in other words, have you watched a film that won an oscar or two and thought that the film was overrated and didn't deserve to win all those or that many awards? and give your reasons as to why you didn't like it
2006-11-27 06:03:01 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
There's been a lot of undeserved winners, but Paul Haggis' Crash that won last year for Best Picture and Best Screenplay might be the absolute worst. I'd say Crash is one of the worst movies I've ever seen, period. (Unlike Haggis' Million Dollar Baby and Casino Royale (he wrote the screenplay) both of which I enjoyed). Why? Oh, man. How long of an answer are you willing to read? I'll try and summarize.
First, because Crash is supposedly about race issues, and yet it is probably the most unrealistic portrayal of racism I have ever seen. Most racist people (at least the one's I've seen or been around) do not immediately start spouting off every racist thought in their heads when they're around people they're predjudiced against like they do in Crash. Racist people usually keep their racist comments within their little circles, making jokes or saying hateful things in private.
Second, Crash is supposed to be about challenging racism and ignorant, racial sterotypes, but it actually reinforces them. Take how they portray the Middle-Eastern shopkeeper. They make him irrational and prone to anger and violence. What does he do when he mistakenly thinks he is cheated? Immediately buys a gun and tries to murder the guy! Way to explode predjudiced American conceptions of all Middle-Easterners being violent, potential terrorists.
Third, flawed, racist characters are redeemed way too easily. For example, why would Dillon, the racist cop, all of a sudden care about saving the life of the black woman he completely humiliated only recently, especially when his own life was on the line? This seems very inconsistent with the deeply entrenched racist attitudes he supposedly has. First Haggis tells us that racism is a persistent and deeply rooted in American's attitudes. Then he shows a hard-line racist feeling compassion and risking his life for a person he hates in the blink of an eye for no apparent reason. Some movies use contradictory ideas to add to the complexity to what is being said. In Crash all we get is confused inconsistency.
There's so many other things, but this is going to be too long as it is, so I'll wrap it up. Aside from everything else, Crash wasn't a fun or a compelling or a pleasant movie to watch. It felt I was seeing a long, preachy, artificial, morality play that was designed to win an Oscar. Pretty much every character seemed so fake and removed from reality that I could not take them seriously. The plot was just as unbelievable and contrived. And that last scene - I just couldn't believe it when Haggis brings us right back to the beginning with another car crash and the camera pans up to the sky. It's like he's winking, shrugging his shoulders and saying, "Here we go again," in this cutesy, totally inappropriate way considering how many huge, serious issues he left unresolved.
Sorry about the length, but I really hated this movie, and I am totally mystified at the how many people and reviews thought it was so great. Crash didn't even deserve to be nominated for an Oscar, let alone to win Best Picture and Screenplay.
2006-11-27 08:39:02 · answer #1 · answered by Underground Man 6 · 9⤊ 13⤋
1999 - American Beauty Stunk. What was wrong with "The Green Mile" or "The Sixth Sense?" "The Cider House Rules" was good, too. American Beauty was just a little too weird for me. I gave up Oscar watching after the turn of the century as I really don't like Lord of the Rings or fantasy and those films seem to dominate every single awards celebration. I'd rather watch the older films, the ones that actually had a plot, good writing and were innovative instead of those with a lot of special effects that are remakes of old concepts
2016-05-23 12:22:15 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"The Greatest Show on Earth" was and still is a terrible movie. It won the best picture Oscar in 1953. Many people believe it won because the film was directed by Cecil B DeMille and they thought he deserved to win after such a long career. Horribly acted, poorly written and ineptly directed ... and it was deemed a better film than "High Noon."
2006-11-27 06:07:32 · answer #3 · answered by MovieGeek 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Titanic! Piece of nonsense. It was totally overdone, and the long, drawn out sinking of the ship was not done particularly well. It was just a cheesy love story between Winslet (Rose) and de Caprio (Jack), that just happened to be set on the Titanic.... sorry, but my favourite part of the whole film was watching Leonardo drown. Both of them totally overacted in it, some of their facial expressions were hilarious, and the script was ridiculous - some of the things they were saying to each other were such nonsense! I can't believe that anyone who knew they were about to drown would be so calm and lovey dovey.
Also, the score was terrible - that awful Celine Dion song 'My Heart Will Go On' - and on and on and on and on....... this was the biggest pile of cheeeeesssseee!!
I'd give it a rating of 3/10. (And the 3 points are only for the pleasure of watching Leo die, ha ha!!)
2006-11-27 06:17:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 11⤊ 0⤋
Definitely the English Patient. Thought the scenery was awesome but didn't like the main characters at all. Thought Ralph Fiennes & Kristen Scott Thomas were cold & unlikeable so didn't actually care about what happened to them in the end.
2006-11-27 07:13:05 · answer #5 · answered by tazminarcher 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
In the Eighties, Out of Africa, I found boring and the only reason it won was because Merle Streep had a accent. Color Purple should have won that year.
2006-11-27 06:28:33 · answer #6 · answered by tenkit5 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Titanic. Three hours of bad acting when you KNOW how it's going to end, and a godawful song to go with it. Ugh.
Just because it was expensive to make doesn't automatically make it good. Whoever decides who wins these awards needs to learn that.
2006-11-27 07:54:56 · answer #7 · answered by Bee 3 · 8⤊ 0⤋
"The Deer Hunter" - it won Best Picture in the late 70's but it looked like a violent mess to me.
2006-11-27 07:45:12 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The English Patient was a total snoozefest!
2006-11-27 06:13:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
either the English Patient (boring as all get out and incomprehensible besides.) or Brokeback Mountain. i didnt think the movie was anything special, but i think it won awards only because the award-givers wanted to look progressive, and didn't want to be called homophobes. honestly, i had to pinch myself to keep awake by that movie!
2006-11-27 06:11:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
"Dances with Wolves", because "Goodfellas" should've won. 1990
"Ghandi", because "E.T." should've won. 1982
"Ordinary People", because "Raging Bull" should've won. 1980
"Kramer vs Kramer", because "Apocalypse Now" should've won.1979
"Rocky", because "Taxi Driver" should've won.1976
"Oliver", because "2001: A Space Odyssey" should've won. 1968
Etc,etc
Seriously, though, "Braveheart" was the worst. It wasn't a great year for movies (1994-1995) but I'd still have given the award to "Babe".
2006-11-27 23:16:13 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 1⤋