20 of the worst Oscar winners in history

Almost every movie that won in the 80s was the wrong choice. Around the world in 80 days is a joke. The secret in their eyes was a great movie though. and while how green was my valley is not a terrible movie cant believe it beat out citizen kane

I can't take anyone who thinks that Mulholland Drive is a better film than A Beautiful Mind seriously.

<a href=http://ja-obcan.info/forum/profile.php?id=363275> I recommend to you to come for a site where there are many articles on a theme interesting you.</a>

What about Tom Hanks as Best Actor for Philadelphia instead of Anthony Hopkins for Remains of the Day, Anthony Hopkins for Shadowlands, Daniel Day-Lewis for In The Name of The Father or Liam Neeson for Schindler's List? OR Tommy Lee-Jones as Best Supporting Actor for The Fugitive over Leonardo DiCaprio for What's Eating Gilbert Grape?

And then there's Kenneth Branagh being nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay for the unexpurgated Hamlet! www.thesquiss.co.uk

This is a really clever list I have to admit. Forrest Gump, with its predictable story, did not deserve the Oscar, that was rightfully Tarantino's for Pulp Fiction. On the other hand, Rocky winning best Picture and Director was bad enough. Network and Taxi Driver really did deserve the wins. And why is not Titanic in the list? It did not deserve the Oscar at all. Also, Slumdog Millionaire.... not worthy as well. Avatar- best cinematography- Oscar was playing a big joke on the audience.

Add: Sandra Bullock (being nominated is bad enough) winning, Julia Roberts, Slumdog Millionaire, War Horse getting nominated, most anything by Steven Spielberg, actually; also add: James Cameron, Extremely Loud being nominated, The Help (a feel good movie for anglo Americans about a cruel and trying time where there was little to feel good about), Aaron Sorkin, Inception being nominated, Denzel Washington for Training Day, any nomination or award for Ron Howard, the best picture to Lord of the Rings final installment.....and so many more....I think the point is that they get more things wrong than they do right....why? B/c it is comprised of people from within the very industry that gives them jobs so they want to maintain the status quo for the most part; it is a reflection of what American audiences (for the most part) react to, which is not necessarily the best made film; and b/c The Academy has a identity struggle, trying- like a chile, or The Supreme Court- to maintain legitimacy and all too often shedding any sense of legitimacy by caving into bad hollywood overwrought melodrama...cue the Batman music b/c its next on the caravan of bad films to get nominated in 2013.

It is extremely egregious for you to say Anthony Hopkins and Al Pacino didn't deserve their Oscars. Those were two amazing performances, especially Hopkins's performance-simply chillng. And playing a blind man while delivering that performance is very difficult. Number 13 is really outrageous. And that comment on Gone With the Wind is just plane stupid. And Driving Miss Daisy, while a snub, isn't one of the worst. The Oscars are the highest achievement in film industry. And saying they're a load of crap is basically saying that Ledger winning best actor in Dark Knight is a load of crap; The Godfather winning best picture is a load of crap; Nicholson winning best actor for Cuckoo's Nest is a bunch of crap. So the Academy Awards are not a load of crap.

the deer hunter was a sorry movie

the sorriest movie i have ever seen was babel