This is my pic, followed by Titanic and Shakespeare in Love. What do you people think are the worst winners, being the results of weak years or poor choices by the Academy? Let's make this into a big post that goes on for a while. Please.
"Do I have an original thought in my head? My bald head?"
[deleted]
[deleted]
Titanic
BTW
What the hell was wrong with Annie Hall?
"Mr Friedkin, you're not wearing a tie?" - Alfred Hitchcock
I'm with everyone who said "Titanic." Also, on a side note, what was with Gwyneth Paltrow winning Best Actress for her performance in Shakespeare in Love when she was contending with Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth?
shareUnfortunately, politics has a LOT to do with what wins Best Picture.
Just three examples generally agreed upon by respected critics and film historians, (and me!, who does a little of both).
1952 Winner: The Greatest Show on Earth. The Real Best Picture: High Noon. Reason it lost? Red scare, blacklisted writers using pseudonyms. Result? Academy chose to chicken out and play it safe.
1998 Winner: Shakespeare in Love. The Real Best Picture: Saving Private Ryan. Reason it lost? Ryan too violent and bloody. The entire Academy membership, which votes for the Best Picture nominees, skews much older than the average moviegoer. It tends to steer away from certain kinds of controversy, which leads us to...
2005 Winner: Crash. The Real Best Picture: Brokeback Mountain. Reason it lost? Hollywood became more tolerant of violence and profanity in eight years, but was not yet ready to lend its imprimatur to a love story that did not take place between a man and a woman. It's really that simple.
Significantly, none of these Oscar winning movies won for Best Direction.
The Oscars really started going downhill when Terms of Endearment was awarded Best Pic. However, the person who said Million Dollar Baby was bad don't know nuttin. It's a classic.
As to the point about politics, I would add 1941. Winner: How Green Was My Valley; Real Best Picture: Citizen Kane. Reason it lost? Nobody in their right mind would have wanted to get on the bad side of William Randolph Hirst, who, let's say, had something against the film...
I love Tom Jones! It's funny how people criticize the academy for never recognizing comedies and when they do, people say its the worst Best Picture winner ever....Shakespeare in Love was also a comedy of course, and you maybe could classify American Beauty as one too. All those films are always pointed at as bad choices for Best Picture, so I think people tend to say one thing and then another, but I digress...
My pick for most undeserving Best Picture winner would probably have to be Rain Man. Ugh, I just thought that movie was so cliche and after Dustin Hoffman's win, we got deluged with a million different actors playing people with "cutesy" physical/mental afflictions in order to win Oscars. Plus I was never a Tom Cruise fan (only person at my school that hated Top Gun). I would have been happier with ANY of the other five nominees (Dangerous Liaisons would probably be my pick)
I agree with you, gleeps, about both "Tom Jones" and "Rain Man." The latter has not worn well at all, and it now looks more and more like just a showcase for Hoffman's schtick. And you're right, playing a character with some sort of handicap/physical challenge/mental illness increases your chances of winning an Oscar significantly. It's like it's not enough just to be a really, really good actor. :sigh:
"Tom Jones" is a wonderful movie. I am very glad I finally got the chance to see it. For some reason, the Academy seems to think comedies are beneath its dignity, but I think comedy is in some ways a higher art form than drama, because it's so much harder to get right.
So the Best Picture Oscar has sometimes gone to a mediocre drama when a strong comedy was more deserving. IMO
I think you're right. What was it Peter O'Toole said in "My Favorite Year", quoting Edmund Keane -- "Dying is easy -- comedy is hard."?
share*My pick for most undeserving Best Picture winner would probably have to be Rain Man. Ugh, I just thought that movie was so cliche and after Dustin Hoffman's win, we got deluged with a million different actors playing people with "cutesy" physical/mental afflictions in order to win Oscars. Plus I was never a Tom Cruise fan (only person at my school that hated Top Gun). I would have been happier with ANY of the other five nominees (Dangerous Liaisons would probably be my pick)
I agree with you, gleeps, about both "Tom Jones" and "Rain Man." The latter has not worn well at all, and it now looks more and more like just a showcase for Hoffman's schtick. And you're right, playing a character with some sort of handicap/physical challenge/mental illness increases your chances of winning an Oscar significantly. It's like it's not enough just to be a really, really good actor. :sigh: *
I personally insulted by those statement, Hoffman deserved his oscar, his performance was actually very realistic (my little bro has autism), and it deserved Best Picture.
Also I would say How Green Was My Valley over Citizen Kane, Chicago over The Pianist (of The Hours for that matter), Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan, Forrest Gump over Pulp Fiction (I didn't hate Forrest Gump, I just thought PF should have won),
For me, it's Gigi, Kramer vs. Kramer, Braveheart, Crash, Dances with Wolves, and hate me, but I really disliked One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.
I try not to compare the film that has one to any of the films nominated that year, though. It tends ot ruin your judgement on that particular film.
