The Only Best Picture Winner from the '80s That Roger Ebert Didn't Give a Perfect Score to

The 1980s often get criticized in film discussions, but this reputation overlooks significant shifts and breakthroughs. While the New Hollywood era faltered after the commercial failures of Michael Ciminos Western epic Heaven's Gate and Francis Ford Coppolas One from the Heart, a new wave of filmmakers emerged. Directors like Spike Lee, Jim Jarmusch, and the Coen brothers brought fresh perspectives, taking cinema in daring and original directions. The rebellious spirit of the 1970s didnt vanishit simply moved to independent channels.

At the same time, Hollywood studios settled into predictable patterns. High-concept blockbusters dominated the box office, while prestige films became increasingly serious and symbolic. The decades Academy Award winners for Best Picture reflect this mix: notable films such as Ordinary People, Amadeus, The Last Emperor, and Platoon carried profound themes and aimed to reshape the audiences worldview. Missing these films at the theater meant missing culturally significant experiences.

Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times critic and one of the most influential voices of the era, generally embraced Hollywoods output. He awarded four stars to nearly every Best Picture winner of the 1980sexcept one. Barry Levinsons Rain Man (1988) received three and a half stars. In hindsight, Rain Man arguably surpasses other Oscar winners like Chariots of Fire, Gandhi, Out of Africa, and Driving Miss Daisy. But why did Ebert single it out as slightly less exemplary?

In Rain Man, Tom Cruise portrays Charlie Babbitt, a charismatic but struggling Los Angeles businessman, while Dustin Hoffman transforms into Raymond Babbitt, an autistic man whose existence Charlie only discovers after his wealthy fathers death. The narrative tension arises from Charlies desperate attempt to claim his fathers fortune, which is legally left to Raymond. Ebert recognized the powerful dynamic between the brothers but seemed more preoccupied with understanding Raymonds mind.

Early in his review, Ebert wrote: Is it possible to have a relationship with an autistic person? Is it possible to have a relationship with a cat? I do not intend the comparison to be demeaning to the autistic; I am simply trying to get at something. I have useful relationships with both of my cats, and they are important to me. But I never know what the cats are thinking. This remark illustrates how little awareness of the autism spectrum existed in mainstream discussions at the time, though today we understand much more about neurodiversity. Eberts analogy to cats raises eyebrows, but it doesnt diminish the films strengths.

Ultimately, Ebert offered no major criticism of Rain Man; his hesitation was more about deciphering its subject matter than evaluating its craft. Compared to grand historical epics like Gandhi or sentimental narratives like Driving Miss Daisy, Rain Man feels more engaging and thought-provokinga puzzle rather than a prepackaged statement.

For those wanting to keep up with major developments in film and television, subscribing to a curated newsletter or adding a trusted source to your search engine can make staying informed effortless.

Author: Sophia Brooks