Worst Best Picture

An Entertainment Weekly writer recently named "American Beauty" as the worst film to ever win Best Picture.

I personaly strongly disagree with this statement, and wondered who I'd give the title to.

Without putting a whole lot of thought into it, I'd say "Dances With Wolves," "Titanic," or "Chicago."

What are your thoughts?

EW are obviously morons if they consider Mendes' masterwork the worst Best Picture winner.

It's not just that I consider it a masterwork, but the worst to win BP? How about the dozens of other films.

Yeah, I agree. You should've seen the context too, the writer stated it with such confidence like it was common knowledge.

What film would you pick, Don V?

I'd need to look over all the winners to pick. I don't consider myself a very strict film viewer, but many little things piss me off, like the good film Rocky beating Scorsese's masterpiece Taxi Driver.

yeah if they were really handing out the awards for the best every year, Scorsese would have 5 or 6 awards, De Niro other 5 or 6, Pacino 3 or 4, and they wouldn't make as much money as they do promoting lesser films like Chicago or Titanic. now, saying American Beauty is the worst out of BP winners is worth of pitty. it is among the best out of BP winners, and probably not even in the top 20 out of those that didn't win anything. :rolleyes:

1927-28: WINGS
1928-29: BROADWAY MELODY
1929-30: ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT
1930-31: CIMARRON
1931-32: GRAND HOTEL
1932-33: 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: CASABLANCA
1943: MRS. MINIVER
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
1950: ALL ABOUT EVE
1951: AN AMERICAN IN PARIS
1952: THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH
1953: FROM HERE TO ETERNITY
1954: ON THE WATERFRONT
1955: MARTY
1956: AROUND THE WORLD IN EIGHTY DAYS
1957: THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI
1958: GIGI
1959: BEN HUR
1960: THE APARTMENT
1961: WEST SIDE STORY
1962: LAWRENCE OF ARABIA
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:
1971: THE FRENCH CONNECTION
1972: THE GODFATHER
1973: THE STING
1974: THE GODFATHER PART II
1975: THE DEER HUNTER
1976: ROCKY
1977: ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST
1978: ANNIE HALL
1979: KRAMER VS. KRAMER
1980: ORDINARY PEOPLE
1981: GHANDI
1982:
1983: TERMS OF ENDEARMENT
1984:
1985:
1986: THE LAST EMPEROR
1987: OUT OF AFRICA
1988: RAIN MAN
1989: DRIVING MISS DAISY
1990:
1991: THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS
1992: DANCES WITH WOLVES
1993: UNFORGIVEN
1994: SCHINDLER'S LIST
1995: FORREST GUMP
1996: SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE
1997: TITANIC
1998: THE ENGLISH PATIENT
1999: AMERICAN BEAUTY
2000: GLADIATOR
2001: A BEAUTIFUL MIND
2002: CHICAGO
2003: LORD OF THE RINGS
2004: MILLION DOLLAR BABY
2005: CRASH

That's every Best Picture winner from the beginning up until now. Where there's a blank, I couldn't recall as I stopped paying close attention to winners after the early 1970's. Also, I might have the years wrong on a few of the more recent ones. (Feel free to enlighten me if you can and I'll edit along the way)

But...although there were certainly years where there were other nominated films more deserving than those that won, I can't see how out of ALL THAT, anyone can simply decide on the WORST. Least deserving, maybe...but not worst.

Apple

What a fucking retard.

A complete list of the best picture winners can be found here by the way.

Oh, sure...anybody can post a link.

I did my list almost entirely from memory ... and could've includes Best Actor/Actress for each year as well, if it were relevant to the thread.

:p

Apple

Bravo That's pretty amazing.

Of the 50 or so that I've seen and have a good memory of, I think that "Rain Man" is the only one that I'm really surprised to see that it won for Best Picture. As I think back on it, it seems like just another movie that had some cute moments. I don't know what the other Best Picture nominees were that year, but The Accused, A Fish Called Wanda, and Accidental Tourist won the other major awards.

I like Dustin Hoffman, but Kramer v. Kramer has a claim on just the tiniest speck in my memory now. It somehow seems more out-of-date than say, The Godfather. They talked a lot through half-closed doors, right?

