Best Picture and Director 1967

[Big Magilla]

A long time, yes, but it's not something I was obsessed with or thought about that much.

[Sabin]

Big Magilla wrote
Midnight Cowboy was one of several films I'd seen being filmed in New York in the late 60s. Beside being obsessed with the film, I was convinced that I was an unpaid extra in one of the scenes where people are seen walking down the street. It wasn't until I saw the film on DVD and could slow it down to a single frame that I could tell for sure that it wasn't me.

I didn’t see this post until now. That’s very funny — and a long time to be convinced that you were in a movie.

[Big Magilla]

Having worked in a theatre as a teenager, I was used to seeing films multiple times, and would occasionally see a film in its first-run and then again when it played the neighborhood, but In the Heat of the Night was the first film I paid to see multiple times while still in its initial run.

Midnight Cowboy was one of several films I'd seen being filmed in New York in the late 60s. Beside being obsessed with the film, I was convinced that I was an unpaid extra in one of the scenes where people are seen walking down the street. It wasn't until I saw the film on DVD and could slow it down to a single frame that I could tell for sure that it wasn't me.

[danfrank]

In the Heat of the Night[/i] was the first film I paid to see multiple times while it was still in its first fun - four times, topped only by Midnight Cowboy which I paid to see seven times in its first run two years later.

The only film I saw close to that many times in its initial run was Annie Hall. It came out while I was in high school; my friends and I saw it together six times. We had large sections of the screenplay memorized and liked to perform scenes together, like the Marshall McLuhan comes out of nowhere bit (“You know nothing of my work”). Good times, those.

If we had been in high school eight years earlier Midnight Cowboy might have been our obsession, but they wouldn’t have admitted us into the theater!

[Big Magilla]

Is Cool Hand Luke the movie with the famous line, "What we're dealing with is a failure to communicate."?

Yep.

[Greg]

Is Cool Hand Luke the movie with the famous line, "What we're dealing with is a failure to communicate."?

[Big Magilla]

Magilla sort of brushes off In the Heat of the Night winning the NY Critics' prize + Golden Globe -- but that had been the dominant best picture profile for the previous decade: Around the World in 80 Days, Bridge in the River Kwai, Ben-Hur, The Apartment, West Side Story, Tom Jones, My Fair Lady, A Man for All Seasons. I grant 1967 was a more competitive year than many of those, but In the Heat... certainly wasn't a long shot -- it was a major contender. In fact, Bonnie and Clyde, having won neither of those two prizes, was a weaker bet, and I wasn't surprised at the time that it did so poorly in the end.

In the Heat of the Night was the first film I paid to see multiple times while it was still in its first fun - four times, topped only by Midnight Cowboy which I paid to see seven times in its first run two years later.

I was rooting for In the Heat of the Night to become the first murder mystery to win the Oscar for Best Picture. It was only in retrospect that I've come to value the smart money candidates, The Graduate and Bonnie and Clyde, even more.

It took six ballots for the New York Film Critics to name In the Heat of the Night Best Picture. Bonnie and Clyde led on the first ballot. It was only after the soon to be retired Bosley Crowther's tirade against Bonnie and Clyde that it lost its momentum. Even though the smart money of the day was on Bonnie and Clyde and The Graduate, I wasn't surprised that Heat won based on the NYFC's track record of predicting the Oscar winner. I was more surprised when their 1968 pick, The Lion in Winter lost both Best Picture and Director to Oliver!

It was, of course, fitting that Heat, the first winner featuring a Black man as its hero, won for Best Picture in the wake of MLK's assassination, especially since the votes were in before that horrifying event occurred.

[Sabin]

Mister Tee wrote
Both. There was the sense he'd come real close with The Pawnbroker, and getting such a juicy, acclaimed role in a sure Oscar contender made him a strong front-runner. Thinking of some analogies -- Colin Firth, The King's Speech following up A Single Man; maybe Robert Duvall, Tender Mercies not long after The Great Santini; and, though he wasn't nominated for the first, Jeremy Irons doing Reversal of Fortune soon after Dead Ringers.

Duvall is probably the closest in career terms -- it's hard to see it now, with most of Steiger's post-Oscar career descending into hamminess, but he, like Duvall, was considered a true stalwart; I remember a high school teacher arguing he was then the greatest American actor (with the caveat, Because Brando's lost his mind -- that was in Brando's 10-year post-Mutiny on the Bounty funk). But Colin Firth might be the closest in-the-moment analogy -- an Oscar near-miss followed almost immediately by a can't-mss.

The Colin Firth analogy is a really good one. His A Single Man nomination was a "Welcome to the Club" for an actor who was barely on anyone's radar for awards consideration. He was basically "Anonymous Brit" who was famous for playing boring paramours both good (Bridget Jones' Diaries) and bad (Shakespeare in Love). By the time he was in The King's Speech, he was somehow overdue.

[Mister Tee]

Mister Tee wrote
And to address Magilla's related point: No, there was no talk about Newman, because, once In the Heat of the Night opened -- three months before Cool Hand Luke -- Steiger became such an obvious front-runner that the subject was closed.

