Reply With Quote
Hurt Locker deserved it for sure, agree with the rest of your post.
So how many times has the Academy ed up on the Best Picture award? Not even getting into movies that weren't even nominated, but just among nominated movies, they screw this up so bad it's not even funny.
2010 - King's Speech wins, I'd argue that True Grit, Inception, and The Social Network all deserved it FAR more.
2009 - The Hurt Locker wins, it's debatable but there's a case to be made for Inglourious Basterds or A Serious Man.
2008 - Slumdog wins in an overall really ty year for movies. I'll refrain from even mentioning a certain movie about Batman so that the cheese s who hate the movie because everyone else loves it will keep their ing traps shut.
2007 - No Country For Old Men wins, not bad but There Will Be Blood definitely was the better movie.
2005 - Crash wins only because the Academy fears gay sex.
2003 - LOTR and it's 9 hour ending win over Lost In Translation, which is one of the biggest crocks of ever. Same with Sean Penn beating Bill Murray, a travesty of epic proportions.
2000 - Gladiator over Traffic. re ed.
and we could keep going on and on and on.
So the Academy Awards are ing stupid. Tell Us Something We Don't Already Know Forum.
Hurt Locker deserved it for sure, agree with the rest of your post.
I didn't know slumdog won over batmanThat movie is so . North Americans are just mystified at the regular indian lifestyle
Shakespeare in Love is probably the most egregious. ing Weinstein brothers.
Since the Oscars are voted on and not an exact science who is to say they haven't gotten them right each time based on the votes? IMHO, even those in the movie business disagree and who is to say that YOU have it right? Just like the MVP vote, All-Star, GG's etc..unless they are based and facts and not opinion then there is no true right or wrong.
This is why these major award ceremonies are to be avoided. They're long, often wrong, and at the end of the day even if they make solid selections, it doesn't really matter because it's all stupid. Hollywood sucking off Hollywood.
Lol movies, pretty lame to care this much, or at all.
Ima have to go with young Alvie on this one
I don't mind when the film that wins Best Picture is at least good enough to not feel out of place within the list of nominees. That's how I felt this year. The King's Speech wouldn't have been my choice, but I thought it was a really good film.
Not even in the same league of WTF-ness as when Chicago beat Gangs of New York and The Pianist. Or Gladiator beat not only Traffic (as pointed out in the OP), but also Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Erin Brockovich, and Chocolat.
hi mike
And don't even get me started on anic beating LA Confidential.
anic
1. Inception does not deserve a Best Picture award. Give me a break.
2. I question the sanity of anyone who thinks that Avatar was better than Hurt Locker.
3. There Will Be Blood got robbed. Easily one of the decade's best.
But the real travesty is Forrest Gump beating out Shawshank Redemption.
The King's Speech was great. You can make the case for Social Network but Inception? no. True Grit? now you're just trollin
Two biggest robberies: Shakespeare in Love beating Saving Private Ryan (seriously, what the ) and Ordinary People beating Raging Bull (imo one of the best films ever made). I'm biased, but whatever. Altogether I'm ing sick of fru-fru british movies winning best picture, or even being nominated anymore.
I don't even watch to see who wins Best Picture anymore...to me, it's about the In Memoriam and even this year's segment got screwed up by Celine Dion being involved with it. Don't have a problem with King's Speech winning as it was a well thought out and executioned movie, but how in the did Kramer vs. Kramer beat out Apocalypse Now or the biggest travesty of all, Dances With Wolves beating out Goodfellas in 1990...
+1 on Apocalypse Now. I don't have as much a problem with Dances With Wolves because it was an excellent movie. I would've preferred Goodfellas too, but it wasn't an egregious misstep on the academy's part imo
anic over Fargo pissed me off
I would've been biased because Goodfellas is one of my all-time favorites. I mean, Dances With Wolves was a great movie, I just didn't think it deserved to win it over Goodfellas. But, that's probably why we have these debates since there can never really be a consensus over what movie is the best of them all. I mean, Biutiful was an excellent movie and most people didn't see that one.
Fargo definitely could've won it that year as well...
You mean The English Patient? anic won it the next year going against L.A. Confidential and Good Will Hunting
Also, Se7en should have won in 95 (it wasn't even nominated), Pulp Fiction in 94, Goodfellas in 90. Basically, Scorcese's movies should have won multiple times.
I agree with There Will Be Blood being a superior movie to No Country For Old Men.
I don't know if it was 'superior' to No Country, but it could have easily won the award.
Good lookin' out, it was TEP...yet another fru-fru british movie
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
