What makes debating movies fun (and painful) is that there is really no objective answers. There are no unequivocal right answers. Some people think Godfather is the greatest movie of all time, while others believe the Dark Knight is the greatest film. We spend hours discussing these sort of questions, and never truly leave with a sense of what's right (or wrong). I've always wondered what it would be like if someone tried to provide more objective responses to movie debates. And, Bill Simmons has offered them.He proceeds to use Oscar nominations/wins as a way to quantify someone's quality as an actor/actress. Of course, there is a high level of subjectivity that goes into selecting nominees and winners for Academy Awards. Quite honestly, it might be entirely impossible to provide objective answers to quality based movie questions. It sort makes me wonder why I discuss these things in the first place. It's like discussing whether God exist or if there are universal truths. No one truly knows. Which means I can hold on to my belief that Twilight is the greatest movie ever made. Prove me and millions of prepubescent girls wrong.
Sports are objective (you win or you lose), whereas movies are almost entirely subjective. I believe Pacino's performance in The Godfather: Part II is one of the 10 greatest of my lifetime. Did he win a best actor award in 1974? Of course not. The Oscars are littered with injustices like that: De Niro's not winning for Taxi Driver, Paul Newman's not winning for The Verdict, Anthony Hopkins' winning a best actor for 16 minutes of screen time as Hannibal Lecter.