Was this due to the perceived excellence of In the Heat of the Night, or the sense that he was due from 1965 (The Pawnbroker, Doctor Zhivago, and more), or both?

Both. There was the sense he'd come real close with The Pawnbroker, and getting such a juicy, acclaimed role in a sure Oscar contender made him a strong front-runner. Thinking of some analogies -- Colin Firth, The King's Speech following up A Single Man; maybe Robert Duvall, Tender Mercies not long after The Great Santini; and, though he wasn't nominated for the first, Jeremy Irons doing Reversal of Fortune soon after Dead Ringers.

Duvall is probably the closest in career terms -- it's hard to see it now, with most of Steiger's post-Oscar career descending into hamminess, but he, like Duvall, was considered a true stalwart; I remember a high school teacher arguing he was then the greatest American actor (with the caveat, Because Brando's lost his mind -- that was in Brando's 10-year post-Mutiny on the Bounty funk). But Colin Firth might be the closest in-the-moment analogy -- an Oscar near-miss followed almost immediately by a can't-mss.

[Sabin]

Mister Tee wrote
And to address Magilla's related point: No, there was no talk about Newman, because, once In the Heat of the Night opened -- three months before Cool Hand Luke -- Steiger became such an obvious front-runner that the subject was closed.

Was this due to the perceived excellence of In the Heat of the Night, or the sense that he was due from 1965 (The Pawnbroker, Doctor Zhivago, and more), or both?

[Big Magilla]

I'm not too sure about Newman winning though in absence of Steiger. While it was his fourth nomination he really didn't become a phenomena and taken seriously as a huge star until Butch Cassidy two years later and The Sting. And even then it took the Academy years to honour him despite further nods in 1981 and 1982 both times he lost despite being overdue.

DEEPLY disagree with this take. Newman was a huge star from the late 50s on, and my mother's favorite actor while I was in grade school. There was even a joke, when Hud was in production: Told, This character is vile; audiences are going to hate him -- the studio guy responds, Don't worry: we've got Paul Newman playing the part. He made big hits of minor films like The Prize and Harper, and soared in The Hustler and Hud. (Had Poitier not met the zeitgeist so perfectly, Newman might very well have won for the latter.)

His Oscar career actually took a dip post-Butch Cassidy/The Sting -- Buffalo Bill and the Indians and Slap Shot were his only roles in the 70s that were remotely near awards consideration. As for why he didn't win on his next times up -- there's no way Absence of Malice was an Oscar part (especially against the even-more-overdue Fonda). The Verdict was definitely teed up as his Oscar Movie, but 1) the unaccountable critics' swoon for Gandhi made Kingsley a powerhouse and 2) The Verdict turned out to be more a pot-boiler than expected; I went in hoping to love Newman in it, but I honestly didn't think the role was Oscar-level.

And to address Magilla's related point: No, there was no talk about Newman, because, once In the Heat of the Night opened -- three months before Cool Hand Luke -- Steiger became such an obvious front-runner that the subject was closed.

Agree with Tee on this. Newman was a Hollywood phenomenon from the get-go. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and The Sting may have made more money than Cool Hand Luke, but it was Robert Redford who became a huge star because of them. Newman was already one.

[Sabin]

Mister Tee wrote
Cool Hand Luke is the clear you-should-see-it. The Dirty Dozen and Thoroughly Modern Millie are entertaining, but you have to go in with the right attitude. Far from the Madding Crowd is not negligible. Ulysses is impressive, but dense. To Sir, with Love seems corny today (probably was, even then), but if you want to know what audiences lapped up in those bygone days...

I don't still have my old film-viewing logs but I think I saw both Cool Hand Luke and The Dirty Dozen back during my most ravenous phase of film viewing (probably 2000 or 2001). I liked them both well enough. I quite understand the hype around The Dirty Dozen. It seemed... fine?

So, it sounds like the clear top five of 1967 are the expected Bonnie and Clyde, The Graduate, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, In Cold Blood, and In the Heat of the Night with Doctor Dolittle encroaching on their territory. Toss one away, and In Cold Blood sneaks in.

[Big Magilla]

As quoted in Inside Oscar, Elmer Bernstein who won was a member of the Academy's music branch, and who won that year for Best Score for Thoroughly Modern Millie, the exclusion of "To Sir, with Love" for Best Song was the "mystery of all time" considering that its popular lyricist, Don Black, had won the previous year for "Born Free" along with composer John Barry.

[Mister Tee]

[
I'm not too sure about Newman winning though in absence of Steiger. While it was his fourth nomination he really didn't become a phenomena and taken seriously as a huge star until Butch Cassidy two years later and The Sting. And even then it took the Academy years to honour him despite further nods in 1981 and 1982 both times he lost despite being overdue.

DEEPLY disagree with this take. Newman was a huge star from the late 50s on, and my mother's favorite actor while I was in grade school. There was even a joke, when Hud was in production: Told, This character is vile; audiences are going to hate him -- the studio guy responds, Don't worry: we've got Paul Newman playing the part. He made big hits of minor films like The Prize and Harper, and soared in The Hustler and Hud. (Had Poitier not met the zeitgeist so perfectly, Newman might very well have won for the latter.)

