Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Worst Best Picture
- Thread starter daimos
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
they are each perfect movies in their genres, so hard to fault one for not being a war firm
Can't tell the worst because I either have no seen them or can't remember them, but of the ones that should not be there No Country for Old Men, The Hurt Locker, Slumdog Millionaire, I would say Argo but can't remember it, Chicago imo is not Best Picture material, I really was upset by The French Connection.
Haven't seen them all and forgot a lot of them. Of those I've seen and recall. I'd probably choose "Crash"
As I recall it was just a bunch of unrelated short stories which somehow sloppily tied together at the end. It was so unremarkable. I just remember that it was dull with no real story. I don't even recall what it was about.
That year had "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire", "War of the Worlds" and "Batman Begins". Which were all far more entertaining and memorable. Of course there was "Star Wars: Episode III" but I wouldn't consider that best picture material.
None were even nominated. I haven't even seen any of the other nominated movies from the list that year. Nor were any of the nominated movies in the top ten grossing movies list of the year. Which is odd. As most years are loaded with nominees of really well known and popular movies. But 2005 went with the unpopular stuff.
As I recall it was just a bunch of unrelated short stories which somehow sloppily tied together at the end. It was so unremarkable. I just remember that it was dull with no real story. I don't even recall what it was about.
That year had "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire", "War of the Worlds" and "Batman Begins". Which were all far more entertaining and memorable. Of course there was "Star Wars: Episode III" but I wouldn't consider that best picture material.
None were even nominated. I haven't even seen any of the other nominated movies from the list that year. Nor were any of the nominated movies in the top ten grossing movies list of the year. Which is odd. As most years are loaded with nominees of really well known and popular movies. But 2005 went with the unpopular stuff.
I’d say this proves that the Academy Awards involve a lot of Hollywood centered politics/ecosystem and frequently are based on agendas other that just what is “best”, such as things like what might be best for my career, popularity contests, social agendas, paying homage, etc, and different opinions!
Although I remember liking Shakespeare in Love, in no way should it have beaten Saving Private Ryan, which is just one of many opinions. Of interest, in a conversation I was recently involved with I picked on both Out of Africa (1985) and The English Patient (1996) as “artsy” with the undertone of stories that suffered because of it, but that qualifier is very subjective when other things in the film don’t click for the viewer. I was not surprised to find these 2 plus SIL listed in this top 10 Worst Best Pictures article.
However I will acknowledge that different stories appeal to different people, which is just an observation, not a knock against personal taste. These movies included some excellent qualities, other than the stories did not appeal to me. And I suppose I could be critiqued on the large quantity of movies based on comics I regularly consume as entertainment, lol. Btw 1985, I would have given the award to The Color Purple, not Out of Africa. For 1996, I would have picked Fargo, which I though was an excellent black comedy.
The Oscars' 10 worst best picture winners ever, ranked (we're talking about you, 'Crash')
The Oscars aspire to honor Hollywood's best, but it doesn't always work out that way. The 10 worst movies to win best picture at the Academy Awards.
www.usatoday.com
Last edited:
I completely agree about "Crash" in fact I just remembered it when you brought it up. Also "Star Wars: Episode III" might be a candidate of best of the worst films
well it wasn't bad actually but far from a great film.
SW Episode 3 made me barf several times.I completely agree about "Crash" in fact I just remembered it when you brought it up. Also "Star Wars: Episode III" might be a candidate of best of the worst films
With each Best Picture for the past several years, the Academy has had its own agenda that it's been pushing. This isn't about what is the most technically proficient or the most artistic film; this is about picking a winner that taps into the zeitgeist and demonstrates the Academy has its finger on the pulse of society. Of course, because the Academy is so out of touch with the pulse of society, the majority of its winners have been WTF moments, and not just because the presenter was given the wrong envelope. But that's why they expanded Best Picture to include more nominees, so the Academy could demonstrate how woke it is without actually having to give the statuette to the true best picture.
I was shocked when Parasite won last year, not because it wasn't deserving, but because the Academy actually picked a Best Picture that balanced artistry with technical excellence and that told an engaging, socially relevant story.
I was shocked when Parasite won last year, not because it wasn't deserving, but because the Academy actually picked a Best Picture that balanced artistry with technical excellence and that told an engaging, socially relevant story.
More Best Picture nominees appears to me to be a mistake with mediocre entries needed to fill the bill.
Shakespeare in Love won for the originality of the themes, acting and dialog.
since titanic, english patient and Braveheart won the previous years,
the academy then had chosen a movie that was not long, war, or very over-budgeted.
oh, great movie!
since titanic, english patient and Braveheart won the previous years,
the academy then had chosen a movie that was not long, war, or very over-budgeted.
oh, great movie!