Movies that won Academy Awards but should not have


Senior Member
Reaction score
After buying Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, the DVD said it won 4 Academy Awards. After taking 3 days to watch the movie (because it was soo boring), I could not understand why it won ANY Academy Awards.

Here are some others that should not have earned Academy Awards:

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon : Boring, sappy love saga with not much action. Costumes were lacking and plot was all over the place. IE: Green sword is stolen, returned, stolen again, some old "ninja" lady trying to kill Chow Yun Fat and two people love one another, but never say it until death...and so on.
2 Best parts of the movie:
1.) When Michelle Yeo fights Ziyi Zhang for the Green Sword.
2.) When Ziyi Zhang jumps off bridge to end her life at the very end of movie.

Titanic: Basically a dramatic documentary with a love story injected into the plot to make it a 4 hour movie. Music adds to the sentimentality, giving one the feeling of endless love in a dire situation. If it took the Titanic only 20 minutes to entirely sink, why did it take James Cameron almost 2 hours to show the sinking??
2 Best parts of the movie:
1.) When the back of the Titanic raises up and you can see the bottom hull and the massive propellers.
2.) At the very end when the old woman dies and it is symbolized by her returning to the Titanic with everyone waiting for her and then she meets Leo Dicaprio for a kiss.

Lord of The Rings : One, Two and Three were complete fantasy. Nothing made much sense (IE: Hobbit alone or with other "fighters" against the evil bad guys who number in the thousands goes to throw a powerful ring away in a far off land that happens to be in the Leader/head Bad Guy's region) and there were no extraordinary acting performances. Other than the bad guys, costumes were regular and not one actor shined.
2 Best parts of the movies:
1.) When the "Good" army fights the "Bad" army and the scary tall General/Leader/King with the big golden ring who has his finger and ring cut off by the good guy @ the very beginning of the movie.
2.) When the 4 or 5 black "Horse Riders" who make shreeking sounds are always chasing the hobbit with the ring to every part of the land. They almost catch him @ a river but they miss him when he jumps on a ferry boat.

Forrest Gump : Semi-retarded kid grows up in the South, becomes a football star, goes off to Vietnam, becomes a "shrimp boat captain", has a child with a woman who does not really love him and ends up back where he started.
2 Best parts of the movie:
1.) Any part with Lt. Dan....Gary Senise
2.) When it is hinted that Elvis P. learned his "hip shaking" move from the young Forrest Gump after staying @ his mother's home.

Maybe I am simply missing something in these movies that makes them Oscar worthy.

Let me know what you see in them.

:ph34r: Any other ideas, fell free to share........

Academy Award "snubs"....Actors/Movies that should have won an Academy Award but did not:

Daniel Day Lewis in Gangs of New York : Give that man his Oscar. Played "The Butcher" with precision.....made a very believable historic character. His character showed patriotism, brutality, egotism and in the end, compassion. No one did better that year as a Best Actor nominee. On a side note: Cameron Diaz was not the best choice for lead actress opposite Leo. DiCaprio.

Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven : Eastwood should have been the one accepting the Academy Award for best actor and not Al Pacino. His portrayal of an ex-murderer/gun fighter who starts the killing and madness again with viciousness when his good friend is killed is spot on. He was a very likable bad guy.

Cold Mountain : Other than Renee Zellweger, the movie was Great. Civil War epic that detailed the lives of people during that time. The movie had hungry Union soldiers invading homes to steal food and rape women, P. Seymour Hoffman as a crazy man eating dead horse, evil Confederate group that hunts down and kills deserters and slaves (the tension could be felt when this group of men caught up with the Confederate deserters in the forest). As well as a very cocky blond gun fighter who thinks he can beat Jude Law in a gun fight. Better than any other movie that year.

Warren Beatty in Bugsy : Made a notorious gangster and murderer into a lovable character and a household name.....not to mention played the character well and with ease.
Any other actor better in 1991?? I don't think so.

