 12, 2009 at 08:54 AM
re: "It must be said that Pauline Kael was often wrong. She hated about every other Best Picture winner."
I say:
It must be said that Pauline Kael was usually correct. About every other Best Picture winner is undeserving.
Posted by: Michael | February 11, 2009 at 09:38 PM
Ordinary People is one of my favorite films of all time and one of the most deserving Oscar winners in the history of the Oscars. Raging Bull is overrated and one of my least favorite films of all time. Tess is also a great film. Much better than Raging Bull.
Posted by: Mark | February 11, 2009 at 07:19 PM
If this happened today, we'd get the same result. The Academy has ALWAYS nominated with its head, and voted with its heart. That's why skillful, sentimental always win out over challenging and aesthetic. That's why "Dr. Strangelove" lost to "My Fair Lady"; "Dances with Wolves" won over "Goodfellas", etc. etc. The Academy is about what makes you feel good at the time, not about whether you'll hate yourself in the morning. Kinda like Hollywood itself.
Posted by: Harry | February 11, 2009 at 04:49 PM
Ordinary People is an extraordinarily skillful work of art. Redford created a masterpiece when he made this picture, eliciting profoundly compelling performances from Mary Tyler Moore and Timothy Hutton. If there was any Oscar robbery, it was that Sissy Spacek (who I think is an excellent actress) won Best Actress over Ms. Moore.
Posted by: D.J.Amari | February 07, 2009 at 04:17 PM
It must be said that Pauline Kael was often wrong. She hated about every other Best Picture winner.
Posted by: Zach | February 07, 2009 at 02:38 PM
Pauline Kael wasn't so high on "Ordinary People."
Posted by: DS0816 | February 06, 2009 at 01:24 AM
Well, I'm a huge, huge, huge Marty Scorsese fan and I think that Goodfellas is the best film of the 90's and it definitely was robbed of its best picture & best directing honors (by a mediocre, but uplifting work nevertheless), but I've never ever liked Raging Bull. It has definitely huge problems with developing a story. It's all too chaotic and doesn't focus. Yes, the acting is superb and Scorsese does terrific job with staging the fights, but after all, it's a film, which doesn't shake you emotionally. And while I don't consider Ordinary People a great film, it had a well structured and well told story and I really don't get all the blame. Dancing With Wolves should get the slaps. Not this one. Oh, yeah! And Rocky!!!
Posted by: Ross | February 06, 2009 at 12:20 AM
I'm honestly so sick of this argument. Ordinary People is one of the greatest family dramas ever made that moved you to tears. I think they have more than made up for Raging Bull not winning by having Scorsese win for The departed.
Posted by: Jake | February 05, 2009 at 05:55 PM
I was just thinking about this! Check out a new feature I wrote: Top 25 Best Picture Nominees That Didn’t Win: http://thefilmstage.com/2009/02/04/top-25-best-picture-nominees-that-didnt-win/
Posted by: Jordan Raup | February 05, 2009 at 05:18 PM