For what it's worth, Kramer v. Kramer is now ranked #10,079 in DVD sales on Amazon. Some other contenders: Ordinary People (Amazon #2327), English Patient (#2077), Rain Man (#2076), and Chicago (#955).

Kramer vs. Kramer was one that I specifically remember being surprised at when I saw how it basically swept the major awards at the Oscars that year (1979?). I had never really heard of it before, and I don't hear much about it whenever people are talking about good films.

I think you've got several different years going, there.

Not positive, but I believe that the year Dustin & Kramer won, the other winners were as follows:

Best Actress: Sally Field for 'Norma Rae'
Supporting Actress: Meryl Streep for 'Kramer'

Geena Davis did win Supporting Actress for 'The Accidental Tourist' but that was way later than 1979. Same goes for Jodie Foster in 'The Accused', and Kevin Kline for 'A Fish Called Wanda'. If I recall correctly all those movies came out well into the 1980's.

Apple

The Accidental Toursit and The Accused BOTH came out in 1988.


Don Cardi

I love it, it's in my favs list.
The cast is amazing, you practically cannot decide who is the best, either Dustin Hoffmann or Maryl Streep. The script is great too. You can say it is a bit of a tear jerker and overcorrect, but that's possibly why it swept all the major Academy awards... :p

I disagree with that Entertainment Weekly writer, 'cause I think American Beauty is a very good movie. A most poignant one. BUT I cannot agree with you either. I absolutely LOVE Titanic!

American Beauty = Masterpiece
Titanic, Chicago = Very Average

The only thing good about Titanic is it's passion from Cameron, especially with the special effects. The actual story is weaker then most make it out to be, and the Deon song is horrible. I consider it a decent film, but ridiculously overrated.

Titanic was a piece of trash.

While we have to give credit to Cameron's attention to technical details and recreation of the ship...that stupid dumb love story that took up 2/3 of the film and made the sinking itself a secondary subplot pretty much ruined it for me.

I think 'As Good As It Gets' was the far better film that year. Still a favorite of mine...won Best Actor/Actress for both Jack Nicholson & Helen Hunt.

Apple

I didnt like Gladiator or Beautiful Mind all that much.

To the ones who don't like Titanic.

I'm so sorry for you: apparently you haven't got a clue what the word "romantic" means and boy! you miss soooo much. The love story may be sappy, implausible and all, but it just meant love can defeat death.

Sorry, I get rather aggressive when my fav movies are getting offended...

too bad for you.... :p

Gladiator, IMO is a great epic supported by a taut direction and great acting. Not to mention proof the historical epic isn't dead yet.

A Beautiful Mind, like Howard's other films, is bad. It relies on music to set a mood that the rest of the film can't live up to, though Crowe was very good in it.

As for not knowing what romantic means, yeah, because Titanic is the only way one could appreciate cinematic romance. No need to feel sorry for me at least, I've seen plenty of romance outside Titanic.

Casablanca, Annie Hall, Gone With the Wind, In a Lonely Place, À bout de souffle, etc.

The best cinematic depiction of love between a man and a woman I can think of is A Woman Under the Influence.

As for 1997, I need to rewatch As Good As it Gets, though I think the best films from that year are Insomnia, Year of the Horse, and Jackie Brown.

who said Titanic is the ONLY way? Not me, I said Titanic is definitely a romantic movie. If you cannot see it, it's because your romantic side is a little blind IMO. :p

i personally did not like shakespeare in love....that one shoulda been the worst! lol...but i for some reason never seen american beauty..maybe ill get on that...and o yea...titanic did suck..uneventful...no surprise ending or nothing! haha

Romance and love 'defeating death' is wonderful and has a place in many films. There were many real life stories that emergecd from the Titanic disaster that could have been depicted. Instead, we got this fictional, arrogant 'Jack/Rose' barf-fest that in my opinion simply cheapened the tragedy.

I'm so sorry for you, Lavinia from Italy. If 'sappy, implausable' love stories are your thing, that's wonderful. Apparently you haven't got a clue of even a fraction of really took place on that night in April, 1912. And are probably not even interested.

