stupid is...still stupid

[ironymaiden]

Forrest Gump has been on TV lately (and i saw it mentioned elsewhere online today). i loathe that film, and it won an Academy Award for Best Picture. i decided to see what other best picture winners (that i've seen) are hours of my life that i will never get back.

Forrest Gump
Titanic
You Can't Take It With You

i'm aware that lots of people disagree with me on these. (certainly the academy did.) the full list is here. anyone else have a best picture or a few that they can't stand?

Comments

[mrdorbin.livejournal.com]

Gladiator. What the hell. Also Braveheart, but they're basically the same movie, with different skirts.

[kijjohnson.livejournal.com]

American Beauty.

[webcowgirl.livejournal.com]

WOW someone else who will finally call a spade a spade. FG was a giant bag of poo and I could NOT understand why people liked it so much! Titanic was also a huge waste of cinema, basically a chick lit movie, but I'll say this: it was good to watch in the summer. All of that ice! At the end I was saying, "Die already!"

Thank God I missed "You Can't Take It With You," based on what I'm seeing as your impeccable taste, I'll avoid it with gusto from now.

[ironymaiden]

i will say that i hate You Can't Take It With You as only a theatre nerd can. it's a dated and unfunny eternally long horror that gets trotted out again and again. or doesn't get trotted out because no one knows what to do with the black servants. being in movie form just means that the explosions are less cheesy.

[refractednotion.livejournal.com]

I'll give you my least favorite nominee: Lost in Translation

So glad that was beat by LOTR.

[ironymaiden]

oh hells yeah. it never got better than the opening crawl across wosshername's ass. at least i thought it had artistic merit. the perfectly okay movie that didn't deserve a nomination was Little Miss Sunshine.

[refractednotion.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I can give Lost in Translation props for cinematography, but I hated the rest of it. What really bugged me was how so many artsie people with generally good taste thought it was fantastic. Blech.

Haven't seen Little Miss Sunshine yet, so I can't comment on that.

[ironymaiden]

it's like a long sitcom. it's not bad, but it's totally not one of the five best films of that year.

[steve98052.livejournal.com]

I thought Lost in Translation was wonderful. I understood both characters – a lot about their situations felt like events from my own circumstances, in ways that really connected with me. Even the lounge musician, with her small part, felt right. And the ending was wonderful (trying to say why without a spoiler for those who haven't seen it), with the way it left interpretation to the viewer.

However, I can understand why it doesn't work for everyone. Without the personal connection that drew me in, or a similar connection that works for someone else, the movie probably feels like just watching someone else's life.

And although hot cast members can't make a bad movie good, Scarlett Johansson's hotness was a bonus in what was already a wonderful movie for me.

However, although I defend the movie as a nominee, I wouldn't argue that it was the best of the field – just that it was a worthy nominee.

[buhrger]

i loathe that film
I Always Wear Terry Cloth!
what a waste of celluloid!

[sinthrex.livejournal.com]

Other than some of the ones already mentioned, I don't really have any more unfavourites other than Bores Us With Wolves.

I will say that I have put in my two cents already in that I have voted with my feet and not seen the vast majority of the winners.

[ironymaiden]

(hey, welcome home.)
i dug it in the theater when i was a kid and the natives-as-the-good-guys thing was a new concept. i saw part of it again on tv not long ago and i'm not sure how i stayed awake and focused back then - i think it was because the theater heating wasn't working properly. what did people see in Kevin Costner?

[miss-swamp.livejournal.com]

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is still the only movie ever to literally drive me to drink. Which doesn't mean it was bad; it had its intended effect and I hated it.

[markbourne.livejournal.com]

Forrest Gump - In spades.

American Beauty - Oh, sweet Jeebus, kill me now.

Oliver! Oliver! Oliver! Oliver! mutherfuckin' Oliver! - Please sir, may I have NO more? The year of 2001: A Space Odyssey to boot.

