Samuel L. Jackson knows he should’ve won the Oscar for Pulp Fiction

Now that the actor is set to receive an Honorary Oscar, he's looking back at the Oscar he should've won

Aux News Samuel L. Jackson
Samuel L. Jackson knows he should’ve won the Oscar for Pulp Fiction
Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction Screenshot: Miramax

Samuel L. Jackson had already been in tons of movies before Pulp Fiction, but it’s the film that changed his career. He was so great in Quentin Tarantino’s movie as hitman Jules—with one of the most iconic film quotes of all time, to boot—that he received an Oscar nomination in 1995 for Best Supporting Actor.

But he didn’t win. Instead, Martin Landau took the award home for his role in Tim Burton’s Ed Wood as Count Dracula actor Bela Lugosi. To this day, it’s somehow the only time Jackson has been nominated for an Academy Award, though he’s receiving an Honorary Oscar this year.

In an interview with The Times, he admits he still thinks he should’ve been the one to take the shiny, gold bald guy home for Pulp Fiction.

“I should’ve won that one,” he tells interviewer Jonathan Dean. He also says he thinks he should’ve been nominated for his role as Gator Purify in Jungle Fever. He was snubbed, and Harvey Keitel and Ben Kingsley received nominations for their supporting roles in Bugsy instead.

“My wife and I went to see Bugsy,” he says. “Damn! They got nominated and I didn’t? I guess black folk usually win for doing despicable shit on screen. Like Denzel [Washington] for being a horrible cop in Training Day. All the great stuff he did in uplifting roles like Malcolm X? No—we’ll give it to this motherfucker. So maybe I should have won one. But Oscars don’t move the comma on your cheque—it’s about getting asses in seats and I’ve done a good job of doing that.”

Jackson also touches on whether or not Spider-Man: No Way Home should have been nominated for an Oscar. Kevin Smith went full Brodie in February, saying on his podcast FatMan Beyond that the latest Spider-Man flick should’ve received a nomination for Best Picture. “They got 10 slots, they can’t give one to the biggest fucking movie of, like, the last three years?” he asked. It sparked a wider discourse on what films merit an Oscar nomination.

Though Jackson doesn’t seem to think No Way Home should merit a Best Picture nomination, he does think there should be a category where similar movies would fit. “They should have an Oscar for the most popular movie, because that’s what the business is about.”

He says No Way Home should’ve been nominated because it “did what movies did forever—it got people to a big dark room.”

There were plans to have an Oscar for Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film back in 2018, but after plenty of backlash from those who felt that blockbusters shouldn’t be recognized just because they bring in the big bucks, the Academy backtracked and shelved the idea.

65 Comments

  • malicedoom-av says:

    Sorry, but no.

    Jackson was freakin’ incredible in Pulp Fiction – no doubt – but Martin Landau topped him.

    Just my $0.02.

    • doobie1-av says:

      Both are incredible performances in what I would consider each director’s best movie (don’t @ me, Jackie Brown/Edward Scissorhands fans), but I would give the edge to Jackson. Looking back at the past (Jesus Christ!) nearly 30 years, that’s the performance that spawned a thousand imitators and has become truly iconic, but it’s a popcorn action role, and Landau was playing a titan of the golden age of Hollywood, so there was only one way the academy was ever going to go (and yeah, Landau being an esteemed old white guy certainly didn’t hurt).

      • laurenceq-av says:

        It’s a “popcorn action role?”  Did you actually see “Pulp Fiction”?

        • joeyjigglewiggle-av says:

          GIMP! Get the popcorn!

        • doobie1-av says:

          Jules starts the movie in an apartment shootout and ends it by disarming and getting the drop on a restaurant hold-up man. Maybe action is the wrong word due to the lack of elaborate fight choreography, but tonally, it’s pretty far outside the Academy’s wheelhouse, is my point. That’s obviously not a knock.

      • fabiand562-av says:

        Inglorious Basterds for me. But QT has some real gems tough to pick.

        • sarcastro7-av says:

          As time goes by I increasingly agree. I also think him having the movie end with “I think this just might be my masterpiece” shows he agrees too.

      • nilus-av says:

        Can I @ you as a Kill Bill fan? I still think that is QT best film(or films really) because I think in splitting it in two movies he managed to get all his extreme violence and homage tendencies on screen but still had time to make a damn fine “Hang out” flick as well

      • jeninabq-av says:

        I’d say that the subject matter, the drug use, and the language were all obstacles for his win. But, you know, QT did win the screenplay award. 

    • rexineffect-av says:
    • allisonkj-av says:

      I disagree. I remember when that happened and I couldn’t believe he won. Even back then it was widely discussed that he only got it because he’s Martin Landau and he had had a long career in which he didn’t win an Oscar.

