I don't know if Woods has ever won one of them, but he deserves one IMO. He is just a stone-solid actor.

I completely agree with you about Salvador being better than Platoon. The latter film always feels very simplistic to me, with its tropes of good and evil in the American soldiers' ranks.

I'd wondered if anyone would ever mention this film on here - I still remember the before-and-after cuts of that one woman who got killed in it, to this day. It's just savage stuff. And yeah, there is humor in the film. What happened to James Woods' character's negatives is so messed up, it's practically funny....

@CelluloidFan said:

I don't know if Woods has ever won one of them, but he deserves one IMO. He is just a stone-solid actor.

No Oscar for Woods although he's been nominated twice. He has won 2 Emmy awards.

He would have won for Salvador any other year but it was decided 1986 was FINALLY Paul Newman's turn.

Oliver Stone's best film? You are kidding! Although i share mr. Stones view on criminal us politics in central america in the 80s i have to say that well intentioned doesn't necessarily mean well done. There's not a single character in this movie, there's just a bunch of clichés. And James Woods (who I actually really like) is the worst actor of them all in this movie. We all know from dozens of films that war correspondents drink, whore around, take drugs, have a big mouth and of course a big heart. What mr. Woods presented here is not overacting, but an involuntary caricature of a reporter and a good director (that mr. stone normally is) would have prevented that. Although largely historically and politically correct this is not a film but a political pamphlet.