Nine Other Buckets O' Puke which won the Oscar

[Rod Hagen]

Sorry. I just can't help myself:

http://www.calendarlive.com/printedition/calendar/suncal/cl-ca-bottom19mar19,0,4607404.story?coll=cl-suncal

 

 

March 19, 2006 E-mail story Print Most E-Mailed

 

PERSPECTIVE

Ten films that give Oscar a bad name

*Still smarting over that big "Crash?" It's not the first time the academy has embarrassed itself with a choice that's going to age badly.

 

Ten films that give Oscar a bad name

 

By Stephen Farber, Special to The Times

 

IS "Crash" the worst movie ever to win the Oscar for best picture? Probably not, though it definitely reeks. Academy members had a chance to make history by honoring "Brokeback Mountain," a trailblazing gay love story that also happened to be the best movie of 2005. Instead, they voted for arguably the worst of the five films nominated — a ham-fisted exposé of racial tensions in Los Angeles that pulled its punches by ending on an incongruous note of communion and redemption.

 

Disappointing as this decision was, however, it wasn't the first time the academy got it all wrong. Indeed, in the 78 years that Oscars have been awarded, there are only a dozen or so times when the statuette was awarded to an undisputed classic such as "It Happened One Night," "Gone With the Wind," "Casablanca," "All About Eve," "On the Waterfront," "The Bridge on the River Kwai," "Lawrence of Arabia," "The Godfather" and "The Godfather Part II."

 

ADVERTISEMENT

[-94949]

 

In other cases, the academy honored a good movie that wasn't quite the best of the year — the Oscar did not go to 1941's "Citizen Kane," frequently cited as the greatest movie in history, but "How Green Was My Valley" — or hugely popular films that may have been kitschy but were still enormously entertaining, such as "The Sound of Music," "Titanic" or "Gladiator."

 

But in a surprising number of cases, the Oscar has gone to films that were mediocre or just plain bad.

 

To provide a little context for readers who are still perplexed or angry over this year's upset, I've come up with an admittedly subjective list of the 10 worst movies to be voted best picture. It wasn't an easy list to compile — not because there were so few possibilities but because there were so many.

 

 

These first two really take the booby prize:

 

"The Greatest Show on Earth" (1952) was criticized even at the time for its cornucopia of clichés. Perhaps this circus-themed soap opera can be enjoyed as a guilty pleasure, full of unintended howlers, but is that what the Oscar was meant to signify? The Oscar that year might have gone to "High Noon," "Moulin Rouge" (the good version, directed by John Huston), or to "Singin' in the Rain," which wasn't even nominated but is now widely regarded as the greatest movie musical ever made.

 

"Around the World in 80 Days" (1956) also sits at the bottom of the barrel. Producer Mike Todd was the Harvey Weinstein of his day, a cunning showman who knew how to court Oscar voters. He also managed to attract a legion of stars to do cameos, a novelty at the time, but the movie is nothing more than a 167-minute travelogue, with inane and insulting comic relief provided by Mexican actor Cantinflas.

 

 

Grandiosity is a regrettable hallmark of several of the other worst movies to be named best picture:

 

"The Great Ziegfeld" (1936) first epitomized this trend. It's a three-hour biopic with a few eye-popping production numbers and a couple of hours of padding.

 

"Ben-Hur" (1959) won a mind-boggling 11 Oscars. The chariot race is worth the price of admission, but the rest of this 212-minute epic is drenched in syrupy religiosity reminiscent of a Hallmark Christmas card. The movie was the weakest of the five nominees that year; "Anatomy of a Murder," "The Diary of Anne Frank," "The Nun's Story" and "Room at the Top" are all more watchable today. And two movies that are more enduring than any of them — "Some Like It Hot" and "North by Northwest" — weren't even nominated.

 

"The English Patient" (1996) is well photographed and well edited, but it's also emotionally desiccated and downright ponderous (as "Seinfeld" fans well know). Director Anthony Minghella crafted a far more involving movie three years later, "The Talented Mr. Ripley," which won exactly zero Oscars.

