Why Gump pipped Shawshank...

4th September was the day when I finally unravelled one of the biggest mysteries of Hollywood. I used to hate this highly acclaimed film called Forrest Gump because it took away all the Oscars from Shawshank Redemption which millions of people, along with me, think, is one of Hollywood's greatest creations. However, there definitely are some reasons why the best film award went to Forrest Gump. Firstly, the movie speaks of hope more forcefully than Shawshank Redemption and hope and faith in the face of physical disability always seems to work better than the hope of a prisoner, however wrongly imprisoned, does. That's the kind of hope that's a little difficult to accept, let alone idealize. That way, I would like to think that the only thing that killed Shawshank is its gory background, the cruelity of prison life, the bare truth. And, everyone know, the bare truth is not so well accepted as the doctored one.
Another thing that pulls an American towards Forrest Gump is the sarcastic take on the image of the American war Hero! The way the american lieutenant thinks its better to be blown up by your own bombers than live on after the war and make a life for yourself, drives the viewer to the wall. I mean, dude! there's some thing beyond all the bloodshed! Forrest Gump is everything that is acceptable to the American Society of 1994. Opposition to war, the heartfelt loss of some of America's JFK, the demystification of Watergate and all of it seen through the life of a cripple who runs due to a miracle, loves due to another, gets on the cover of Fortune magazine due to another one, plays football by chance and lives because he could run. The wayward Jenny gives you the views of the radical American kid with a tortured childhood and with Forrest fathering a physically and mentally excellent kid, it all fits in like clockwork. Something that will inspire one and all. From the peaceseeker to the hippie. From the soldier to the Shrimp Farmer. These kinds of film are made for oscars. I would still maintain, Shawshank deserved an oscar for all the right reasons, its a pity it was released in the same year.
One last observation, say what you may, Tom Hanks couldn't do half of what Morgan Freeman did with the Narration!

3 comments:

kray said...

the thing I really don't understand, why are you even comparing the two?? have you not seen enough to know that the Oscars are hardly awarded following sense and reason? it just so happens that in this case you have come up with a reason to explain it to yourself...

don't get me wrong, I think very highly of Shawshank, it's just that I also think pretty highly of Forrest Gump, and I believe, despite the whole playing to US sentiments bit, it was bloody good film-making!

and while I also worship Freeman, I have never seen him play a cripple with as much conviction as Hanks, yet.

Saikat said...

@Kray:

Its a pity Tom Hanks didn't play a convict ever, that at least, would have given us a common ground for comparison, isn't it? :)

As for the movies, They have their positives and negatives. But however good a peice of film making it is. If you go by content, there's no denying that Shawshank deserved the recognition more than Gump. One award could have made Tim Robbins' career. He's one of the most underrated actors of the century.

sap said...

shwashank redemption is the best!

and oscar is hardly a measure of film's brlliance.none of rays films ever won one!!