Have you ever seen the movie How Green Was My Valley? Me neither.

Have you even heard of the movie? Didn’t think so.

Yet John Ford’s film somehow won 5 Oscars including Best Picture. But what’s more shocking: It beat out such classic films as Citizen Kane and The Maltese Falcon for the top honor. (Note: I’m not saying that Ford’s film is a bad movie. I’m just saying that in terms of reviews, user ratings, and all time-top 10 lists, it’s not to the level of Kane and Falcon)
How can that be? As it turns out there are a lot of movies that should have won Best Picture but somehow didn’t. Some of them weren’t even nominated!

Let’s take a look at the list.

Mystic River (2003)
Clint Eastwood’s Boston murder mystery was highly acclaimed by both critics and moviegoers. It was arguably better than Return of the King. But often the current work or role of an actor is unrightfuly commemorated by the Academy instead for his career or past parts. This is a perfect example. King won for its proceeding films, and not on its own merit. Another example of this would be Judi Dench’s 1999 win for her relatively brief appearance in Shakespeare in Love.

Gangs of New York (2002)
Martin Scorsese’s epic tale of 19th century New York City’s five points district was far more interesting than Rob Marshall’s Chicago. It had a better story, better cinematography, better acting (compare Daniel Day-Lewis to Catherine Zeta-Jones or Richard Gere, I dare you). Marshall’s movie was good, but I felt it was more of a filmed musical stage performance, than a visual cinematic masterpiece (Moulin Rouge! would be a good modern example of a musical that transends stage).

Requiem for a Dream (2000)
Ridley Scott’s Gladiator is highly overrated and inconsistent at best. Most felt that even Traffic was a better film that year. But unnoticed at that year’s ceremony is one of the best independent films of all time - Darren Aronofsky’s Requiem for a Dream. Ellen Burstyn was nominated for Best Actress, but was robbed by a usual performance from Julia Roberts. How could this have happened?

American Beauty (1999)
Okay, I know, I KNOW - American Beauty won Best Picture that year. It was the best film - I AGREE. But how were David Fincher’s Fight Club and Paul Thomas Anderson’s Magnolia not awarded nominations? Beauty and the Beast was strong enough to get a best picture nomination in 1991, yet Toy Story 2 didn’t win a single statuette? It’s the best reviewed movie of all time according to Rotten Tomatoes! How could the forget to award such an animated masterpiece?

Good Will Hunting (1997)
How did Titanic win Best Picture? Does anyone know? I have yet to meet someone who truely loved this movie. Hunting is currently rated almost a full ratings point higher than James Cameron’s romanic action drama on imdb. Not only was it better received by moviegoers, but also by critics. Rotten Tomatoes currently rates Titanic at 82%, while Good Will Hunting is near perfect at 96% fresh.

Pulp Fiction (1994)
1994 was a fantastic year for movies. Forrest Gump could have won on any other year, and I would have been happy. But how the hell did it beat Pulp Fiction, Quiz Show and The Shawshank Redemption?



Goodfellas (1990)
A film that is considered one of the 20 best films of all time (on imdb and almost every other list I’ve ever seen) lost to Kevin Costner’s directorial debut, Dances With Wolves. A film which I might add, isn’t in the list of the top 200 films ever made (again, on imdb or any other list). When it comes to the Academy, Martin Scorsese has been screwed more times than a hooker. And can someone explain to me how The Godfather Part III earned a nomination?

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi reigned supreme, and for good reason - but Steven Spielberg’s film deserved the honor. But it wasn’t as dramatic, so it lost.


Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Chariots of Fire won four Oscars that year, the same amount as Indy’s first adventure. It’s a good movie, but not great. The forgettable Louis Malle film Atlantic City and broadway adaptation On Golden Pond both earned nominations that year. Were they better films? But at least Raiders was nominated for best picture…

Star Wars: Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Empire received two nods and one technical win but no nomination. How was Empire ignored? A couple years earlier, George Lucas’ Star Wars: A New Hope earned a nomination for Best Picture. Was Empire not as good?


Apocalypse Now (1979)
Kramer vs. who?

Jaws (1975)
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is an brilliant film, but Jaws is better. Call me a Spielberg fanboy or whatever you want, you know I’m right.

Mean Streets (1973)
Not only did Martin Scorsese’s first major film lose out to The Sting, it wasn’t even nominated. But don’t worry, George Lucas’ classic American Graffiti earned a nomination instead. But fear not, the Academy will eventually award Scorsese for a lesser-film. That’s the way they do it.

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
Stanley Kubrick’s science-fiction masterpiece lost to Oliver! 2001 is considered one of the most influential science fiction movies of all time. It was certainly better than that crappy musical adaptation of Oliver Twist.



North by Northwest (1959)
Ben-Hur cleared house that year. Alfred Hitchcock’s classic was no where in sight. Nominated for Art Direction, Film Editing and Writing, it left with no statuettes. (imdb: #25 of all time, 100% on RT)

The Third Man (1949)
How did All The King’s Men beat one of the best movies of all time (#45 on imdb, 100% fresh on rotten tomatoes).



Citizen Kane (1941)
I was never a huge fan of Welles’ masterpiece, but as a film journalist I see its place in filmmaking history. It is known to most as the greatest movie of all time. It’s possibly most innovative cinematic work in the history of film. If anything, it at least deserved to win Best Picture. The Maltese Falcon, starring Humphrey Bogart, was also passed over for that year’s Oscar.

