• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

films: Worst Movie To Win The Oscar For Best Picture

supertrav77

supertrav77

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 25, 2007
Messages
1,413
Location
St. Louis
If you need a cheat sheet, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_Picture_Oscar

My picks
1. Forrest Gump (1994) This movie is stupid, condescending, and totally unbelievable. I walked out of the theater personally insulted. Like I spent 90 minutes listen to Tom Hanks call my mother a whore. Worst. Movie. Ever.
Who shoulda won: Any movie produced in 1994 other than this won. Preferably Pulp Fiction or Shawshank Redemption

2. The English Patient (1996). It's really boring. It's really long. It's really boring. After about an hour, I no longer had any clue as to what the fuck was going on. Did I mention that it was boring?
Who shoulda won: Fargo.

3. Cavalcade (1932-1933) See notes for The English Patient. I gave this a good 40 minutes but it was unwatchable.
Who shoulda won: either 42nd Street or Little Women

4. Gladiator (2000) OK, this is a decent popcorn crunching movie. But Best picture? Really? I mean, really???
Who shoulda won: Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

5. Driving Miss Daisy (1989) In no way shape or form is this movie better than Dead Poets Society
 
Gladiator lol. Talk about overrated. It was a great movie, but giving it best picture - or even giving Crouching Tiger best picture (another great movie) - really says something about how these movies get picked. It's not really about artistic merit as much as it is about palatability.

I really enjoyed Forrest Gump, of course I was in like the fourth grade and at the time an avid Entertainment Weekly reader. :D
 
I'm going to have to go with crash for its preachy tone and oversimplification of complex sociocultural issues, and for casting ludacris. But really, looking at the winners of the past 15 years, and comparing them with the winners from the preceding 15 years... its so sad:

Crash
Lord of the Rings
Gladiator
American beauty
Shakespeare in Love
Titanic
The English Patient
Braveheart
Forrest Gump
Schindlers List


what pedestrian trash compared to:

Unforgiven
Silence of the Lambs
Dances with Wolves
Driving Miss Daisy
The Last Emperor
Out of Africa
Chariots of Fire
The Deer Hunter
Annie Hall
Godfather I & II
Patton



Fucking hollywood is teh lamezors now.
 
"hey did you see crouching tiger, hidden dragon? i really liked it for all the flying... and the magic."

old school ftw.
 
anyone who thinks that crouching tiger is just a superhero action flick wasn't paying any attention 8) :\
 
Sometimes it's easiest to pick out the "worst" best picture by looking at the losers in a given year. In recent memory, 1994 sticks out the most. Pulp Fiction, Shawshank, and Quiz Show are all masterpieces, and they all lost to Forrest Gump. Forrest Gump is good -- it's just not great.
 
Crash. what a steaming pile of crap that movie was. i silently judge people who tell me it is one of the best movies they have ever seen.
 
Banquo said:
Sometimes it's easiest to pick out the "worst" best picture by looking at the losers in a given year.
Click to expand...

1941: How Green Was My Valley beats Kane and The Maltese Falcon.
1956: Around the World in Eighty Days beats The Searchers (not nominated)
1958: Gigi beats Vertigo (not nominated!)
1976: Rocky beats Taxi Driver
1979: Kramer v Kramer beats Apocalypse Now
1980: Ordinary People beats Raging Bull.
1994: Forrest Gump beats several good films.

OK, we have our winner: I've at least heard of all those other films. WTF is Ordinary People? It only came out a few decades ago, and I've never heard of it.
 
continuousbeing2 said:
Crash. what a steaming pile of crap that movie was. i silently judge people who tell me it is one of the best movies they have ever seen.
Click to expand...

I agree. And there are people who's intelligence I normally respect who like this movie. I mean, Christ, racism is not THAT obvious. People going off on these long monologues "my dad lost his job to one of your people".
I'll say that the movie's heart was in the right place. But it was just soooooo sloppily executed. Like it was written by a 21 year old liberal arts major.
 
Titanic and Crash are the two biggest travesties in recent years.

Honestly though I stopped giving the Academy Awards any credence a long time ago.
 
I didn't think Crash was too bad, and I was surprised by Ludacris's acting. But academy award material? Come the fuck on.
 
