Worst "best picture" winner of the decade

Post by **VanHelsing** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 10:38 am

i can't bring myself to go through another round of Titanic... heck, i didn't even manage to complete the film in my first viewing... makes me wonder how did it manage to have legs and gross so much at the box-office... guess majority wins afterall...

Post by **Franz Ferdinand** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 10:22 pm

Driving Miss Daisy, and Braveheart.

Post by **Hustler** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 5:34 pm

Braveheart

Sabin · Post by **Sabin** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:47 pm

For me, Braveheart hasn't aged very well. I have a lot of affection towards it because it was the first "adult" movie that I had ever seen. My father took me to the Cine Capri in Phoenix to see it and I was blown away, completely obsessed with it for years. My Oscar fanaticism took root when I just couldn't let up to everybody around me that it deserved to win every Oscar imaginable. I railed on Babe without having seen it and when Braveheart won, it was cathartic.

Babe shoulda had it.

There are many problems with Braveheart, MW. First and foremost, the film is acted to the point of hyperventilation. It seems like a Monty Python sketch whenever the characters are inside. The supporting characters are fine but pretty one-dimensional. And I have to bring up the whole A Beautiful Mind-clause in that A) it's okay for a film to play loose with facts, but B) not when it prevents the film from being more compelling. Gibson's affair with Sophie Marceau's princess A) never happened, but B) detracts from the love Wallace had for his wife. I don't mind if a movie fibs for greater entertainment value but this serves no purpose other than to bring sex into the final stretch. And so much else of the film never even began to happen that it's hard to forgive its excesses.

The battle scenes are good and the film doesn't seem three hours, so that's nice. Too much of Gibson's obnoxious worldview shines in (homophobia, masochism, martyrdom), so I hate to say it but the guy's compelling throughout. It's not my pick for worst choice, but it wasn't a good moment for the Academy.

Post by **MovieWes** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:21 pm

What's with all the hatred towards "Braveheart"? I think that of all the best picture winners of the '90s, "Braveheart" easily ranks second for me behind "Schindler's List."

Post by **HarryGoldfarb** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 6:12 pm

I can't believe The English Paient has more votes than Dances with Wolves and Titanic, both formulaic films... of course, I'm on The English Patient side...

As for 1988, I believe Dangerous Liaisons, though not a perfect film, it's by far better than both Rain Man and Mississippi Burning. I still see it and it catches me totally, Close, Pfeiffer and Malkovich can't be better, perfect score, perfect art direction and costume design, not to mention the great and difficult but ultimately accomplished work of adapting that novel... my choice for that year.

My vote on this was to Braveheart, not even when it was released and I was 15 years old, I liked that...

Post by **jack** » Thu Nov 13, 2003 5:39 pm

The winner/loser is The English Patient...

rudam · Post by **rudam** » Sun Mar 09, 2003 10:05 am

the nominations are

rain man
dances with wolves
unforgiven
forrest gump
braveheart

and the winner is...... forrest gump
with narrow margin by rain man and braveheart

Sabin · Post by **Sabin** » Sun Feb 23, 2003 3:08 pm

You thought Kevin Costner "shined" in Dances with Wolves? He was a mannequin! I will cop to thinking he was quite good in Bull Durham, JFK, A Perfect World, and Tin Cup but that's really all I can remember without actually feeling pain in my head.

Post by **criddic3** » Sun Feb 23, 2003 1:50 pm

I disagree with your view of Mississippi Burning. The one major criticism towards the film was characterizing a white FBI man as the good guy in the film. Yet I don't have a problem with Gene Hackman being the "hero" in the film. Sure, they hit us a little heavy at times, but the message is a sincere one and the film is one of the better titles from 1988. It is a powerhouse on the acting front and the writing was actually quite good.

Oh, and yes, people actually liked Kevin Costner. He is a good actor whose more recent roles have not given him the opportunity to shine as he did in Dances With Wolves or A Perfect World (my pick for best male performance of 1993).

Sabin · Post by **Sabin** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 6:05 pm

Dammit! Whenever I criticize Criddic, karma kicks me in the ass. I meant to vote for Dances with Wolves, not Schindler's List. I still have a hard time believing people actually liked Kevin Costner once upon a time.

Sabin · Post by **Sabin** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 5:45 pm

Well, I think Rain Man is decent enough but not as good as Mississippi Burning?!? That movie is terrible, just an ignorant white man's view of the South full of bad dialogue and dull direction. I don't mind a sledgehammer approach in something like Midnight Express where you have to feel the pain, but Mississippi Burning has the mentality of an action movie.

Post by **criddic3** » Sun Feb 09, 2003 12:32 am

oops, voted the wrong way; I voted the best for Schindler's List, not worst! The English Patient may be the worst, simply because it drags on much longer than necessary (although I admired much of it) and Rain Man was entertaining but not better than Mississippi Burning.

Post by **Aceisgreat** » Mon Jan 27, 2003 1:30 am

Had to go with Braveheart.

Post by **dws1982** » Sun Jan 19, 2003 2:08 pm

Dances With Wolves--by far. Nothing else even comes close.

Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

The internet's oldest Oscar discussion forum.

Worst "best picture" winner of the decade

Worst "best picture" winner of the decade