City Lights (1931)
Considered Charlie Chaplin’s greatest film, the movie wasn’t even nominated for a technical award. Orson Welles has said this is his favorite movie of all time. Stanley Kubrick said City Lights was his fifth favorite movie. Federico Fellini and Woody Allen have both praised and referenced the film in their work.

The Third Man (1949)
How did All The King’s Men beat one of the best movies of all time (#45 on imdb, 100% fresh on rotten tomatoes).

Um, watch All The King's Men and you'd know. It's not my favorite book, but they made a wonderful movie out of it. Mercedes McCambridge was spectacular in that. At the time, they kind of considered the Third Man to be over-hyped (Welles was famous for doing that to his movies - making them all bigger than they really were).

Citizen Kane (1941)
I was never a huge fan of Welles’ masterpiece, but as a film journalist I see its place in filmmaking history. It is known to most as the greatest movie of all time. It’s possibly most innovative cinematic work in the history of film. If anything, it at least deserved to win Best Picture. The Maltese Falcon, starring Humphrey Bogart, was also passed over for that year’s Oscar.

Over-rated. It wasn't completely shut out either, it did win best screenplay. It's not all that spectacular. In fact, I always found it kind of boring. In the end, people, it's a movie about a sled! :rolleyes: Hitchcock did much more for the cinema than Welles ever dreamt. And yet because AFI put it so high up, everyone thinks it's the best. I dont' care what the AFI says, I never liked this movie that much.

I have actually seen How Green Was My Valley, which was a sweet (if somewhat forgettable) movie. But the one that stole that movie was an extremely young Roddy McDowall hobbling around with a bad leg. Oh my God, that was so loveable! The whole movie was worth it for him.

But out of the top runners that year, I think it all should have gone to The Maltese Falcon. Probably the best original Film Noir, from a man so much more talented than Orson Welles; John Huston. Welles was hammy on a lot of things, John Huston has always had my utmost respect. As a film student, I always considered Huston to be a god among the auteurists. Want unappreciated performances? Look at Huston in Polanski's Chinatown, and tell me that wasn't the Best Supporting performance of the year.

Star Wars: Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Empire received two nods and one technical win but no nomination. How was Empire ignored? A couple years earlier, George Lucas’ Star Wars: A New Hope earned a nomination for Best Picture. Was Empire not as good?

Kramer vs. who?

Like The Two Towers when Empire came out, everyone knew it was going to be a trilogy, and they were all just waiting to see the third one. It also is not a stand-alone movie, the way the original Star Wars (nix the New Hope, it hadn't been in the title originally) was.

Have you seen any of these movies that your claiming didn't deserve best picture? Kramer vs. Kramer is a deservedly famous film. It's one of the lesser wins of the late seventies/early eighties that I just live for. Ordinary People is another one.

I am a huge JAWS FANATIC. As great and brilliant that movie was and how it holds its own, still, One Flew was deserving of the Academy. But I would like to have seen Jaws get more nominations than it did.

As for Judith Densch and her 8 MINUTE PERFORMANCE, I hate that she won the Oscar. I hate that she was even nominated. There out to be a limit on the performance screen time before one is allowed to be nominated. How many brilliant acting performances have not even received a nomination and their performance lasted more than ten minutes????? What a waste of an Oscar.


As for Julia Roberts performance, it may not have been as climactic as Ellen Burstyn's performance, I agree, I think Ellen turned in her best work thus far in Requiem for a Dream. It was pure outstanding and harrowing. Perfection is what it was. I think though the performance that Julia gave was so different than what she normally does and it was really an imitation of a real-life person, is what made the voters sway in that direction. Too bad these two performances didn't occur in different years. They each deserved an Oscar.

Gangs of New York (2002)
Martin Scorsese’s epic tale of 19th century New York City’s five points district was far more interesting than Rob Marshall’s Chicago. It had a better story, better cinematography, better acting (compare Daniel Day-Lewis to Catherine Zeta-Jones or Richard Gere, I dare you). Marshall’s movie was good, but I felt it was more of a filmed musical stage performance, than a visual cinematic masterpiece (Moulin Rouge! would be a good modern example of a musical that transends stage).

Wow, you are the first person I've seen that even liked that movie. I took my whole family to see it and we all hated it. There was no real plot and just a lot of blood. Lewis is a better actor than Richard Gere, but Chicago was a much more enjoyable movie. It also was a return to Broadway musicals that had been sadly lacking for over 20 years.

I'm amazed that in this whole thread you haven't mentioned some of the more obvious complaints that the academy has dealt with for years. Some of the films that did not win Best Picture include:

-The Wizard of Oz
-A Streetcar Named Desire
-Cabaret
-Chinatown
-Network
-The Ten Commandments
-Sunset Blvd
-Doctor Zhivago

All of these were undoubtedly deserving, but had the bad luck to come out the same time as Gone With the Wind, The Godfather, All About Eve, The Sound of Music, etc. Did Gone With the Wind deserve it over The Wizard of Oz? I guess it's apples and oranges :crazy:

I was not into Gangs of New York either. So add me to your list Liza. :lol: Doesn't mean it wasn't made well or that the acting wasn't great, it just didn't appeal to me.

Chicago was an awesome movie. I don't care for movie musicals, but the few that I have seen are great such as Grease. I don't think Catherine Zeta Jones performance should have been given an Oscar, hardly. Just like I don't think anyone in Dreamgirls should have been nominated or won.