Best Picture Oscar Winners : The Good, The Bad and The Really?

I generally agree with this because as I said, the Oscars are a reflection of the Academy and how it works. Regarding ET, I never have taken to it but have loved the music from day 1, and I recognize how entertaining it was for so many people. I think Blade Runner had better visual effects and cinematography (which wasn't nominated but won the BAFTA), but it was rightly criticized at the time for its weak script, and that hasn't improved with re-evaluation. Although I love the film, I see its flaws. I agree that King of Comedy (and DeNiro) should have at least been nominated.

 

u need to stop sitting alone in your room

 

I don't like the movie. Ya don't gotta agree, but odd comments about me "sitting alone in my room" have nothing to do with my lack of affection for the film:

Cabaret [Blu-Ray Book] (1972)

 

It’s the line from the song “Cabaret.”

 

Oops! Obviously I don't remember the lyrics very well!

 

Hey, it took me a couple of minutes to realize what he meant—and I like the movie.

 

An embarrassment of riches.

It's still shocking to me that Gene Hackman wasn't nominated for The Conversation. Shocking!

Although All That Jazz would be my pick for Best Picture, I really like Kramer vs. Kramer. It still holds up for me. Both actors were terrific in the film. I thought Streep did an excellent job of playing a character who makes some poor choices but somehow she makes you empathize with her.

 

Agreed. I think this has always been the case regarding the Oscars - Hollywood leans towards choosing films that best represent how the industry sees itself and how it wants to be seen by others. Everyone's got their own beef about which movie won for a particular year - and which one should have (for the record, mine is Kevin Costner's pretentious Dances With Wolves over Scorsese's Goodfellas).

While I prefer the gutsier All That Jazz, Kramer vs. Kramer is no Lifetime movie, either. I agree - Hoffman and Streep were terrific and here's a fascinating, yet very frank article about the making of Kramer vs. Kramer and how both actors found their way into the material. With a special appearance from Christopher Reeve, who might as well worn the red cape for services rendered.

How Meryl Streep Battled Dustin Hoffman, Retooled Her Role, and Won Her First Oscar

 

Substitute The Man Who Would Be King for Barry Lyndon and I would agree it’s better than 1972.

 

Surprised no one's mentioned 1939 as a banner year for Oscar nominees.

It's bloated because they had 10 noms that year, but 1939 had:

-Gone With the Wind
-Wizard of Oz
-Stagecoach
-Of Mice and Men
-Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
-Love Affair
-Ninotchka
-Dark Victory
-Goodbye Mr. Chips
-Wuthering Heights

Pare that list to 5 and it's tough to top!

 

I seem to be in the minority, but I like "Lyndon" - I think it's one of SK's better movies.

I think they should've nominated "The Man Who Would Be King of the Popes":

 

Good choice. DWW spawned so many awful movies on its own, including more from Costner himself.

 

But you also like The Man Who Would Be King—I just checked your site. Then we would agree about 1975.

 

I do! Not sure I ever really considered it "Oscar-worthy", but it's a good movie.

If we're gonna lose a 1975 flick, I'd drop "Nashville"...

 

No way! That’s my favorite of the year. I love all its gimmicks.

 

Another excellent year I don't think we've mentioned: 1976.

-Rocky (winner)
-Taxi Driver
-All the President's Men
-Bound for Glory
-Network

That's at least as good as 1975 - and probably better!

 

Bound for Glory is beautiful-looking but otherwise meh.

 

I get the influence of "Nashville" and maybe if I'd seen it when it was new, it'd have made more of an impact.

But now, all I see is the wafer-thin nature of the whole thing.

I like the scenes where Gwen Welles gets nekkid, though!

 

I would agree, but I still think 1976 was a stellar year.

I don't think "BfG" is worse than "Nashville"!

 

When Barry Lyndon is the weak link in a year of Best Picture noms -- it was a very good year.



Oh, Barry Lyndon sends Dog Day Afternoon to obedience school.

 

I just looked through a list of 1976 movies, and it’s hard to improve on that list. I would have replaced BfG with Carrie, but there’s no way Oscar would have, and you probably wouldn’t either.

 

Yep, which is why it’s the #2 year on my list.

And certainly better than 1976. (That’s for Oatsdad. )

 

Little Big Man does what Dances with Wolves wants to do, does it better, and is fifty times more original, fun, and exhilarating

 

Carrie or maybe even The Omen but agreed, hard to improve.

Back when I did the Best Films of the 70s thread, I was surprised at just how many good films were made in 72 and 73. I had always thought 76 was the peak, but those earlier years seem to be the sweet spot for the output of "New Hollywood." You can certainly make a strong case for the Best Picture Oscar nominees in 75 and 76, but if you look through the list of films made in 72 and 73, I think you'll find the range and depth of American filmmaking at that point is astounding.

The Best Films of the 70s: A year by year discussion thread

 

Some really good one's mentioned already; "How Green Was My Valley" over "Citizen Kane", "Ordinary People" over "Raging Bull" and "Dances with Wolves" over "GoodFellas".

How about the 41st Academy Awards (1969):

"Oliver!" (winner)
"Funny Girl"
"The Lion In Winter"
"Rachel, Rachel"
"Romeo and Juliet"

Now, Carol Reed is one of the finest British directors ever, ask BFI and they'll tell you. But "Oliver!" isn't his finest hour.

Notably absent from the Best Picture nominees that year was "2001: A Space Odyssey". In my mind, that might be the biggest snub ever. It wasn't even nominated. Granted, a number of critics derided the film (Pauline Kael called it "a monumentally unimaginative movie"); ironic because if it's nothing else — it's a film about creativity and grandiose ideas.

In fact, it may surprise people but a number of some of what are now considered to be the greatest films ever (AFI, Sight & Sound, Time Out, etc) were never nominated for Best Picture.

Here's a list of (mostly) quality films that were not nominated for Best Picture. Some of the most glaring from the list:

1927/28: "Sunrise", "Metropolis"
1932: "Trouble in Paradise"
1937: "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs"
1940: "Pinocchio"
1946: "Brief Encounter", "Notorious", "The Big Sleep", "My Darling Clementine"
1947: "Black Narcissus"
1948: "Red River"
1950: "The Third Man"
1952: "Singin' In the Rain"
1954: "Rear Window"
1957: "Sweet Smell of Success"
1960: "Psycho"
1962: "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence"
1966: "Blow-Up"
1969: "The Wild Bunch", "Easy Rider", "Once Upon a Time in the West", "Medium Cool"
1972: "The Last Tango in Paris"
1973: "The Long Goodbye", "The Last Detail"
1978: "Days of Heaven"
1979: "Being There", "Manhattan"
1981: "Ragtime"
1989: "Do the Right Thing"
1991: "Boyz N the Hood"
1992: "The Player", "Malcolm X"
2000: "Almost Famous"
2008: "The Dark Knight"

When I looked through that list many of the Best Picture snubs I could understand: 'too political', 'too dark', 'too controversial', whatever. But the one that is the biggest head-scratcher for me is still "2001". I mean, it did quite well at the box office finishing in the Top 5 in '68 and while some critics piled on others, like Roger Ebert, found meaning: "It was e. e. cummings, the poet, who said he'd rather learn from one bird how to sing than teach 10,000 stars how not to dance. I imagine cummings would not have enjoyed Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey," in which stars dance but birds do not sing. The fascinating thing about this film is that it fails on the human level but succeeds magnificently on a cosmic scale."

Also, not nominated for Best Picture.