lovemerox wrote:
LOTR:ROTK
Blasphemy!!
Of course you entitled to your opinion. It's because I was in the film right? lol
| World of KJ http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/ |
|
| What are the WORST Oscar wins ever? Summary on Page # 4 http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=1642 |
Page 1 of 4 |
| Author: | Goldie [ Sat Nov 20, 2004 9:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | What are the WORST Oscar wins ever? Summary on Page # 4 |
What are the WORST Oscar wins ever? List that bad choice or also what you felt should have won in its place. |
|
| Author: | Goldie [ Sun Nov 28, 2004 9:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Guess no one has had any problems with any past Oscar winners, Maybe this year there will be some complaints. |
|
| Author: | Atoddr [ Sun Nov 28, 2004 10:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ok, how about A Beautiful Mind. It's not a bad movie but I thought The Fellowship Of The Ring, Moulin Rouge!, and Gosford Park were all better. |
|
| Author: | andaroo1 [ Mon Nov 29, 2004 12:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Braveheart. |
|
| Author: | lovemerox [ Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
LOTR:ROTK |
|
| Author: | matatonio [ Mon Nov 29, 2004 4:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Titanic |
|
| Author: | matatonio [ Mon Nov 29, 2004 4:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Titanic |
|
| Author: | Neostorm [ Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The English Patient :Sleep: |
|
| Author: | Libs [ Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Shakespeare in Love (a great movie) winning Best Picture over Saving Private Ryan (a masterpiece). |
|
| Author: | Chris [ Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Libs wrote: Shakespeare in Love (a great movie) winning Best Picture over Saving Private Ryan (a masterpiece). Agreed. Also, Braveheart winning over Fargo. |
|
| Author: | publicenemy#1 [ Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sean Penn winning for Mystic River. (ALL 4 of the other nominees were better) Beautiful Mind winning over Moulin Rouge! and Fellowship. |
|
| Author: | Dkmuto [ Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Chris wrote: Libs wrote: Shakespeare in Love (a great movie) winning Best Picture over Saving Private Ryan (a masterpiece). Agreed. Also, Braveheart winning over Fargo. It was actually The English Patient that won over Fargo. :wink: And while I enjoyed Braveheart, its win is proof that the Academy just loves its good ol' epics. |
|
| Author: | xiayun [ Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dkmuto wrote: Chris wrote: Libs wrote: Shakespeare in Love (a great movie) winning Best Picture over Saving Private Ryan (a masterpiece). Agreed. Also, Braveheart winning over Fargo. It was actually The English Patient that won over Fargo. :wink: And while I enjoyed Braveheart, its win is proof that the Academy just loves its good ol' epics. Also, that year had one confusing lineup and no frontrunners all along. It's also one of the weakest years ever in term of which films are nominated. The two strongest pictures coming in were Appolo 13 and Sense and Sensibility, and neither was able to get its director nominated, probably because there was still bias toward Ron Howard and Ang Lee. What else? Babe was an animated film, and Il Postino was a foreign language film. So if you analyze the field after the nominations, you have to say Braveheart was the logical choice for the academy members. That's why I wouldn't choose Braveheart as the most undeserving given what they nominated that year. As for which films they should've nominated that year, I'd pick The Usual Suspects, Toy Story, Dead Man Walking, and Leaving Las Vegas, and if Braveheart had beaten them, then I'd say it's definitely undeserving. |
|
| Author: | andaroo1 [ Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I would have taken any of the winners that year. I would rather have seen Howard win for Apollo (a much, much better film than A Beautiful Mind). Babe should have won that year though. |
|
| Author: | xiayun [ Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
For me, the worst win in recent years is Gladiator. No surprise, considering how I felt about Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. I also agree on Shakespear in Love over Saving Private Ryan and English Patient over Fargo. If we go way back, there is also The Greatest Show on Earth, probably the worst Oscar winner ever, over High Noon. |
|
| Author: | xiayun [ Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
andaroo wrote: I would have taken any of the winners that year. I would rather have seen Howard win for Apollo (a much, much better film than A Beautiful Mind). Babe should have won that year though. I'd choose Apollo 13 too, but without a best director nod and with Tom Hanks the 2-time reigning Best Actor, I knew they wouldn't go for Apollo 13. |
|
| Author: | Miruvor [ Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
lovemerox wrote: LOTR:ROTK Blasphemy!!
Of course you entitled to your opinion. It's because I was in the film right? lol |
|
| Author: | lovemerox [ Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mirûvor wrote: lovemerox wrote: LOTR:ROTK Blasphemy!! Of course you entitled to your opinion. It's because I was in the film right? lol lol, nah. Mystic River was more deserving. I think ROTK was good, but not that good. I also think 12 grams and Monster should have been nominated |
|
| Author: | neo_wolf [ Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Libs wrote: Shakespeare in Love (a great movie) winning Best Picture over Saving Private Ryan (a masterpiece). I agree.I was so pissed when it won over SPR. :evil: Others that didnt deserve to win: The english patient Gladiator A beautiful mind Chicago Chariots of fire Kramer Vs Kramer The Sting |
|
| Author: | Goldie [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 11:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
With the Oscars coming up, any other bad wins come to mind? |
|
| Author: | Riggs [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 12:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
andaroo wrote: Braveheart. Serious? |
|
| Author: | Riggs [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 12:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Worst Oscar Win Ever: Chicago |
|
| Author: | Goldie [ Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Let's hope that none get added to this list tommorrow night! Know what I mean? hehe |
|
| Author: | Maverikk [ Sat Feb 26, 2005 10:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Annie Hall beating Star Wars. |
|
| Author: | Groucho [ Sat Feb 26, 2005 11:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Geez, I may not always disagree with the Oscar winners, but usually the winner at least deserves the award, even if there was a better film that year in my opinion. I mean, "Shakespeare in Love" is a very good film that no one would be whining about if it "Saving Private Ryan" had been released a year later. To me, undeserved Oscar winners are those that shouldn't even have been nominated. Films that you just go "What kind of studio pressure got this film considered?" because there is no other reason for it to be there. Mostly, I'd say that was the case in the mid years of Oscar, where crappy big budget studio films like "Around the World in 80 Days", "The Greatest Show on Earth" and "Gigi" won. In the last 30 years though, I'd have to say the snore-fests "Chariots of Fire" and "Kramer verses Kramer" would be high on my list of "Why were these even nominated?" (espeially since they beat out "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "Apocalypse Now" -- I mean, does anyone even watch those two Oscar winners any more?) And this doesn't even go into the films that should have been nominated and never even were, like "2001" (which lost to "Oliver!"...) |
|
| Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|