      • mytvneverlies-av says:

        he only got it because he’s Martin Landau and he had had a long career in which he didn’t win an Oscar. Exactly. That’s how the Oscars work. It’s how they almost always work.
        The aged, respected, prolific, well liked nominiee is always gonna win.The only way to be more of a shoo-in is to die.

        • allisonkj-av says:

          Exactly. That’s how the Oscars work. It’s how they almost always work.
          Eh, that’s how they sometimes work. Not always. Not even mostly. True, it’s not an award that often goes to edgy work, but there are lots of examples where the old stalwart is passed over for someone newer and more deserving. Off the top of my head, Glenn Close in The Wife losing to Olivia Colman in The Favourite, and rightly so. And look how long it took for Scorcese to get an Oscar. If you were going to reward him for a body of work, you could have done that decades ago. Awards like this are so subjective, but I think the Oscars often get it right. In Landau’s case they got it wrong. It’s not even something that’s aged badly; people knew at the time it was a bullshit call.

          • mytvneverlies-av says:

            I admit the famous cases no doubt skew the memory of a casual Oscar watcher like me, but it also depends on what “aged” means.Everybody knew it was Landou’s last hurrah. I think voters always thought Scorsese had more chances.But yeah, Close losing pokes a big hole in my theory. It’s the exact scenario where she should’ve won, even if it turned out not to be her last nomination.I used to always watch The Oscars they’ve gotten more and more irrelevant to me. I actually wrote that I barely noticed them this year, before I checked and found out they haven’t happened yet.

          • cosmicghostrider-av says:

            What’s funny to me is that Landau was the deserving old boy, but because of his win now Samuel L. Jackson has become the deserving old boy getting an honorary Oscar.

        • deeeeznutz-av says:

          Another way is to make a movie about making movies and/or Hollywood in general. They love rewarding those movies.

        • cosmicghostrider-av says:

          For this very reason it’s always felt wrong that Joaquin Pheonix won Best Actor for Joker. It was clearly a “this is overdue so here” award.

          I kinda felt the same way when Leo won for fighting CGI grizzly bear.

    • nilus-av says:

      Lets not forget Landau’s followup film either, as Geppetto in only the third worst version of live action Pinocchio put on film. 

    • milligna000-av says:

      Easily.

  • darkqueen7694-av says:

    Samuel Jackson should win an Oscar for everything. Even movies he’s not in.

    • kirivinokurjr-av says:

      Infamously, Marisa Tomei won when Jackson instead should have been awarded the Oscar for his incredible portrayal of Mona Lisa Vito.

      • coldsavage-av says:

        I am now replaying the deer drinking from a brook monologue in my head, but with Samuel L Jackson instead of Marisa Tomei.

        • triohead-av says:

          This is perfect, but also what if Tomei gets to play Jules? I think that works too.

          • coldsavage-av says:

            Agreed. “What does Marsellus Wallace look like?”I am now thinking I would pay good money to see a double feature of my Cousin Vinny and Pulp Fiction but with those two switching roles. Isn’t this why we have deepfake technology? lol

    • zythides-av says:

      Considering he’s been in about 6 movies per year for the past 30 years, it’s almost a statistical improbability that he hasn’t won an Oscar yet.

  • happyinparaguay-av says:

    “Enough is enough is enough! I have had it with these motherfucking snakes in these motherfucking Oscar nominations!”

  • kirivinokurjr-av says:

    So people don’t really mean it when they say “it’s an honor just to be nominated”?

    • dirtside-av says:

      “It is an honor just to be nominated, but actually winning is an even bigger honor, motherfucker!”

  • hootiehoo2-av says:

    I’m not that big of a QT fan as most people on this board are, with that said Jackson was great in Pulp Fiction but you know what other QT movie he was great for and could have gotten a Supporting nomination for? Django Unchained, he was amazing in that movie and even better than Leo was in it.

    • peterbread-av says:

      He definitely should have been nominated for DU. He could (should?) have won if Christophe Waltz had been in the Best Actor category like he should have been.

      • hootiehoo2-av says:

        That’s a very good point as Waltz was the star of that movie and not a supporting actor.

      • rogersachingticker-av says:

        Then again, I suspect that if they’d pushed for Waltz as best actor over Foxx, the cries of racism would’ve been deafening, maybe enough to bring on #oscarssowhite a year or two early. Never mind that Waltz was close on screen time and gave a much better performance than Foxx did. Still, Jackson gives the best performance in that film, and it was the perfect opportunity give him an award, given that the rest of the best supporting field were actors who’d already been recognized by the academy.