His Oscar career actually took a dip post-Butch Cassidy/The Sting -- Buffalo Bill and the Indians and Slap Shot were his only roles in the 70s that were remotely near awards consideration. As for why he didn't win on his next times up -- there's no way Absence of Malice was an Oscar part (especially against the even-more-overdue Fonda). The Verdict was definitely teed up as his Oscar Movie, but 1) the unaccountable critics' swoon for Gandhi made Kingsley a powerhouse and 2) The Verdict turned out to be more a pot-boiler than expected; I went in hoping to love Newman in it, but I honestly didn't think the role was Oscar-level.

And to address Magilla's related point: No, there was no talk about Newman, because, once In the Heat of the Night opened -- three months before Cool Hand Luke -- Steiger became such an obvious front-runner that the subject was closed.

[Mister Tee]

I have a question: what were the generally predicted five nominees of 1967 and how would that lineup have changed without In the Heat of the Night. Bonnie and Clyde, The Graduate, and Guess Who's Coming to Dinner seem safe. But we can generally chalk the Doctor Dolittle Best Picture nominee to unprecedented levels of studio cronyism that few saw coming at the time, something of a historic fluke. In Cold Blood probably would've made it through but if the Doctor Dolittle gambit doesn't work, what would've made it through?

I'm not sure if "historic fluke" is necessarily the term, given that Mutiny on the Bounty, Cleopatra and The Sand Pebbles had also got best picture nominations in the recent past, even while being far from critical favorites (and Hello, Dolly!/Airport/NIcholas and Alexandra were to follow). But Dolittle is probably the most glaring of this bunch, because it was the worst-reviewed and a box-office dud, and also because In Cold Blood was so highly regarded that it was a shock it was left off.

My limited understanding of the mood of the musicals of that moment was one of slightly decline. Thoroughly Modern Millie picked up seven nominations, but this total seems a bit inflated. It benefited from two score nominations, one song nomination, an acting nomination, production design, costume design, and sound. I'm not sure that makes it a serious contender. While Camelot and its five are a bit higher profile with a Cinematography nomination but not by much. But neither (nor Doctor Dolittle) were DGA nominations.

The great decline of musicals as industry mainstay had definitely begun -- and was to fiercely accelerate by 1969 -- but Thoroughly Modern Millie was, I think, viewed as an enjoyably lightweight hit. Its 7 nominations make it feel like a best picture runner-up, but, as you note, those nods were a bit inflated. Maybe it's a Dick Tracy, which also got 7 nominations but fell short under best picture. (Though both films would probably have made it under the current system.) Camelot, contrarily, got poor reviews, and its nominations/wins seemed purely a crafts thing; I can't imagine it slipping into best picture.

Cool Hand Luke's four nomination are high profile. No Golden Globe nomination for Best Motion Picture but a DGA nomination plus Actor, Supporting Actor, Adapted Screenplay, and Score. It seems early for a double nomination for Conrad Hall but a Best Cinematography nomination might have been in the cards as well. Kennedy's win suggests good will for the film.

It's a good film; the kind of movie that today gets into best picture with ease, but back then was in the highly-respected second tier, getting acting/writing nominations but not being that seriously considered for the top award.

The Dirty Dozen got four nominations. No Golden Globe nomination for Best Motion Picture but a DGA nomination plus a Supporting Actor nom, plus Film Editing, Sound, and a Sound Effects win. The Dirty Dozen might win a few of these without In the Heat of the Night.

The Dirty Dozen was the big summer action hit -- though it was considered "brutal" by some critics (how far we've moved since then), audiences ate it up. It's a variation on Seven Samurai/Magniiicent Seven, and I enjoyed it a lot at 15. Wouldn't want to vouch for it as my adult self.

Or would they have looked towards the UK? I'm not familiar with the adaptation of Ulysses. Was it in any serious competition? Same with The Fox, which won the Golden Globe for English Foreign Language Film, along with Best Actress, Director, and Screenplay. I'm also not terribly familiar with Far from the Madding Crowd.

Ulysses is an impressive work of ambition, but would not have made the best picture list in a million years. The Fox wasn't eligible till 1968 (where it was limited to a score nomination). Far from the Madding Crowd, with its hefty star-power, was viewed as a let-down for Schlesinger between Darling and Midnight Cowboy. That it won the NBR best picture prize only underlined what a bunch of out-of-touch fogies they were.

Or To Sir, with Love? How's my reading? Also, which of these films do I need to see?

To Sir, with Love was, as noted, a huge hit, but the fact that its title song -- the top-selling single of the year -- was inexplicably un-nominated suggests it had little AMPAS strength.

Cool Hand Luke is the clear you-should-see-it. The Dirty Dozen and Thoroughly Modern Millie are entertaining, but you have to go in with the right attitude. Far from the Madding Crowd is not negligible. Ulysses is impressive, but dense. To Sir, with Love seems corny today (probably was, even then), but if you want to know what audiences lapped up in those bygone days...