The Greatest Show on Earth - Famously bad choice, especially for the year of Singin' in the Rain, which wasn't even nom'd because of An American in Paris's win the year before.

The Deer Hunter - Beautiful but pompous even with sentiments I share.

The Broadway Melody (http://www.dvdjournal.com/quickreviews/b/broadwaymelody.q.shtml) - Okay, I can't hate it, but it has aged so, so poorly and is all but unwatchable. That it came out the year following the eminently watchable Sunrise (http://www.dvdjournal.com/reviews/s/sunrise_fsc.shtml) shows you everything you need to know about how difficult the "sound revolution" was on film artistry.

[steve98052.livejournal.com]

Long-winded though my reply was, I overlooked the fact that 2001: A Space Odyssey failed to get even a nomination for Best Picture. Of the 1968 nominees I've seen, The Lion in Winter deserved to win. But if we expand the field to include un-nominated films, 2001 should have won.

[markbourne.livejournal.com]

Agree completely re The Lion in Winter. If 2001 couldn't make the list, at least let the best movie on the list actually beat Oliver!. (Also out that year were Once Upon a Time in the West, Rosemary's Baby, and The Producers. So ... Oliver!?)

The Lion in Winter is a DVD I pull out occasionally for a favorite scene or just to hear John Barry's score. As mentioned here (http://www.dvdjournal.com/quickreviews/l/lioninwinter.q.shtml), it did take the New York Film Critics Circle's Best Film Award, plus Oscars for Hepburn, Barry, and writer Goldman, plus noms for O'Toole, the director, and others. A fine piece of work.

[steve98052.livejournal.com]

Speaking of The Lion in Winter, check out the third photo (of three) on this entry (http://steve98052.livejournal.com/72004.html) in my journal.

[markbourne.livejournal.com]

Oh, excellent! That's a terrific shot. I sure wish I'd paid attention to the SIFF schedule and attended Sir Tony's fete.

[steve98052.livejournal.com]

Going back in time . . .

2006: The Departed was a very good movie, but as an Oscar winner it's really a Lifetime Achievement Award dressed up in a Best Picture costume. Letters from Iwo Jima should have won, and all the other nominees should have been drawn from the foreign language category. Babel was a mess, and didn't deserve nomination (but Rinko Kikuchi was fantastic in her segment, which made the movie worth seeing).

2001, 2002, 2003: Fellowship of the Ring was the best of the Lord of the Rings films, and as a representative of the trilogy it should have won.

2002: How did Gangs of New York get nominated for anything other than set design?

2000: I loved Gladiator – up until the end of the forest battle. The film's made-up perversity is so much less interesting than the perversity alleged against the same emperor in historical sources. The computer graphics sucked; hadn't the film's graphics people heard of anti-aliasing? And the plot was lame. I'd rather see someone do another Spartacus; even if it's a poor shadow of the 1960 version at least they'd be starting with a decent source story.

1998: Shakespeare in Love? What the hell? It beat Elizabeth?

1997: Titanic was not a great film, but it was a good melodrama in a soft field. But the Oscar looked like an award for bringing money into the industry more than for the film-making. Even undeserving, I don't hate it like I hate some of the winners.

1996: Secrets and Lies should have won, but all five nominees were admirable films.

1995: How did Braveheart beat Apollo 13?

1994: Forrest Gump is another Oscar for bringing money into the industry. I guess Quiz Show didn't sell enough tickets.

1991: Why was The Prince of Tides nominated?

1990: Why was Ghost nominated?

1982: Why was E.T. the Extraterrestrial nominated?

1980s in general: Nice work, Academy.

1978: The Deer Hunter was a load of crap. I can only explain its win, or even its nomination, on the basis of reverence for its "important" subject matter. But by that reasoning the Rambo movies deserved nomination too.
  Even more bizarre than its Best Picture win, however, was its Best Sound win. The only time I've seen it was on DVD, and the sound was so awful I couldn't understand the dialogue without turning on the English-language subtitles, supposedly for the hearing-impaired. No, my hearing is fine; the sound sucked.