Its a real guilty pleasure of mine, and something I keep really close to my chest for fear of alienating myself from other people, but I love playing the "Smart movies for dumb people" game. Smart movies for dumb people have really obvious symbolism, really obvious morality, and are transgressive in really predictable, pedestrian ways.

American Beauty is the alpha and the omega of Smart Movies for Dumb People, but Forrest Gump, Crash, and Dead poets society are all strong contenders for the worst.


Supertrav: how the hell can you call Dead Poets society great. Its way lame, I can't even verbalize what I despise about it, it makes me that angry. Plus, its just like patch adams, which I think we all agree is terrible.
 
Do The Right Thing was a superior version of Crash, almost TWENTY years earlier, and Spike Lee's Best Joint (excepting, perhaps, the much-underrated 25th Hour) didn't even get NOMINATED.

And I'll be the n-th one to chime in that SHawshank and Pulp Fiction are masterpieces; Forrest Gump was a sappy after-school special by comparison.

The Rules For The Oscars Are Simple:

If Tom Hanks plays a retard, he wins.
 
atlas said:
Its a real guilty pleasure of mine, and something I keep really close to my chest for fear of alienating myself from other people, but I love playing the "Smart movies for dumb people" game. Smart movies for dumb people have really obvious symbolism, really obvious morality, and are transgressive in really predictable, pedestrian ways.

American Beauty is the alpha and the omega of Smart Movies for Dumb People, but Forrest Gump, Crash, and Dead poets society are all strong contenders for the worst.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree with the American Beauty comment. I loved that movie. I didn't find it to be obvious in symbolism or morality, nor was in transgressive in a predictable pedestrian way. Crash was all of the above.

Supertrav: how the hell can you call Dead Poets society great. Its way lame, I can't even verbalize what I despise about it, it makes me that angry. Plus, its just like patch adams, which I think we all agree is terrible.
Click to expand...

Dead Poets Society IS a great movie. I agree that it may have been a little heavy on the cheese factor, but comparing it to Patch Adams is uncalled for.

Believe me, I have a major problem with "smart movies for dumb people" as well (see: Crash), but I think you need to review your criteria a bit. There is a significant difference between a movie that is obviously and insultingly preachy and a movie that is dramatically stirring in a creative or thoughtful way. I mean, I kind of feel that way about "Shawshank Redemption". I enjoyed the movie for what it was, but I certainly don't understand why it is on so many people's top ten lists... but I sure as hell won't classify it as pandering to the lowest common denominator with it's message.

Personally, I think the "alpha and omega" of smart for stupid movies is "The Passion of the Christ"... but that's another thread all together.
 
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
I HATE lotr. SUX. Lost in Translation was so much better. The directing by sophia coppola was great. and the movie was infinitely more enjoyable than Lord of the Shit. Also Scarlett Johanson is much hotter than the hottest hobbit, Liv Tyler, IIRK she was a hobbit, right? or was she an elf??
 
Definitely Forrest Gump, in my opinion. How that could be judged Best Picture in a year that included Pulp Fiction & Shawshank is beyond me. Maudlin pap.

The main thing I take from this though is a reaffirming of just how incredible Hollywood's output was in the 50's & 70's. The nominations are just lists of classic after classic.

A few disagreements with what some (well, atlas :D ) have said in this thread: Shakespeare In Love is a great film, in my opinion. Lightweight in tone, yes, but very, very clever in its conceits & script, & worthy of 100 times the praise that is meted out to the lowest common denominator that seems to pass for film 'comedy' these days. Worthy of being spoken of in the same breath as The Godfather & Lawrence Of Arabia? No way; but to call it pedestrian trash is nonsense imo.

American Beauty: yes, its morality & symbolism aren't difficult to discern, & its central message has been done a thousand times before, but it features some stunning performances, fantastic cinematography & a perfectly judged script. You obviously think it's a load of shite - fair enough - but don't you think it's a little pompous to label it as a film that only 'dumb' people like? Going by your criteria, surely Dances With Wolves falls into that bracket as well? It too features obvious morality & symbolism to my eyes, but that doesn't detract from it being a truly great film that can be enjoyed by smart and dumb people, however you choose to define those arbitrary labels.

It seems that rather than just shrug your shoulders & say "Meh, it did nothing for me", you've chosen to believe that those who do see something of worth in it are lacking in intelligence. An odd stance to take, but maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top