zekeburger1979

I liked Gladiator enough that I thought it deserved the Best Picture nomination, just not the win. If I could have voted, I would have voted for Traffic.

Giles

I agree. Hollywood shmaltzy all the way - yuck!

tdilia

Yes, Forest is very overrated. Also don't know if anybody mention it yet, but Ordinary People to me was boring and should't have won Best Picture. Almost forgot Chicago, lousy movie.

Green Jello

Every one of these threads turn out the same way. There is someone out there for every critically acclaimed movie who hates it. Let me save every one here a bunch of time.

All these films SUCK!:

1927 Wings
1928 The Broadway Melody
1929 All Quiet on the Western Front
1930 Cimarron
1931 Grand Hotel
1932 Cavalcade
1934 It Happened One Night
1935 Mutiny on the Bounty
1936 The Great Ziegfeld
1937 The Life of Emile Zola
1938 You Can't Take It with You
1939 Gone with the Wind
1940 Rebecca
1941 How Green Was My Valley
1942 Mrs. Miniver
1943 Casablanca
1944 Going My Way
1945 The Lost Weekend
1946 The Best Years of Our Lives
1947 Gentleman's Agreement
1948 Hamlet
1949 All the King's Men
1953 From Here to Eternity
1954 On the Waterfront
1955 Marty
1956 Around the World in 80 Days
1957 The Bridge on the River Kwai
1958 Gigi
1959 Ben-Hur
1960 The Apartment
1961 West Side Story
1963 Tom Jones
1964 My Fair Lady
1965 The Sound of Music
1966 A Man for All Seasons
1967 In the Heat of the Night
1968 Oliver!
1969 Midnight Cowboy
1970 Patton
1971 The French Connection
1972 The Godfather
1973 The Sting
1974 The Godfather Part II
1975 One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
1976 Rocky
1977 Annie Hall
1978 The Deer Hunter
1979 Kramer vs. Kramer
1980 Ordinary People
1981 Chariots of Fire
1982 Gandhi
1983 Terms of Endearment
1984 Amadeus
1985 Out of Africa
1986 Platoon
1987 The Last Emperor
1988 Rain Man
1989 Driving Miss Daisy
1990 Dances with Wolves
1991 The Silence of the Lambs .
1992 Unforgiven
1993 Schindler's List
1994 Forrest Gump
1995 Braveheart
1996 The English Patient
1997 Titanic
1998 Shakespeare in Love
1999 American Beauty
2000 Gladiator
2001 A Beautiful Mind
2002 Chicago
2003 The Lord Of the Rings: The Return Of the King

HistoryProf

Much like the recent election, i'm still pretending that never happened It's easily the worst winner ever. simply awful choice.

RockStrongo

I hated Rainman, Shakepeare in Love and Midnight Cowboy.

Havent seen English Patient though. Might be worse.

Tyler_Durden

Yep!

jfoobar

What about the Cal Hockley role? Now that was a multi-dimensional character played with both insight and finesse by Billy Zane, who is himself one of the great actors of the 20th century.










Kidding.

tommyp007

Greatest Show on Earth over High Noon ????????

Jaymole

There are 3 Best picture Oscar winners from the past 15 years I truly dislike:

Forrest Gump
Braveheart
Titanic

and there are 6 films that I didn't dislike but that are really not deserving of the top prize:

Driving Miss Daisy
Dances With Wolves
Shakespeare in Love
Gladiator
A Beautiful Mind
Chicago

The Academy Awards are great for arguements but they suck for legitimatcy.

jdpatri

This argument is going to go on forever.

I agree. Multilayered. Yep. Beautiful cinematography. Absolutely.

BUT <--- Big ol' butt

...scratch-my-eyes-out-and-call-me-Cavalcante was it boring. I felt that Winged Migration had a more interesting story. So yes, watching birds fly was more engrossing than watching The English Patient.

That said, Titanic is still my least favorite best picture winner of the last ten years. So that's saying something. The most objectionable award goes to Forrest Gump for trumping at least a dozen better movies that year.

I'd also like to object to The Sound of Music beating Dr. Zhivago while we're on this game.

But what can you do? The Academy has no interest in rewarding excellence or artistic merit. It's Hollywood's yearly circle jerk. And once you accept this you'll fare much better in your office pool.

wendersfan

Complete and total agreement.

Most awards are of two types - industry awards, and critical awards, and for different reasons are each flawed. Industry awards are decided by people who are in the system, and have little interest in making waves. Critical awards are decided by people who, and lets be frank about this, are people who want to be in the industry, but aren't talented or driven enough to make it. Therefore they have a someone idealistic attitude which favor more marginal artists over the more successful. Either way they're all fun to argue about.

RocShemp

I really like Gladiator and I was glad to see it nominated but I don't feel it deserved to win. Not by a longshot. That said, I do find sollace in the fact that it beat out the terrible Traffic.