1970s in general: With the exception of The Ridiculous Russian Roulette Plot Device Hunter, nice work, Academy.

1968: Even though The Lion in Winter is the only nominee I've seen, I don't feel like I'm reaching to say it should have won.

1967: If In the Heat of the Night really is better than The Graduate, I must see it.

1965: The Sound of Music is painfully sappy, but I suppose it's well-refined sap. But a syrup award might have been more appropriate than an Oscar.

1964: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb is a case where just being nominated is an insult. But no fighting; this is the war room.

1963: The only nominee I've seen is Cleopatra, and it's a load of poo, piled into giant spectacle. But it's still a load of poo.

1950s in general: I've seen only a few of the nominees, but I applaud the 1950 choice, All about Eve. The 1959 choice, Ben-Hur, is also a worthy winner, even though the 1925 (which it ripped off, often shot-for-shot, adding sound) version was better.

1940s in brief: I've seen only a few of the nominees (which are particularly numerous until 1943, with ten nominees per year), but thumbs up for Casablanca (which I was fortunate enough to see in a new print in a nice theater not too long ago) and all the other nominees I've seen.

1939: Gone with the Wind is the Titanic of its era, but more tedious. How the hell did it beat The Wizard of Oz?

Before 1939: I've seen almost none of the nominees. Too bad the awards didn't start until 1927, because by then it was too late to give one to the 1925 Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ.

[pixxelpuss.livejournal.com]

Forrest Gump has been on my most hated list for years. I hated it.

I wasn't wildly fond of Gladiator, and thought that there was about an hour and half two much Braveheart. Broadway Melody hasn't aged well. I haven't seen Titanic, Kramer vs. Kramer, or Gone With the Wind out of a certainty that I'll dislike them. I also think Ben Hur and Olivier's Hamlet are painfully overrated. This may be them aging poorly also, I couldn't say.

[ironymaiden]

i remember an entire college theatre class bursting into gales of laughter at the "to be DUN DUN DUN or not to be" - we had been comparing various productions and as an isolated clip lined up against several other productions it was particularly bad.

Off Topic! Yay!

[boldfeather.livejournal.com]

I really really really didn't like Titanic. I had to listen to years of "wasn't that just the greatest movie ever?" from that man and his father (stoopid Titanic-loving freaks!) FG was sappy fluff that I willingly saw once and never want to see again. Even in moments between remote clicks.

And just to add a recent film that everyone has been gushing about - the latest Harry Potter flick. Did people stick ice picks up their noses before entering the theater? Did anyone even pay attention to it or were they just overly enamoured with the franchise? Gah.

Re: Off Topic! Yay!

[ironymaiden]

i dunno about the HP films. i saw the first one, and then the fourth one because my niece and nephew really wanted me to go with them. otherwise, i never need to see them. i'd rather read.

Potter films

[steve98052.livejournal.com]

The third Harry Potter film stands up pretty well as good film. The first two are great if your idea of "adaptation" is "audiobook with pictures", but as film they're duds. The fourth was better than the first two, but more a Potter-fanboy film than a film-geek film.

I haven't seen the fifth yet, because I want to go with my wife and she's in Norway. We have gone to some movies "together" by seeing them on the same day and comparing impressions by phone later. We're not doing that this time because it's out in Imax, but the Oslo Imax theater doesn't have it. Since we want to see it in Imax and the Seattle Imax has it for eight weeks, we can wait until she's home.

[matt-ruff.livejournal.com]

Totally with you on Gump. I need my inspirational heroes to do more than just show up.

I loved Titanic when it first came out, but noticed that for all the fanfare it seemed to have dropped off the cultural radar over the last few years. Then a couple weeks ago I caught a few minutes of it on cable and it seemed less impressive.

My other thumbs downs would include: Dances with Wolves, Driving Miss Daisy, Platoon (it's not bad, just overrated I think), and The French Connection, which, like a lot of '70s cop dramas (Dirty Harry is another) hasn't aged well.