MovieChat Forums > Reds (1981) Discussion > Reds (1981) had 12 Oscar nominations, ye...

Reds (1981) had 12 Oscar nominations, yet it rarely gets mentioned anymore

posted 2 years ago by TMC-4 (19411)
4 replies | jump to latest

Reds (1981) was Warren Beatty’s masterpiece, also starring Diane Keaton and Jack Nicholson. It was nominated for 12 Academy Awards in 1982 and won 3, including best director for Beatty.

And yet, it is rarely discussed anymore. Do you think it’s just not very good and was overshadowed by other New Hollywood movies? Or do you think the movie’s length (too long?) played a part? All of the above?

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/t0r1pn/reds_1981_had_12_oscar_nominations_yet_it_rarely/

[–] huwdj (4562) 2 years ago

I remember it as very big and a bit worthy and earnest. It was good but not enjoyable in a way that meant I'd want to re-watch it.
Though I've just noticed Best Cinematography: Vittorio Storaro, which might get me to watch it if it ever turns up.

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

I've never seen it and rarely see it talked about. For me personally I have no interest in watching it because of it's length coupled with the subject matter. Sounds like a real bore.

I've no doubt it's a decent film but I imagine it's not entertaining in the slightest. A good example of this would be The Pianist (2002), a well made film for sure but a bore and not something I'd ever bother to rewatch. Reds (1981) gives me that vibe.

[–] TheArgentinian (6429) 2 years ago

The Pianist boring? It's a thriller next to Schindler's List !

[–] Redsfan001 (6003) 2 years ago

It is a interesting movie, and all true movie fans should watch it at least once.

But it's length and heavy intellectual theme makes rewatching it like retaking college course which you already passed.