A wonderful movie, but...

Rating: 5/10 (24 September 2000)

I really liked Forrest Gump the first time I watched it and I still do like it.
But can someone explain to me why it won 6 oscars, including best picture and best actor, in the same year that The Shawshank Redemption & Pulp Fiction were released. Forrest Gump is a good movie but it isn't in the same league as TSR or PF. Will the academy ever apologise for this mistake and many others? I think they should.
Tom Hanks was good, but the real winner was Morgan Freeman. Robert Zemeckis did a great job, but what Quentin did.....WOW. Forrest Gump is a wonderful film, but in this year against Pulp and esp. Shawshank it shouldn't have won.
This (Forrest Gump) is a great indication that the academy awards don't always get it right, this comes mainly through the hype which surround some movies therefore maybe the oscars should be held a year later when the hype is gone. (Titanic vs. L.A. Confidential another example) Then the real winners will win hopefully.
1994 was a great year but the academy got all the main oscars wrong (best actress was Natalie Portman for Leon), what a shame.
Nevertheless my rating for Forrest Gump is 8/10