Road To Perdition : Very believable crime drama starring Tom Hanks. Had everything a movie like this should have. Hanks getting out of the gang and moving away with his boy is original. Jude Law plays a perfect murderous photographer who uses his occupation to hunt and kill those he is paid to....he also makes money photographing their dead bodies. Killing Paul Newman @ the end was genius. Where is this film's Academy Award nomination??

Thank you for reading my post :ph34r:
When working, I sometimes get an idea in my head and want to rant about it. This idea of unworthy Oscar winners and Oscar "snubs" has been bothering me for 1 week now. Especially when the DVD box of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon gives the expectation of a great movie by noting the # of Academy Awards it won. Then the movie turns out to be a huge disappointment. And I was "crushed" when Daniel Day Lewis did not win the Best Actor Oscar for his role in Gangs of New York.

And if anyone would know about these movies or what I am missing or can enlighten me about these movies and actors, it is someone here on Adtunes.

Cheers to all :ph34r:
I fail to understand why the opinions of others would matter to you in something like this. Your opinion certainly isn't going to influence what anyone else likes or dislikes. Why don't you go see them or rent them first and then just buy what you like? :unsure:
I don't see the point in renting a DVD for 3 nights @ $3 each when I can buy the DVD for $10 - $12 each and add to my collection (But that is just me). I never complain about buying the DVDs...only the movies being bad....I still like to own the DVDs. Gives me a sense of ownership.

Regardless of my opinions about these films and actors, I would still like the opinions of others.....let this be like one big forum where we can all share our ideas and thoughts.....because thats what I thought this was. You know, a place where we give ideas and opinons and then others respond with their ideas and opinions.

Love to all :ph34r:
Ya know, when you first start posting in these forums, you act like this complete dick and cause everyone not to like you. Now, you act all hurt when people don't take you seriously and don't want to have deep conversations about war, politics, or movies that didn't deserve an Academy Award. I mean, what do you expect?

"thesassycynic", you also raise a good and logical point and I respect your idea.

I can expect nothing since I have no control over those who wish to respond and those who don't. No favors, I shall ask nor pleading, I will do.

I am not hurt and I am not acting hurt...and this Academy Award post is far from serious. I would think that basic opinions about movies are not "deep" conversations, perse.

My friend "givemfitz" said: "I fail to understand why the opinions of others would matter to you in something like this....." which is a valid and true point. The fact that he/she had a response at all to my post makes me happy and hopeful that all is not lost. But if all is lost, Then So Be It.

To which I responded: "Regardless of my opinions about these films and actors, I would still like the opinions of others.....let this be like one big forum where we can all share our ideas and thoughts.....because thats what I thought this was. You know, a place where we give ideas and opinons and then others respond with their ideas and opinions."

No hurt or misunderstandings involved. Just my repsonse to givemfitz point.

But i see your point thesassycynic, and thanks for your response.

And I would like to thank "givemfitz" for showing me how to properly quote the titles of books, movies, and other titles. Thank you.

:ph34r: Its all good :ph34r:

George Clooney in Syriana : Why did Clooney win the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor in Syriana?? He was only on screen for about 20 total minutes and had no memorable lines or performance. His only real line that required acting was his line : "Why are they investigating me?"

The Saudi Prince whos life he tried to save should have gotten the Oscar if Clooney got it. Matt Damon did better acting by crying and furrowing his eyebrows after his son died. Hell, why not give the Pakistani suicide bomber the Oscar for his serious acting? Many other actors in Syriana were more qualified than G. Clooney.

Popularity must go a long way in deciding who gets Academy Awards.

And why did Mark Wahlberg NOT win the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his small yet, powerful role in The Departed??

Every professional and even the critics agreed that he was perfect for the role. He was emaculate in his delivery and was the most believable actor in that role of 2006. So what went wrong? Alec Baldwin also performed well. Not as well as Wahlberg, but better than that Arkin guy. Looks like some actors from a Scorcese film got snubbed again.

Avatar does not deserve Best Picture.

A movie should have great acting, an original plot, and dialogue that isnt so absolutely atrocious you cringe every other minute.

District 9, on the other hand... now theres a movie that actually deserves it.