Apple

I'm so sorry for you, Lavinia from Italy. If 'sappy, implausable' love stories are your thing, that's wonderful. Apparently you haven't got a clue of even a fraction of really took place on that night in April, 1912. And are probably not even interested.

Apple [/QUOTE]

this time, Apple, you immortalized yourself. This is so insulting that I couldn't believe what I was reading. Even coming from you.

Just the THOUGHT of something romantic lasting 3:15 is exhausting.

THIS time?

Sorry dear...I was simply borrowing words from your own post, which was (IMO) far more insulting to all (..the ones who don't like Titanic..) at whom it was directed.

But of course, we're ALL entitled to our own opinions ...

Apple

the difference is that I put a smiling face after my post, while you put a nice vomiting one and most of all you assumed I don't know anything about the Titanic tragedy and that I am not even interested in it. Many Italian immigrants died in that tragedy. I'm much interested in the disaster, if only for that. But it was cinema we were talking about. Cinema. It's a fictious thing. Fictious love stories are perfectly allowable, even in a historic frame.

Anyway, this is a closed case for me. I'm not interested at all in sharing thoughts with people who are constantly in a biting mode. CIAO!

Cameron, or indeed any filmmaker for that matter, has no obligation to teach us a history lesson. That his film is set on Titanic's voyage (and indeed named after the ship) is secondary to the story, which, let's face it, could have been depicted elsewhere.

How anyone could both praise his efforts at "technical detail" and then criticise the film for not showing a real-life story from "that night" is something of a paradox, no?

What are my thoughts on Titanic? I think it's brilliant; hated by many because of its box-office success, loved by others for much the same reasons.

There've been worse Best Pictures, though my interest in Oscar has gradually waned over the years; who, I wonder, is interested in any other film festival awards ceremonies? Cannes? Sundance? Berlin? Venice?

Hmm...

I kind of lost interest in independent film festivals when I saw all the awards the one festival had given Barton Fink, which I thought was an average film.

Yes, a little quick to judge, but thats what did it for me.

As for me, I was just referring to your reference of not knowing what romance is for not liking Titanic.

Whatever. You apparently don't if you truly think Titanic is the standard bearer for romance.

'Love defating death?' Jack dies!

The relationship would've never happened if you look at it realistically. Rich, engaged woman falls in love with poor drifter? Uh, no.

The relationship would've never happened if you look at it realistically. Rich, engaged woman falls in love with poor drifter? Uh, no. [/b][/quote]I dusagree, though I still think it has a poor impact.

So how come you're still interested in the most unjust awards ceremony in the film industry?

Emphasis on industry.

Good point

probably publicity reasons, and just all the clout that goes along with winning an Oscar. Plus the fact that they're not always wrong; Godfather, Godfather Pt II, American Beauty, etc.

I agree with all of that. However, the film was named after the doomed ocean liner, and it's that story that initially brought people in. It's unfortunate that the fictional story of Jack & Rose did not play a secondary role to the tragedy, instead of the other way around.

And again...there are many 'true' stories of love and courage that happened that night. It's a shame that Cameron didn't research and elaborate on one of those, instead of feeling the need to create that nonsense. Did we really need the sex in the car? Did we really need Jack being framed and handcuffed to a desk and left to drown, only to be saved by Rose in one of the dumbest, most unrealistic scenes I've ever seen? I remember really losing it when the fiance of Rose (evil rich guy, of course) began shooting at Jack. And again when Rose hid from the guy next morning on the Carpathia.

What bullshit. What trash. What a shame.

Apple

Actually, I liked Titanic. I don't know if I'd consider it worthy of an Oscar, but I did enjoy it. I think that Cameron did include several "true" characters, and the research on the ship, getting all those details right, was an outstanding job.

Yes, he did. Such as Molly Brown, ship builder Thomas Andrews, and of course Captain Smith & the crew. And Cameron's attention to detail was outstanding; the only reason in my opinion that it did become Oscar worthy. Still though, the fabricated Jack/Rose story was dominant and that's what stinks.