Sometimes I find it more interesting to consider the films that were not nominated for Best Picture in a given year. 1968? I mean, come on. 2001: A Space Odyssey. That was THE film of the year.
The Academy is predisposed against science fiction. It takes it even less seriously than comedy. I'm not much of a sci-fi fan myself, but 2001 remains an extraordinary achievement on so many levels. Countless images stay with you, and Strauss' Also: Sprach Zarathustra took on a whole new life thanks to this movie. After nearly 40 years, 2001's reputation and its influence on filmmaking in general are as strong as ever.
That the Best Picture winner that year was Oliver! had to make Kubrick shake his head and pour another drink. I think a lot of other people did the same.
ecjones1951---
I totally agree with you about Stanley Kubrick. Talk about being robbed! Kubrick never won an oscar, but he created so many great films that have since influenced directing in profound ways.
When Kubrick died, Hollywood didn't even see it fit to include him in their Academy Award tribute of film-industry people who had died that year. I was aghast; I remember watching the Oscars that year for that reason, just to see if he'd finally be given a nod. Nope.
Kubrick never won an oscar,
Kubrick's Oscar was for special effects though, not for directing.
shareWest Side Story is an amazing musical.
shareI think Kubrick was a fine director. But, specifically, how have his films "influenced directing" profoundly?
shareI don't know what you are talking about or if you watched the same academy awards I did, but they did an entire tribute that year because he died the week before! I guess you missed it! Of course he wasn't in the list since he got his own piece!
share[deleted]
I really dislike One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest as well.
Odd the way it's become somewhat politically incorrect to dislike that film.
........gentleman's ageement
chicago
shakespeare in love
the english patient
OUT OF AFRICA
OLIVER
Tom Jones was well-deserving of the Best Picture award - brilliantly acted, directed, photographed, and paced. I think that the plot is too complex for some of you simpletons!
I think that most best picture choices have been good choices. One thing that people don't take into account is that these some of these "bad" pictures were the best in a bad picture year, like "Gentleman's Agreement", "Driving Miss Daisy", and "American Beauty". Looking back historically, some of these "bad" pictures were signs of the times, like "Mrs. Miniver" and "Going My Way". Here are my only worst best picture choices:
1. "Braveheart" - the worst. Amazingly dumb piece o' junk - the characters are ridiculous caricatures! Mel Gibson is a stick of wood in a wig. I kept fast-forwarding, laughing, fast-forwarding, and laughing. Just an amazingly crappy year for the Academy - "Leaving Las Vegas" pinned this to the mat.
2. "Out of Africa" - Streep and Redford have zero chemistry - the movie feels a lot like Heaven's Gate - it goes on and on and...ad nauseum...Brandauer does the best he can, but it's like carrying an anvil on his back...
3. Around the World in 80 Days - An inferior realization of what could have something really brilliant - David Niven and Cantinflas don't make a good team. How did this somewhat enjoyable mess beat out "Giant"?
4. "My Fair Lady" - somewhat enjoyable inocuous piece of fluff, but is it REALLY better than "Zorba the Greek", "Mary Poppins", and "Dr. Strangelove"? Har!
[deleted]
Yes, now here's someone who knows what s/he's talking about. "Cimarron" is truly atrocious, though the 2nd Best Picture Winner ("Broadway Melody") is equally creaky. (I suppose that, in retrospect, it's easier to excuse because it was such an early musical and must have seemed impressive to 1928 audiences.)
I've seen every Best Picture winner except two ("The Deer Hunter" and "Million Dollar Baby" -- just haven't gotten around to them yet). And I can say that the Academy has been wrong about 90% of the time. I mean, what we really ought to do is start a thread counting the number of times they've actually gotten it right!
That would be a mighty short thread! LOL
You're a little ahead of me on Best Picture Winners, Tryavna; I've seen all but Cavalcade, The Last Emperor and Crash. But I'll get around to them, too.
Shakespeare in Love was a classy, intelligent, romantic, witty, and hilarious period piece. I thought it richly deserved its Oscar. Crash is the only BP winner in memory that I can honestly say has few redeeming qualities.
----------
If you enjoy cinema, please check out my website @ FILMPIX.NET!
titanic, or dances with wolves (only cause i think goodfellas should of won).
haven't seen chicago, but heard it was crap.
watch some films @ evanmartins.com
8 1/2... that's all i have to say... I don't care if this movie is "still good", it still is in no way comparable to the perfection that is 8 1/2
----I feel sorry for homeless homosexuals. They have no closet to come out of.----
RIP John Reich
Rocky over Taxi Driver, how is that possible? I like the first Rocky movie. I could gladly have it on my collection, but it's not better than Taxi Driver.
The only movie Rocky would have deserved to win over is Shakespare in Love.
Havent seen a lot of them..but two of the worst I have ever seen to win best movie award are
1) Chicago - I didnt think it was bad on academic award point of view, but i think it was really really BAD on any point of view
2) Crash - yawwwn....BBC show such documentaries much too often
forest gump shouldn't have won. shawshank redemption should have.
share