Almost each year there's at least one so-called throwaway Best Picture nominee. By that I mean a movie that has ZERO chance at winning the Best Picture Oscar, yet is pretty solid for a BP nom before the nominations are actually announced. By throwaway, I don't want to make any statement about the films' quality, so don't get me wrong.

I just kinda find it interesting that each year, even when we've got a somewhat open race, there is always at least one film that is just there as a BP nom, but with absolutely no chance to win anything. I mean films that never even had that chance to begin with because of their small profile/small exposure/heavy competition...whatnot. What I also mean by that are films that wouldn't have even won in another year... Difficult to explain, but I think you get the gist.


Last year it was definitely Michael Clayton. I think the other four nominees were all at some point at least considered as potential winners (obviously it was clear that NCFOM would win by the end of December).

This year it looks to be Frost/Nixon. Nothing against it, but unlike TDK, Slumdog, Milk, Benjamin Button and WAL-E its chance to win is pretty much zero...and it would not be significantly different in another year. (as I said, that's not a statement about its quality).


So what do you think were the throwaway nominees in years before that? I'd say.


2006 - The Queen (despite big acclaim and the locked Best Actress win, this never stood a chance for Best Picture)

2005 - Good Night, and Good Luck and to a certain degree, Capote (I say to a certain degree because it actually wasn't absolutely clear as a nominee before the announcement).

2004 - Ray and Finding Neverland - never stood any chance to win, never had any case going for them.

2003 - Master and Commander (Even without ROTK, Mystic River and Lost in Translation would easily have been the frontrunners). I don't list Seabiscuit because it wasn't that expected, but rather Cold Mountain.

2002 - not sure if there has actually been one here, all had some advantages (even though Chicago was a clear frontreunner, IMO). If anything, then The Two Towers.

2001 - In the Bedroom and Gosford Park

2000 - Erin Brockovich

1999 - The Insider

I think 99 was probably The Cider House fucking Rules.

Nah. Not because it had any big chance to win, but because it has never been a solid nominee either. It missed a Best Picture nom at the Globes as well as a DGA nom. Which is kind of a biggie. Otherwise, it would have been on.

I would add Sideways to 2004.

At least Sideways won Best Picture at the Globes and sweeped the critics' awards. What I mean were films that really never stood any chance and didn't even win many precursors.

I'm guessing mostly.

2007 - Juno - Did it have more buzz besides the screenplay? God I hope not.
2006 - The Queen or Letters From Iwo Jima
2005 - Munich (sadly)
2004 - Finding Neverland
2003 - Master and Commander
2002 - Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers - Only because everyone knew, even the voters, that the big win was coming the next year when the entire series would get rewarded.
2001 - In the Bedroom
2000 - No idea
1999 - Cider House Rules

Sadly this year if it gets the honor I think the next addition to the list will be Wall-E. The nomination and the Animated Oscar will be considered good enough.

I wouldn't count Letters from Iwo Jima because basically many didn't even think it was a solid nominee in first place.

Also, Juno actually did have quite a case going for it, especially due to the big success.

this year they very well may all be [throwaway films not throwaway noms, obviously one must win, unfortunately].

If they nominated Frost/Nixon and/or The Reader and/or Gran Torino over TDK and/or Wall-E, I will puke blood. The Wrestler I could understand, but those three?

Seabiscuit was actually nominated by all four guilds, so it was probably a surer nominee than M&C (Which was completely snubbed by SAG and WGA), in addition to being a complete throwaway.

Finding Neverland at least was the NBR's #1 film of the year, that counts for something. I'd say 2004's was definitely Ray.

2002 and 2006 didn't really have any. The Queen could have won Screenplay in addition, Letters won something I forget and actually had decent strength in Director...

2002, I think the closest thing may have been Gangs, but that had an overdue Scorsese and a ton of tech noms. Sort of the same for Master & Commander.

The Queen could have won Screenplay and yet wouldn't have been a serious BP contender in the slightest. Just a movie that would never win. I don't think anyone at any point predicted it.

Point taken. Probably too small-scale. Had the reviews, which I think combined with Clint Power saved Letters.

The Queen was all about Best Actress. One of the biggest locks ever. But I recall most pundints playing it down for Best Pic. The Wrestler would be its equiavlent today.

The Queen was lucky to be nominated.

2008 - The Reader

this year has two -- The Reader and Frost/Nixon.

But come to think of it... I'm a wee bit worried about this illiterate bitch.

Ooh, you used the word "bitch." I can totally tell how frustrated you are with this nomination.

And it has 0% chance at winning.

No, I was going for a more sexist/casual use of the word bitch. Haven't seen The Reader yet, though I doubt it's better than the films it got nominated in place of (namely Wall-E). But even if I had found it better, I would prefer an animated film/comic book movie cracking this category over a Holocaust drama (not called Schindler's List) any day, simply because they really need to open up to all kinds of movies, something that they obviously haven't done yet.

No one (almost) saw The Reader coming, so it does not qualify. Frost/Nixon was one that everyone (sane) saw coming and yet we all knew it would never ever win.