Page 1 of 1
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:04 pm
by Hustler
I´m going with P.T. Anderson´s movie.
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:35 pm
by Steph2
Sheesh, sorry.
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:33 pm
by OscarGuy
Of these ten films, which were the more critically acclaimed Best Picture losers of their year, which is the best. That's the poll. It's not which one deserved to win the most of all of them.
If you didn't know they were Best Picture nominees or winners and just had to view the list, which of these ten is the best. That was the purpose.
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:29 pm
by Sabin
...wait, so the purpose of this poll is Which film was the most critically favorored excluding the Best Picture nominee?
I give it to 'There Will Be Blood'.
Edited By Sabin on 1204565411
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:27 pm
by OscarGuy
You know that's just the kind of attitude I was hoping to avoid. We're picking the BEST of the films, not which one SHOULD have won more rightly over another.
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:11 pm
by Steph2
Brokeback. I prefer There Will Be Blood, but at least it lost to a great film whereas Brokeback lost to absolute crap.
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:44 am
by OscarGuy
Researching the films with the highest critics score among films that didn't win Best Picture, here's an interesting poll asking which of these films are the best non-winning Best Picture nominees of the last decade.
It was most interesting to look at both Meta Critic and Rotten Tomatoes on this. While Meta had Brokeback and There Will Be Blood with better ratings, RT had Good Night and Good Luck and Juno with higher. The reason I went with Meta Critic is because they average the highest score to get their score. RT goes based on "positives" so, Juno might have 94% positive reviews, but of those, the average is only 3 stars. There will Be Blood could have 91% but have an average of 3.5, so in the end, I went with the Meta Critic score comparisons.