 

"Forrest Gump" (1994). Robert Zemeckis made a terrific piece of entertainment in "Back to the Future," but he won his Oscar for this bloated, soft-headed trip though a few decades of American history. That year, the academy might have honored the electrifying "Pulp Fiction" but chose to play it safe. Quentin Tarantino and co-writer Roger Avary did win for best screenplay, but that was merely a consolation prize, like "Brokeback Mountain's" directing and screenplay Oscars this year.

 

"You Can't Take It With You" (1938). Some argue that the academy is a sucker for swollen, overlong epics. But in several instances, the Oscar went to small, quirky movies that were just as stupefying. This one is a case in point. Seen today, the antics of the world's wackiest family seem about as engaging as the sound of fingernails raking a blackboard. Consider all the classic comedies of the '30s and early '40s that didn't win Oscars — such as "My Man Godfrey," "Ninotchka" and "His Girl Friday" — and then try to justify this one's victory.

 

"Rocky" (1976) ladles on the whimsy as well. This is one of the most ridiculous of all Oscar choices, first because of the movies it beat: "Taxi Driver" and "Network." It's also hard to forgive the picture for spawning all those dreadful sequels, with yet another installment, "Rocky Balboa," still to come.

 

"American Beauty" (1999) is a precious satire of suburbia (now there's a fresh topic) that mustered the courage to criticize real estate agents and gun nuts. Overlooked that year: "The Insider" and "The Cider House Rules," the latter of which took on a genuinely controversial subject — abortion. On the plus side, the Oscar victory gave writer Alan Ball the clout to create HBO's "Six Feet Under," a far more incisive look at American mores.

 

 

Finally, there is space for one more movie on the list, and that belongs to:

 

"Crash" (2005). This jeremiad bemoaning our society's intolerance is filtered through a fanciful plot built on a heap of outlandish coincidences. Can you really imagine audiences in another decade or two giving this movie, which somehow combines grandiosity and whimsical eccentricity, any more respect than they give "Rocky" or "The Greatest Show on Earth" today? Like all of these prize-winning embarrassments, "Crash" is destined to be remembered as just one more footnote in the annals of Oscar blunders.

 

*

 

Farber has written several books on film and is a critic for Movieline's Hollywood Life. Contact him at [email protected].

[bigguyinpasadena]

This of course is just one critics opinion.The oscars are voted on by people inside the industry,the critics have their own awards.

A critics job is to be critical,they also earn a reputation by being saucey,or sometimes hypercritical.

Looking over films Faber found unworthy of the oscar nod I found quite a few I disagreed with him on,no surprise there.

Rod,we here at the MC know how strongly dissapointed you were with the outcome of this years oscars.Posting reprints of all of the editorials by film critics who feel likewise will not change the fact that Crash,not BBM won the best movie oscar for 2005.

[Guest 8mile]

>Sorry. I just can't help myself:

 

Yeap, it's getting a little annoying.

 

Realize people have their own opinions and though it may differ than yours who are they do say you're wrong? and vice versa.

 

Zachary

[JamesK840]

>"Rocky" (1976) ladles on the whimsy as well. This is one of

>the most ridiculous of all Oscar choices, first because of the

>movies it beat: "Taxi Driver" and "Network."

 

I'm also getting tired of this subject, but wanted to point out that part of the problem may well be the conventional balloting system. I agree that both Taxi Driver and Network deserved an Oscar more then Rocky, but that was most likely why neither won. They probably siphoned off each others votes leaving the 3rd choice the winner. This may have happened with Capote and Good Night and Good Luck, both of which were a bit daring in their own right.

 

It's yet another example of why people advocate proportional balloting systems such as: 1st choice, 2nd choice...

 

Further, money and power have been accused of influencing the Oscars before, I remember people saying that Miramax bought the Best Actor oscar for Cider House Rules and I'm sure Hurst put a lot of effort into keeping Citizen Kane down.

 

But as several have said, it's just an industry award. Look to something like the AFI or Ebert's great movies if you want a much better list of the best of the best.

 

http://www.afi.com Top 100: http://www.filmsite.org/afi100filmsA.html

Ebert's Great Films: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=REVIEWS08

[Rod Hagen]

Is it supposed to be "Nine Other Buckets O' Puke which won the Oscar" or "Nine Other Buckets O' Puke that won the Oscar"? I have difficulty with choosing b/w which and that.

