Did Titanic Deserve To Sweep The Oscars 25 Years Ago? An Investigation

Only three movies have ever won 11 Academy Awards: William Wyler's 1959 Roman epic "Ben-Hur," Peter Jackson's 2003 trilogy capper "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the Thing," and, of course, "Titanic." These three movies share quite a lot in common. All of them are massively budgeted action spectacles. All of them were far and away the highest-grossing films of their respective years. While lately box office has not exactly equated to Oscar success, sometimes a film becomes such a massive cultural touchpoint that people from every corner of the industry must pay their respects to the achievement.

The place to rack up the awards total comes mostly in the below-the-line crafts categories. Though they aren't as star-studded as the acting categories, these are the places where these impressive feats of filmmaking can get their due, earning wins for their cinematography, production design, special effects, music, costumes, and more. When a film has the money to achieve these results that stun even the most seasoned cinema professionals, they can't help but give them awards for it. In fact, "Titanic" and "The Return of the King" were able to reach these massive win totals without even winning a single acting category ("Ben-Hur" scored two wins there). For these three films, the filmmaking craft is directly in your face, and it's much harder for a lower-key film to obviously wow in those departments. Only a film like "Titanic" would have the opportunity to dominate at the Academy Awards like this, and it's even more difficult to actually pull it off in the end, which they did.

Naturally, people will quibble with the Best Picture nominees we did get — maybe thinking "The Full Monty" was too flimsy or "Good Will Hunting" too maudlin — but I don't think there's a bona fide stinker in that group. But there were plenty of other alternatives that could have made their way into that list of five. With 25 years of hindsight, the clear miss is Paul Thomas Anderson's "Boogie Nights." This was one of our most celebrated American auteurs bursting onto the scene in a major way, quickly establishing himself as a formidable talent behind the camera, and many still consider this to be his best film (for me, that is "There Will Be Blood" or "Phantom Thread"). "Boogie Nights" missed out on Best Picture and Director.

A Best Director nomination that missed out on Picture was Atom Egoyan's "The Sweet Hereafter." Strangely, that film's only other nomination was for Best Adapted Screenplay, which is a pair you don't see too often when nothing else is recognized. Egoyan's drama delves into a lot of heartbreaking tragedy and creates a tapestry of many complex emotional lives. You would've needed much more universal support for that film to get in there, which the lack of nominations demonstrates wasn't there, but it would have been a fitting entry.

Other big films that "Titanic" dethroned included Quentin Tarantino's sole work of adaptation "Jackie Brown," Martin Scorsese's Dalai Lama biopic "Kundun," the under-discussed romantic drama "The Wings of the Dove," and Steven Spielberg's less than stellar "Amistad," which certainly could have won some crafts categories. Ang Lee's "The Ice Storm" wasn't even nominated anywhere! There was plenty to like in 1997 to spread the wealth at the Oscars, but the power of "Titanic" was just too much to ignore.

For as dominant as "Titanic" was at the Oscars, the film was not represented in every category it was eligible for. Most notably, James Cameron wasn't nominated for his screenplay, a rarity for a Best Picture winner. In the 25 years since "Titanic," no other film has won Best Picture without also being nominated for Best Original or Adapted Screenplay, and before "Titanic," you must go all the way back to "The Sound of Music" to find that again. The film quickly garnered a reputation as a technical achievement with a dramatically flimsy backbone (much like his "Avatar" films), and the scapegoat for that was the screenplay. I disagree with the storytelling criticisms. Cameron clearly harnessed the power of archetypes to best suit the classical nature of the film. The story and characters may be simple, but more importantly, they're effective.

The winners of Best Original Screenplay were two up-and-coming actors named Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, who wrote "Good Will Hunting" for themselves to star in. Actors writing their own material could so easily turn into a self-aggrandizing piece about their own talent, but "Good Will Hunting" manages to eschew that and actually be a completely satisfying, emotionally honest story. They proved themselves in front of and behind the camera, and I have no issue with their win.

If I were to pick a winner from that category though, it would be Paul Thomas Anderson for his sophomore feature "Boogie Nights." Anderson — who still hasn't won an Oscar — took the works of Martin Scorsese and Robert Altman, filtered them through the world of porn in the 1970s and '80s, and created a tragicomic epic we still love today. It's one of those films powered by pure ego that somehow isn't destroyed by it too.

Because acting and writing were off the table, "Titanic" needed to make up some serious ground below-the-line, which they most certainly did. Along with winning the aforementioned Best Art Direction, Best Visual Effects, Best Sound, and Best Sound Effects Editing categories, the film also took home Best Cinematography, Best Editing, Best Costume Design, Best Original Dramatic Score (this was a year where comedic scores were separate), and, of course, Best Original Song for "My Heart Will Go On."

Some of these wins are incredibly justified. Most obviously for me, it's Best Editing. "Titanic" runs for over three hours, toggles between two different timelines, requires you to keep up with dozens of different characters throughout the ship, and keeps the suspense and momentum at a peak for over an hour of the ship sinking. Conrad Buff, James Cameron, and Richard A. Harris richly deserved that prize.

The most contentious win there is probably Best Cinematography. Russell Carpenter's work on "Titanic" is the kind of bright, glossy look only the highest-budgeted Hollywood productions allow, and if you are into that aesthetic when done right (which I am), it's a visual feast. For others, they may prefer the grittier, less saturated look of Dante Spinotti's cinematography on "L.A. Confidential" or the lush, hazy feeling of Eduardo Serra's work on "The Wings of the Dove." "Boogie Nights" has one of the most dynamic cameras in the last 30 years, and it wasn't even nominated. My winner that year would probably be Frederick Elmes for "The Ice Storm," which wasn't recognized. But the thing everyone agreed upon with "Titanic" was how much of a visual and technical accomplishment it was. Not rewarding how it all was captured would feel very unusual. "Titanic" wasn't ever going to not win these awards.

With the ever-expanding Academy, accomplishing a sweep of the Oscars at the level of "Titanic" will prove to be incredibly difficult. Outside of "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King," which obviously tied the win record with 11, the closest a film has come to that number was in 2008 with "Slumdog Millionaire," which won eight. "La La Land" tied "Titanic" for the most Oscar nominations ever, but it only won six awards, infamously not including Best Picture. We have seen giant productions like "Mad Max: Fury Road" and "Dune" crush in below-the-line categories, but that is the extent to which they are recognized. "CODA" won Best Picture last year, and it only won three awards in total.

Reaching an Academy-wide consensus is only going to prove more and more difficult as each year passes. Too many people expect and want different things from the cinema they want to reward in order for one film to come along and rack up 11 wins. "Everything Everywhere All at Once" is the most nominated film this year with 11. We all expect that film to do incredibly well at the ceremony, but even if it won every single category it was nominated for, the most it could get is 10, unless Jamie Lee Curtis and Stephanie Hsu tie in Best Supporting Actress. Of course, the chances of it winning every category also aren't very strong either, as there's plenty of fierce competition in almost every race.

What "Titanic" pulled off at the Oscars is nothing short of astounding. You can quibble with the results and think other films should've won, but like it or not, "Titanic" is in the history books. And I don't see it getting replaced anytime soon.