Jazzbutcher

Movies I think didn't deserve it:


1945 The Lost Weekend (Great movie, but hasn't aged well. Overwrought)
1947 Gentleman's Agreement (Love GP, but too preachy for me)
1956 Around the World in 80 Days (This movie sucks nuts)
1964 My Fair Lady (see above)
1979 Kramer vs. Kramer (timely movie, but hasn't aged well. Could MS be more of a bitch in this movie?)
1985 Out of Africa (for reasons mentioned previously)
1988 Rain Man (It got the "Let's give the Oscar to the Most Afflicted Character" vote)
1994 Forrest Gump (It got the "Let's give the Oscar to the Most Afflicted Character" vote)
1996 The English Patient (Like shooting fish in a barrel)
1998 Shakespeare in Love (Why all the hate? Not a bad movie, just not Oscar worthy)
1999 American Beauty (overrated IMHO)
2001 A Beautiful Mind (It got the "Let's give the Oscar to the Most Afflicted Character" vote)
2002 Chicago (Am I the only one that thought Renee looked scary, and CZJ fat?)
2003 The Lord Of the Rings: The Return Of the King (Great movie, not the best of the series IMHO, and shouldn't have won as many Oscars as it did--best song? please. Triplets of Belleville whooped Annie Lennox's ass)

Michael Corvin

Other than Return of the King, I haven't agreed with a winner since Braveheart. There were always more deserving movies each year. So to sum up..

The first 6 years of the 90's
The last 7 years

Although Gump is a toss up. It hasn't stood the test of time all that well. It was a great film that captured the hearts and minds of the world. Still a great film, but in hindsight Shawshank was more deserving. Pulp Fiction hasn't aged well either. It is still a great film but there is just something I can't put my finger on, that says it isn't worth a Best Picture Oscar.

Giles

I agree, but in it's defense: the cast is perfect and Marc Norman/
Tom Stoppard script is top notch.

pro-bassoonist

_____________________________________________
Originally posted by tdirgins

1998 Shakespeare in Love (Why all the hate? Not a bad movie, just not Oscar worthy)
_____________________________________________

Perhaps because everyone felt that Saving Private Ryan was more American (and should have won ), theme-wise, and the Oscars are an American Awards Show as one poster claimed here.

Pro-B

Heat

I agree, though The English Patient was OK to me (I've not seen it more than once, though).

Autotelik

The English Patient is one of my favorite films. I can watch it over and over and over aagin and it will still be awesome. Love the acting, the deliberate pacing, the rich cinematography, the transitions, and ....... oh yes..... Gabriel Yared's score.


Love it.

jaeufraser

Um, while I don't doubt a few people have that opinion, I think most people wanted SPR to beat SiL because they thought it was a better movie. It's not too surprising...SPR appeals to a larger audience than SiL...it's a war movie, dramatic, with a big star and a big director. It's definately more visceral visually, more epic, and that just fits more in line with many people think as best picture. Of course then you have Judi Dench getting best supporting actress for a 6 minute role. Not that she played it poorly, but that's more like an extended cameo.

conscience

Forrest Gump =

Ordinary People =

I think a lot of people (not everyone) just dislike or really want to dislike these two films because they beat Pulp Fiction and Raging Bull, respectively.

Don't let the Oscars overcome you. Just because Pulp Fiction didn't win Best Picture doesn't mean it isn't a great film.

RyoHazuki

You are very right. I think a most of this Gump hate comes from angry Pulp Fiction fans who thought their film should have won.

pro-bassoonist

This is very much why many on this board (at least) think that Gladiator should NOT have won an Oscar (following your criteria).

And quite frankly I think that it is surprising to claim that Saving Private Ryan is clearly the better film. Which I think it was not.

Cheers,
Pro-B

Big Quasimodo

I'm just glad everyone is laying off my man Ernest Borgnine and Marty!

P.S. I liked the English Patient a lot.

jaeufraser

Well I don't think anyone can claim that one or the other is clearly the better film, of course that's a very subjective thing. I'm just responding to the notion that people wanted SPR to win based on it being more American. I think, more than likely, it was because people liked SPR more. I'll be honest, most people don't sit aroudn for long hours weighing artistic merits on movies. They just think, which movie did they like better, and oftentimes those criteria explain their opinions. We're not talking about who should really win the award, just why people have those opinions.

With regards to my opinion, I think they're both quite good, I wouldn't say either one champions the other. I never said I think SPR is clearly better. Just that it's obvious many people do (though for many, I imagine SiL was never even seen).

With regards to Gladiator, I agree it shouldn't have won. but the criteria I said have nothing to do with why it shouldn't have won. Though the criteria I said more than likely explains why it was so popular and got such a win, which I agree it didn't deserve.