        • bigal6ft6-av says:

          The real problem, nominations for TV and movies, is splitting 2 lead films into Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor nominations. Both Waltz and Foxx should have been up for Best Actor, it’s a two-hander (even though Schultz dies before the last 30 minutes but c’mon he’s definitely a lead). I think Jackson does qualify as supporting in Jango though, mostly because he doesn’t show up until almost over halfway through the flick, his character eventually becomes more important as it goes on. 

  • i-miss-splinter-av says:

    Jackson is one of the most over-rated, over-the-top actors ever, and from what I’ve heard, a nightmare to work with.

    • magpie187-av says:

      He’s had his moments but put a ton of crap out there too. 

      • doctorstephenstrange-av says:

        The point of acting is to get paid, not to only churn out high drama and art house flicks.

    • milligna000-av says:

      Surprised more of those stories don’t come out.

    • cjgoon33-av says:

      I always believed that once the years Jackson spent bouncing around Hollywood hoping to make it big and losing out on roles he promised himself he would never turn down anything if he ever made it. Looking at his IMDB since Pulp Fiction would give credence to that theory. Some awesome stuff and some blatant paycheck grabbers.Pulp Fiction, to me, will always remain the best QT movie but I think Django is right up there along with “Once Upon a Time…”

  • noturtles-av says:

    That’s a terrific quote from Jackson.And yes, he should have won. Landau’s imitation of Lugosi was very good, but come on – Jackson created something entirely new.

  • cinecraf-av says:

    He should’ve won for Django. Don’t get me wrong, I love Christoph Waltz, but he didn’t bring anything new or terribly compelling to his role, while Jackson’s portrayal of Stephen was incredible and nuanced and full of such complicated history in the portrayal of an enslaved person in the chattel system who functions as collaborator as well as a subjugate. It was masterful, and I suspect the Academy balked at recognizing him because they feared the optics of awarding such a portrayal, which was a shame, because it was far more cutting and caustic, honest and brutal than most of the Oscar-winning performances by persons of color.

    • dvsrey17-av says:

      Samuel L. Jackson not getting nominated for Django Unchained for all the brilliant reasons that you expertly pointed out but Christoph Waltz winning the award for playing a white savior is the US in a nutshell.

      • seoulglo-av says:

        Say it louder for the people in the back, please!

      • cosmicghostrider-av says:

        It really felt at the time that the Academy just sorta gave Waltz the Django Oscar as some kind of follow-up to the Inglorious Bastards Oscar because they were still buzzing from that performance, which was brilliant.

  • bhlam-22-av says:

    Okay, but Landau is unbelievable in Ed Wood. And honestly, Jackson isn’t even who I’d give that Oscar to from Pulp Fiction. That said, I would give him the Oscar for Jungle Fever. That’s a knockout performance.

    • kirivinokurjr-av says:

      Maria de Medeiros for Most Irritating Character In Cinema?

    • sarcastro7-av says:

      Jackson should have been nominated, and won, for his climactic but sadly interrupted monologue in Deep Blue Sea.

      • snagglepluss-av says:

        the shark should have won

      • send-in-the-drones-av says:

        True story – the reaction of the cast members was real as no one had told them about the shark. Not even Jackson was given a head’s up. The script that had been handed out indicated that Jackson would lead them to a triumphant ending, vanquishing the sharks and everyone escaping. It’s like the chest burster scene, but sharks exist. He was laid up for months in the Muther F’ing Ward. Made a complete recovery. Such a dedicated actor.Also, they didn’t inform the shark who it would be biting. He filed a comp claim against the producers for damaging it’s teeth on Jackson’s steel balls. 

      • bhlam-22-av says:

        Especially Michael Caine for a bullshit win in The Cider House Rules, a film that has had no impact on culture and where no monologues are interrupted by shark snacking.

  • hasselt-av says:

    Oddly enough, that’s the last year I really had any interest in the best supporting actor category, mainly because of Jackson and Gary Sinise in Forrest Gump. Both performances have only become more iconic with age….and then, Martin Landau won.  

  • olguinard-av says:

    I appreciate SLJ’s reference to his race being a factor, but let’s not forget how much Hollywood looooves a movie about itself.

  • fabiand562-av says:

    I thought so too. But im also a huge Tarrantino fan so maybe that’s the main reason. Landau was great also in Ed Wood. Couldn’t go wrong either way. 

  • volunteerproofreader-av says:

    Morgan Freeman should have won as part of Shawshank sweeping the whole thing

  • rigbyriordan-av says:

    I remember VERY WELL the 5 squares with each actor seated, awaiting the results, and Sam Jackson actually reacting poorly with a “shit” or something like that when Martin Landau’s name was called. Here it is:

  • cosmicghostrider-av says:

    but it’s gotta be Cumberbatch this year right? It feels like his year with this lobbed on top of No Way Home and Multiverse of Madness.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share Tweet Submit Pin