Yes. There are a ton that have been nominated for some category, but not won. Here are a few more winners:

Babe (1995)
Beetlejuice (1988)
When Worlds Collide (1951)
Mary Poppins (1964)
Bedknobs and Broomsticks (1971)
The Abyss (1989)
Independence Day (1996)
Total Recall (1990)

Doomsday was a better movie than I expected - Adventuresome with a unexpected humor.

Hellraiser: Bloodlines (kind of pinhead in space) seems to get worse every time I watch it.

Star Trek 1 is not worthy - predictably disposable characters, overly emphasized but dated effects, cutesy twist... bring on Wrath of Khan.

The annual tradition of watching ID4 on July 4th will commence shortly. It's not the best movie in the world but it's fun.

IMDB Advance Search results using "Feature Film", "Science Fiction", "Won Oscar", sorted A-Z.

And again but with "Fantasy" as the genre.

Here are the results for Oscar Nominated Sci-Fi Feature Films.

Award specific information is at the Awards link on the detailed page of the respective film.

IMDB advance search is pretty good at helping find stuff like that. There are a lot of options and many can be combined to further narrow results.

I was pleased to see that Import CDs already shipped Body Snatchers (along with High Noon), so I'll be able to give it a spin earlier than expected!

I haven't seen Alien 3 or Resurrection in over a decade. I didn't mind them before but they sure are awful now. Resurrection also looks like crap on blu-ray. Neither one needed to be longer than 90 minutes. I've also grown to dislike French cinema in the last few years, which just added fuel to the fire of hate for Resurrection.

Does True Blood count towards fantasy, an episode featuring fairies?

According to IMDB, it has fantasy as one of its genres, so you're good.

Good point, and I even own one (Hogfather). I should have said "live-action, non-craptastic major studio version with a real budget".

After having seen the latest Batman trailer right before the new Spidey movie, it made me wanna revisit the 6 previous movies though the ones made by Nolan won't qualify for this challenge, I still had a great time watching them & can't wait to see the 3rd movie in the reboot franchise in a couple of weeks time.

I watched the Superman marathon on Encore. Don't know why I stuck with III and IV because they sucked.

Watched Starship Troopers (an all time fav I knew I would watch for the millionth time for this) and Starship Troopers 3 (for the first time). I had tried to watch 3 once and only got 20 mins in. I finished it this time, and was glad I did. Not too bad.

You might say, what about Starship Troopers 2?

THERE IS NO STARSHIP TROOPERS 2 IN MY WORLD.

I watched the first 3 Crow movies, yesterday, first time views for two and three. The Crow is still a great movie, City of Angels suffers mightily from being a sequel and Salvation I liked, not as much as The Crow, but I was alright. I'll have to get number 4 eventually and see if it's the abomination that it's claimed to be.

I took a day off yesterday as I just wasn't in a mood to watch tv or movies, wasn't burnt out, just kind of a blah day and one of those days where you don't feel like doing much of anything. I started as soon as I got up this morning though with Queen of the Amazons.

What about Starship Troopers 3?

The first thing I watched for this challenge was the 1988 Starship Troopers anime series--well, the first four half-hour episodes (out of six).

The ones by Nolan count under the Comic Book Act of 2008.

Would the Harryhausen Sinbad movies count as High Fantasy in the checklist? It seems to me that they are set in an alternate world based on some real world cultures but where magic works and is very common and accepted by everyone. Is that enough? I did read the article linked to, but that kind of categorization discussion can make my head hurt. Being set in another world seems to be enough but then they go on to talk about a bunch of other things so any opinions?

I could be completely wrong but I think it's no. I just looked up one of the films and in it, Sinbad is the prince of Baghdad and has to travel Hyperborea, which in reality is supposed to be around the Arctic Circle and of course Baghdad exists. It seems like it's more of an Earth with some magic which would make it low fantasy.

Here's some examples which might make it clearer:

Urban Fantasy - Cast a Deadly Spell, Lost Girl
High Fantasy - Lord of the Rings, Narnia
Sword and Sorcery - Sinbad, Sword & the Sorcerer
Dark Fantasy - Lord of Illusions
Martial Arts Fantasy - Miracle Fighters, Holy Flame of the Martial World

Vampires = fantasy (imagine your own female-related joke here).

I didn't think to take this with me for evening festivities. Anyone else fit this one into its natural slot?

Political Fantasy = The West Wing
Business Fantasy = The Social Network
Media Fantasy = The Newsroom

I liked it! (once we I past the ridiculous idea that rebel Johnny Rico somehow made General. Honestly that may have been why I turned it off 20 mins in the first time I watched it)

And if I had a physical copy of 3 (which I might get now that I made it through the thing and kinda liked it) I would probably create my own custom cover which called it 2!

I may have to check that out, I have seen it a lot of places very cheap. Honestly I was afraid to have my love for ST shattered any more after the 2nd one so I have avoided anything but the first.

Related in name only, I think tonight will be a Zone Troopers night. This is one of my fav Charles band movies and is on Netflix streaming, so if you aren't expecting earth shattering gravitas but rather just an entertaining sci fi flick with its share of laughs....I highly recommend it.

"Butt me Mittens!"

Thanks for the ruling and the examples. Sinbad as Sword and Sorcery does make some kind of sense to me. But Mr. Peepers, do you mean that you've never seen any of the Harryhausen Sinbad films? Granted they may have some flaws but gosh I love those creatures!

I picked up a copy of 3 last BF on an amazon lightning deal. I'd not have purchased it otherwise simply because of "2". When I finally watched it I was surprised that it was a fairly good film and a worthy sequel. Far superior to that which is called "2". I had trouble getting past that first 20 minutes as well. Frankly when I heard the book was being turned into a movie I wondered how they'd pull it off. Turns out they really didn't but they *did* wind up with a couple of fair "popcorners".