 

 

http://www.RodHagen.com

310.360.9890

Fun, Fit, Friendly Fucker in West Hollywood.

-Rod Hagen

[Guest DickHo]

I agree 100% with Farber--and if not Brokeback Mountain as Best Picture this year, the other 3 were more deserving than Crash.

 

But that's only my opinion.

[BgMstr4u]

I have written elsewhere that I actually liked Crash, so I won't repeat that here.

 

Now let's not take what follows here too seriously, but really, folks -- Hollywood is Tinseltown, has always been built on profit, and it hasn't mattered much where that profit comes from -- all the better if it comes from lots of people paying lots of money to see really good movies, but hey, if nostalgia works, we'll do nostalgia; if car chases work, we'll do car chases; if politics works (preferably the kind Hollywood currently prefers, but we're flexible - e.g. "Thank You for Smoking"), we'll do politics; if it's biography, if it's classics, if it's cute animals (after the recent success of the penguins and the sled dogs, watch this category!), we'll do them too. The Oscars are awarded in the context of a vast moneymaking machine, and the starlets' dresses and the hosts' patter and the "suspense" are all part of a great big push to squeeze one last dollar out of last year's shows, and THANK GOD for DVDs!!

 

So why get upset when better movies are trumped? My guess is that the dvd market for BBM was already pretty much sewed up, what with the devotion of your average gay and of your average liberal cause queen, who've already socked away their $29.95 for the regular release -- and an additional $59.99 for the inevitable "director's cut" 6 months later for your real addicts -- so why not push the after-screen and overseas potential of the other one? It's worth a shot. And a good laugh, too.

[Yeswell]

In this case it should be 'that' as winning the Oscar sets those buckets o'puke TM apart from all the other buckets o'puke.

[Guest FallenAngel]

Well, thanks to the author of this thread; I HAVE just puked, and it wasn't for any other reason than the mention of this subject. All of those that continue this "we were robbed" mentality, can relish in the fact that life isn't fair. You don't get laid by the guys you want to get laid by in life, but whinning about it, doesn't change the fact that you're laidless by the guys you want to get laid by. Go out and find another prospect. If I didn't know better, I'd think you were all related to the Barry Bonds family and the fact that he claims he didn't shoot "roids" is a reason to tell the American public/press to shut the fuck up. vote him into the "Hall?" Get over it. He lied. Brokeback lost. Shall we just kill ourselves now and have it be the end of all these horrific tragedies that our selfless lives revolve around? Does anyone recall the latest dead count for American young men in Iraq? It stands at 2,317 dead and 23,012 mamed for life. Let me repeat; 2,317 dead and 23,012 mamed for life. Oh I'm sorry, priorities are so unimportant here aren't they? Let's fight for Brokeback's rights, their certainly more important than anything else we should be concerning ourselves with......like artificial arms and legs for 18-21 year old boys that are coming home absent what they left with. How fucking shallow of me.

[poiuyt]

I've never been able to take the Oscars seriously, the idea of a "best movie" contest is pretty idiotic to begin with.

 

If you're interested, here's the whole sorry list:

 

http://www.filmsite.org/bestpics3.html

 

Sheesh, Vertigo and Touch of Evil both came out in 1958. What "won"? Gigi.

[camshaft9]

Cher won the Oscar over Glenn Close.

Marlee Matlin has an Oscar.

Halle Berry won the Oscar over Judi Dench.

Helen Hunt won the Oscar over Judi Dench.

Mira Sorvino won the Oscar over Kate Winslet.

George Chakiris has an Oscar.

Titanic won Best Picture.

Kim Basinger won the Oscar over Julianne Moore.

Robin Williams won the Oscar over Burt Reynolds.

John Wayne won the Oscar over Jon Voight, Dustin Hoffman, Richard Burton, and Peter O' Toole.

And on it goes.

This year I finally voted for a film that won the Oscar.

And let's not forget that Crash won the SAG award too.

But ultimately, it's all crap.

George Bush won 2 Oscars for Best Actor.

That's something to complain about.