I have to admit that my being a Titanic buff for the past 30 years has alot to do with my complete disgust with the film. Obviously it was enjoyable to many who are not quite as interested in the tragedy itself.

Apple

Apple, If you are a Titanic buff, I suggest a visit to Halifax, Nova Scotia. As you probably know, Halifax was where the survivors were taken and the center of the recovery effort. They have a maritime museum with a very interesting Titanic exhibit. Also, many of those that died when the ship sank are buried there, including one child that was unidentified until recent DNA tests confirmed who he was. We took a tour of the cemetery, and there is a J. Dawson buried there, but no relation.

Jack's death is exactly where it is shown that love defeats death. He dies just in order to let her live. Live also for him, as he in fact asks her before dying. And Rose is in fact going to have a long, long and full life, always cherishing the memories of Jack. At the end, Rose and Jack will be reunited after Rose's death, as the touching scene with all the Titanic victims applauding shows us. Love defeating death is, btw, a very old concept since Greek myth and possibly earlier. A love that survives after one partner's death is definitely stronger than time and death itself. An inspiration for a huge amount of works of art in every age.

Trouble is you shoudn't look at it realistically, IMO. This way you'd lose all the magic. You look realistically at a documentary, not at a movie. A movie - as any other work of art - is the free creation of the human geniality, where there are not other rules but art itself, not a mathematic formula. I dare say, borrowing a Shakespeare's most famous quote, cinema (at least when it is not purposely "realistic" in a documentaristic sort)is "such stuff as dreams are made on".
Are dreams supposed to be realistic? No way.

well, she was very unhappy as well. Jack was poor but he was a real human being, with blood in his veins, "air in his lungs" and a genuine passion for life, not a stiff dummy. But then again, it that really important? Let yourself jump in the love story, savour every bit of it. Let your imagination freely flow through the scenes. You'll enjoy it to pieces.
Otherwise I surrender. Too bad for you! :p

The only thing I liked about Titanic was Rose's dress in the painting scene

To be sure so did I!

I'm sorry, but there wasn't room on that door for poor Jack? Rose couldn't have moved her fat butt over a little? :p

I'm sure there are many documentaries out there to document the tragedy of the Titanic disaster. But I see no need for Cameron to give me something more realistic than he did. The atmosphere of the ship was enough, and sufficiently achieved in my opinion. Take, for instance, the scene where the captain waits at his wheel for the water to come gushing in, or, during the same montage I believe, the old couple lying on the bed with the water flooding around them. Not once, during that montage, did I question if that actually happened; the feelings it conjured in me overrided that.

Like I said, I don't watch the film for a history lesson, nor does Cameron have any responsibility to give us one.

Actually, that was based on a real life older couple who went down with the ship. Mrs. Strauss refused to leave her husband's side to get in a lifeboat. When a seat was offered to Mr. Strauss because of his age, he also refused to get in ahead of the other men. So...although it's unlikely they returned to their cabin bed to await the end like the two in this trash movie...the Strauss's is indeed one of the true life 'love' stories of the Titanic tragedy.

Incidentally, the Strauss's were the owners of Macy's Department store and quite wealthy.

Apple

Really? Cool. Thanks for the insightful info.

Though my point stands: that it didn't matter, and it still doesn't, whether or not that particularly happened. My emotions were not influenced in any way.

Perhaps I would feel differently, more involved, if I held more personal attachment or even historical interest in the voyage.

For now, I don't.

Hi, Capo...as stated previously I agree with you that Cameron had no obligation to provide us with only historical facts, nor does any other filmmaker when making a movie based on a true story.

I'll also stand by my point though, that the fictional, fabricated, nonsensical, rich v. poor love story of Jack & Rose made it into a piece of trash.

So I guess in keeping with the original theme of the thread, Titanic gets my personal vote for the 'WORST Best Picture'.

Best,
AppleOnYa

I remember hearing a similar morbidly amusing anecdote about the Titanic disaster. There was some businessman, who was known as a heavy sleeper, and they say that supposedly there were efforts to wake him up by pounding on his locked door while he was sleeping but to no avail, so he evidently slept through the whole thing and died. :rolleyes: