These Films Should Have Won "Best Picture," Rotten Tomatoes Says

These Films Should Have Won "Best Picture," Rotten Tomatoes Says

rotten tomatoes

And yet again, it appears that Tremors has been screwed over.

If there's one thing I've learned in my years as a highfalutin movie blogger, it's that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences has *never* picked the correct winner for Best Picture in the 87-year history of the Oscars. Not. Once. I thought they got it right last year with Birdman, but according to at least a few hundred Youtube, reddit, and Facebook comments, I was wrong. Dead wrong. Who woulda guessed?

It all comes down to one simple fact, I've learned: Movies are art, and art is subjective (a guy by the name of Squidboy64 taught me that after insulting me ferociously). If only there were some quantifiable means of determining that one movie was in fact better than another -- an aggregation website, if you will, that used compiled hundreds of critical reviews and converted them into percentages that determined if a movie was either viewed, say, "favorably" or "unfavorably."

What? You say there's a website that does exactly that, and has actually been doing it for years?!! I'VE LEARNED NOTHING.

Well now that my universe has been shattered, I guess I might as well pass along some data from this Rotten Tomatoes site you speak of.

Originally compiled by James Story of Elmshow.com, the gallery below (presented in semi-random order, because our viewer SUCKS) looks back at every previous "Best Picture" winner in Oscar history and determines which film REALLY should have won based on its "Tomatometer" score (whatever that is).

The result? An Academy that has only chosen the correct Best Picture winner 26% of the time. You hear that? The Internet was right. The Internet...was right...

Even more startling than that figure was the revelation that I, a famed movie blogger/pornography historian/weekend exorcist, was wrong about Birdman being 2014's best picture. It was actually Selma, which is a great oversight to make public in these #BoycottTheOscars times. Way to go, James. Way to go.

Head over to Elmshow for more facts and raw data, then let us know how you plan to use this knowledge to obliterate your friends in your next heated movie debate.

Source: Elmshow

Permalink

This is a case of the Special Olympics of movies: winning an Academy Award (where shit movies like Crash will beat out masterpieces like Good Night, and Good Luck or Munich when it never should have even been nominated) or being loved by Rotten Tomatoes (where a painfully average movie like Toy Story will get a 99%, or honestly most Pixar movies will get 80s or 90s just by virtue of being Pixar movies even though their post Wall-E movies have been more miss then they've been hit).

Picture 5 has:

Funny Girl
Z

And now I can't stop thinking about an android Barbra Streisand fighting Super Sayan Omar Sharif.

Honestly, Birdman was way better than Gravity. And I genuinely liked Gravity.

I figured we all knew by now that the Academy Award judges usually don't pick the film that deserves to win. I'm still bitter that Wreck-it Ralph and The Lego Movie got shafted.

Zontar:
This is a case of the Special Olympics of movies: winning an Academy Award (where shit movies like Crash will beat out masterpieces like Good Night, and Good Luck or Munich when it never should have even been nominated) or being loved by Rotten Tomatoes (where a painfully average movie like Toy Story will get a 99%, or honestly most Pixar movies will get 80s or 90s just by virtue of being Pixar movies even though their post Wall-E movies have been more miss then they've been hit).

...Those are fighting words, good sir.

marioandsonic:

Zontar:
a painfully average movie like Toy Story

...Those are fighting words, good sir.

Then so be it. I have never been one to back down from a challenge.

image

Sir.

I must tell you, the majority of your article has potentially lethal levels of sarcasm buildup present. The readings on our sarcasmographs are off the scale. They have, in fact, been broken. There is simply too much sarcasm.

We are sending a cleanup team to your location for decontamination and medical treatment.

You will also be receiving a bill for breaking our equipment.

Hold on... How Green Was My Valley beat Citizen Kane? The only explanation is that the academy was on drugs. Like, all of them. That's all that can be said.

P.S. Thanks

Covarr:
Hold on... How Green Was My Valley beat Citizen Kane? The only explanation is that the academy was on drugs. Like, all of them. That's all that can be said.

P.S. Thanks

Actually, Citizen Kane wasn't all that popular when it came out. It made back its budget, but little more. Why? Well, Mr. Kane was very heavily based on William Randolph Hearst, who happened to be one of the biggest media magnates at the time. When Mr. Hearst got wind of it, he ordered his newspapers...to say absolutely nothing about the movie.

I'm sorry, but the internet is objectively wrong on a few of these. The Crying Game over Unforgiven? Fuck that, Unforgiven is the best western not part of the Fistful of Dollars series. I'll disown my firstborn if they say otherwise. And ET, really? That movie was probably overrated at the time, I finally got around to seeing it recently and damn, its really not that good. Might be the weakest Spielberg movie I've seen, and I've seen AI. Not that the Academy was right that year with Gandhi, but saying ET is just way wronger.

Also, not to diss Annie Hall, but how the fuck does it have a higher rating on Rotten Tomatoes than Star Wars? If it were imdb I could believe it but Rotten Tomatoes works on a recommended/not recommended dichotomy.

Its rotten tomatoes though. just like the name says, that site is rotten and if you use it youll get poisoned.

Covarr:
Hold on... How Green Was My Valley beat Citizen Kane? The only explanation is that the academy was on drugs. Like, all of them. That's all that can be said.

P.S. Thanks

I have never seen "How Green Was My Valley", but im willing to believe that. Citizen Kane on the other hand i have seen (last year). Was serverely unimpressed. Yes, at the time techniques used was revolutionary, but as a movie it is a boring dredge of a film. I wouldnt even go as far as to consider it mediocre.

Covarr:
Hold on... How Green Was My Valley beat Citizen Kane? The only explanation is that the academy was on drugs. Like, all of them. That's all that can be said.

P.S. Thanks

There was a big thing where the person that Kane was based off of made all sorts of threats of exploitation and blacklisting. It certainly had some sway in the preceedings.

Edit:I should make it clear that the guy basically owned the media. Like, all of it.

There is no way the Academy could have gotten away with awarding Gravity the Oscar over 12 Years A Slave. I've never personally seen it but it was far too politically charged for it to get away with a simple nomination.

Sorry, but many cases are wrong in Rotten Tomatoes as well: Gravity is good, but it is nowhere near 12 years a Slave good; Gladiator is better than Crouching Tiger; Jaws can't be better rated than Over the Cuckoo's Nest and Field of Dreams is seriously overrated.

Of course, it is all subjective, so my choices have a chance of being as wrong as the Oscars, but the rotten tomatoes are just as wrong...

marioandsonic:

Zontar:
a painfully average movie like Toy Story

...Those are fighting words, good sir.

Yet it is completely true, especially the third one. Toy Story 3 is an enjoyable movie sure, but it is easily the weakest in the series. There were way too many characters for the film to focus on, some of the logic in the narrative was very contrived, and the plot is a near beat for beat retread of Toy Story 2.

The only saving grace of the film was that it added closure to the series, but now that closure is rendered meaningless with Toy Story 4 in production.

What I'm about to say is not directed to anyone I've quoted in this post, but merely related to the topic at hand.

Can we please stop acting like Pixar is infallible? Their films have been getting more mediocre after WALL-E, and lately it seems they've changed into a sequel and merchandise factory like Disney. For the love of everything, Inside Out was a new IP, yet they were selling butt-loads toys and promotional products of the film months before release!

At this point, many other studios, both in Hollywood and in the indie scene, have caught up with Pixar in creating eye popping animated films. How to Train Your Dragon 2(Dreamworks), Rango(Paramount), ParaNorman(Laika), and Song of the Sea(indie collaboration) are some of the lushest and most visually impressive animated films made in last several years. On top of that, they're very good films.

Besides Up, the latest crop of Pixar have been bland and forgettable in terms of narrative and visuals. While they have yet to make a terrible film, it still doesn't change the fact that Pixar is turning into the same "moichendisin'" entity that Disney is.

Alright time to rant/say what I think:

1. Wizard of Oz over Gone With The Wind? Why do people like Wizard of Oz so much? And Gone of the Wind is just as much a charming movie.

2.Sense and Sensibility over Braveheart?

3.I'm surprised they picked The Quiz Show over Forrest Gump and not The Shawshank Redemption or Pulp Fiction, Especially the Shawshank fanbase.

4. The Hustler over West Side Story? Yeah fuck you Rotten Tomatoes The Hustler got nothing on this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kokbJvSEMUY

5.Nah Godfather Part 2 is superior to any of the competition in that year even Coppola's The Conversation.

6 American Graffiti? That movie is BORING. You should have added the Exorcist.

7.Jaws!!?? And not Dog Day Afternoon?!

8. I am split between Rocky and Taxi Driver because well I love Scorsese but Taxi Driver is not my absolute favorite of his work.

9. Of all the movies I expected to get replaced the most, I am surprised that STAR WARS did not replace Annie Hall? I mean you put Jaws in there but not Star Wars?!

10. Hannah and her Sisters over Platoon?! Quite possibly my absolute favorite Vietnam War movie even more so than Deer Hunter and Apocalypse Now? And I think the Annie Hall still winning is now more clear, the people are obviously Woody Allen fans :P

11.Born on the 4th of July > Driving Miss Daisy/Field of Dreams

12. American in Paris, Bridge on the River Kwai, and Ben-Hur is better than what Rotten Tomatoes voted for :P

The 2000s part, Oh boy where do I begin, but that is for the next post because this is too much for me.

2000s:

1. Juno.....JUNO!!!??? That painfully white and hipster-ish movie whose comady is so white and suburban that I just facepalm so much?

No Country For Old Men blows Juno out of the water, even than No Country For Old Men is still not as good as my favorite of the year, THERE WILL BE BLOOD!!!, That movie and Daniel Day Lewis' performance Blows the 2 other movies out of the universe.

Continuing:

2. The Departed is good but I would not replace it with The Queen, I prefer Letters from Iwo Jima.

3. Since they chose Lord of the Rings 2 and 3 I am surprised they did not added the first movie over A Beautiful Mind.

4. I never understood why Crash gets so much hate? I mean what is wrong with the movie that people says it was undeserved? Anyway I personally would have prefered Munich.

5. Up? I like Up but I don't see it as completely Oscar worthy, I prefer District 9.

6. Slumdog Millionaire has the most interesting premise and plot than just some typical drama movie about a Gay Rights Activist.

7. Gladiator and Croutching Tiger or evenly matched.

Now on to the 2010s.

1. I get it mainstream internet, You love Pixar. But Toy Story 3 is just average. I did not see much of 2010 movies so I don't know.

2.I thouhgt people hated the Oscars for voting Argo because it was the second movie to win Best Picture because the movie itself had story that revolved around movies and filmmaking?

3. Wolf of Wall Street>>>>>>>Gravity/12 years a Slave.

4. And here I was expecting they vote Boyhood :P

Me I think Birdman was an OK movie.

How about we just go with the following:

"If you don't like what I like then fuck yourself". So tired of this whole 'I need to be validated in my like/dislike of "whatever the fuck"'.

Every awards show these days is just "industry name here" sucking off its own cock and I really dont give a shit. And painful to say - but the same is true with RT. RT - stop masturbating while lubing up with the idea that your opinion fucking matters. It doesn't.

I like some objectively terrible movies.
I dislike some objectivly great movies.

If you think otherwise thats fine. Really no problem.
But if you want to tell me i'm wrong and you're right because "reasons".

Nuh. Nuh-uh-uh. And btw your mothers a whore.

TL;DR Try to have a mind that makes up its own opinions and ideas rather than relying on everyone else to do your thinking for you.

Samtemdo8:
Alright time to rant/say what I think:

1. Wizard of Oz over Gone With The Wind? Why do people like Wizard of Oz so much? And Gone of the Wind is just as much a charming movie.

I agree that this is one of he cases where the Academy got it right. Gone with the Wind is more problematic than the family-friendly Wizard of Oz, but is overall a better film.

That said, 1939 was a great year for movies. Films that would have taken Best Picture in other years lost out to the magnificent Gone with the Wind include Goodbye, Mr. Chips, Ninotchka, Of Mice and Men, Stagecoach (which I admittedly haven't seen), Wuthering Heights, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, and of course The Wizard of Oz.

Rocky or Taxi Driver? Wow, that's like asking to pick between your children.

Samtemdo8:
4. And here I was expecting they vote Boyhood :P

It took twelve years to make!

Samtemdo8:
2000s:
4. I never understood why Crash gets so much hate? I mean what is wrong with the movie that people says it was undeserved? Anyway I personally would have prefered Munich.

Ho-boy, you pushed my nuclear button there. I loathe Crash. That it got any kind of recognition beyond a "Can you believe this shit?" award is fucking astonishing to me. It's one of the least subtle movies I've ever seen in my life, and I'm including shit like Reefer Madness and Birdemic. The dialogue is DREADFUL. Every other line is some racist blah-blah schtick, jarring against how people talk in the real world and sticking out in every conversation to such a degree that you're painfully aware of the film's preaching. As I've often described it, it's like the director took a baseball bat, carved the word "racism" into it, and spent 90 minutes beating you around the head with it. Well, not 90 minutes for me. I turned it off because I just couldn't stand another minute of that trash.

You just know the Academy only gave that movie any attention because it was a "message" movie, and oooh so brave for talking about a subject everyone was already talking about (you know, only a mere decade and change since LA was on fire). Even on IMDB, where the crappiest films can find a pretentious masturbatory fanbase to claim their brilliance, the featured review for Crash is one calling it a preachy mess.

Strazdas:
Its rotten tomatoes though. just like the name says, that site is rotten and if you use it youll get poisoned.

Covarr:
Hold on... How Green Was My Valley beat Citizen Kane? The only explanation is that the academy was on drugs. Like, all of them. That's all that can be said.

P.S. Thanks

I have never seen "How Green Was My Valley", but im willing to believe that. Citizen Kane on the other hand i have seen (last year). Was serverely unimpressed. Yes, at the time techniques used was revolutionary, but as a movie it is a boring dredge of a film. I wouldnt even go as far as to consider it mediocre.

Boom. So much boom. I so despise the attitude that "because it was considered great then it must be great now". I have no doubt that back in the days when CK was made it was something that could hold an entire audeince in thrall. But now? No.

It's the whole "standing on the shoulders of giants" principle. Of course CK was a pioneer in its field and brilliant for its time. - and worthy of respect. But to pretend that no one has taken what they did and built upon it and made it more in the years that have passed since?

That's just dumb.

If you doubt it just try and imagine Peter Jackson's LotR with CK techniques and CK tech.

It's not just animals that are subject to evolution.

I think that it's a bit of an unfair advantage to RT for many of the older films because all the votes happened way after the fact, hindsight is a big advantage. With this century's winners it's a mixed bag. I prefer the Oscar choice with some and the RT score for others, generally more populist choices which is what you'd expect. And some years both have the wrong answer (*cough* wolf of wall street *cough*)

Was anyone else surprised that neither "Star Wars" nor "The Empire Strikes back" won the RT award for their years?

It's not accurate to proclaim movie critic opinions to be the "true" measure of a film's quality; for that you would have to check ticket sales, but then a Transformers movie would probably win and we can't have that.

Critics are infamous for picking unwatchable stinkers and--in recent times--"message pictures" which are supposed to contain important social and moral lessons. Critics don't pay for their tickets so they're less invested in making sure they enjoy themselves, and they have their critical reputation to consider. No critic wants to be that one lone voice championing a movie that the others say is bad, or vice versa; you can be the one critic bashing an important and socially protected "message picture." That would be racist! There's also a strong pressure to criticize anything too popular. A lot of this list is just the critics telling people they don't know what's good. LA Confidential may be a more interesting movie to a jaded critic but most people would much rather watch Titanic.

There's also the effect of general marketing and anti-marketing. Everyone knew Citizen Kane was about William Randolph Hearst and there would be hell to pay if it won. Meanwhile some filmmakers and studios are savvy at canvasing Academy voters and persuading them to vote for oddballs, which is what happened with Shakespeare in Love.

Men in Black is objectively the greatest movie ever. Not my favorite movie (Pacific Rim) mind you, this has nothing to do with opinion.
Men in Black has 0 Oscars.
Thus the Oscars have no justification for their continued existence.

Silvershock:

Samtemdo8:
2000s:
4. I never understood why Crash gets so much hate? I mean what is wrong with the movie that people says it was undeserved? Anyway I personally would have prefered Munich.

Ho-boy, you pushed my nuclear button there. I loathe Crash. That it got any kind of recognition beyond a "Can you believe this shit?" award is fucking astonishing to me. It's one of the least subtle movies I've ever seen in my life, and I'm including shit like Reefer Madness and Birdemic. The dialogue is DREADFUL. Every other line is some racist blah-blah schtick, jarring against how people talk in the real world and sticking out in every conversation to such a degree that you're painfully aware of the film's preaching. As I've often described it, it's like the director took a baseball bat, carved the word "racism" into it, and spent 90 minutes beating you around the head with it. Well, not 90 minutes for me. I turned it off because I just couldn't stand another minute of that trash.

You just know the Academy only gave that movie any attention because it was a "message" movie, and oooh so brave for talking about a subject everyone was already talking about (you know, only a mere decade and change since LA was on fire). Even on IMDB, where the crappiest films can find a pretentious masturbatory fanbase to claim their brilliance, the featured review for Crash is one calling it a preachy mess.

Agreed, I thought "Crash" was terrible. It was about as subtle as an avalanche and even less entertaining.

I also thought it was funny that the movie takes place in Los Angeles, a city with a metro population of 13 million people and covering 500 square miles, and yet the same people would continuously just happen to run into one another.

Grampy_bone:
LA Confidential may be a more interesting movie to a jaded critic but most people would much rather watch Titanic.

We must run in different crowds: everyone I know would watch LA Confidential over Titanic any day of the week.

I remember being really pissed off at the academy when Up not only didn't win, but wasn't even nominated for picture of the year. I made a point to learn how the oscar process works after, and I have since stopped giving it any consideration.

It is all a sham, just like mpaa ratings.

RT's pro ratings have been getting wilder lately, and a lot of questionable sources are being compiled. It is almost as if they are trying to compete with Metacritic (aka shillfactory).

flying_whimsy:
I remember being really pissed off at the academy when Up not only didn't win, but wasn't even nominated for picture of the year. I made a point to learn how the oscar process works after, and I have since stopped giving it any consideration.

It is all a sham, just like mpaa ratings.

Em, Up WAS nominated. It was considered a huge achievement too. It was only the second animated film to ever be nominated. How did you miss that?

Anyway this list is kind of dumb. Rotten Tomatoes scores are good for figuring out whether a movie is worth watching or not, they're not good at all for judging one film against another, especially when it comes to old movies where many of the reviews are retrospective ones written when the film is already considered a classic (like with Citizen Kane).

Grampy_bone:
It's not accurate to proclaim movie critic opinions to be the "true" measure of a film's quality; for that you would have to check ticket sales, but then a Transformers movie would probably win and we can't have that.

Critics are infamous for picking unwatchable stinkers and--in recent times--"message pictures" which are supposed to contain important social and moral lessons. Critics don't pay for their tickets so they're less invested in making sure they enjoy themselves, and they have their critical reputation to consider. No critic wants to be that one lone voice championing a movie that the others say is bad, or vice versa; you can be the one critic bashing an important and socially protected "message picture." That would be racist! There's also a strong pressure to criticize anything too popular. A lot of this list is just the critics telling people they don't know what's good. LA Confidential may be a more interesting movie to a jaded critic but most people would much rather watch Titanic.

There's also the effect of general marketing and anti-marketing. Everyone knew Citizen Kane was about William Randolph Hearst and there would be hell to pay if it won. Meanwhile some filmmakers and studios are savvy at canvasing Academy voters and persuading them to vote for oddballs, which is what happened with Shakespeare in Love.

That's such a load of totally unsubstantiated bullshit that I can't even begin to imagine which bull's ass you managed to pull it out of.

MarsAtlas:
I'm sorry, but the internet is objectively wrong on a few of these. The Crying Game over Unforgiven? Fuck that, Unforgiven is the best western not part of the Fistful of Dollars series. I'll disown my firstborn if they say otherwise. And ET, really? That movie was probably overrated at the time, I finally got around to seeing it recently and damn, its really not that good. Might be the weakest Spielberg movie I've seen, and I've seen AI. Not that the Academy was right that year with Gandhi, but saying ET is just way wronger.

Also, not to diss Annie Hall, but how the fuck does it have a higher rating on Rotten Tomatoes than Star Wars? If it were imdb I could believe it but Rotten Tomatoes works on a recommended/not recommended dichotomy.

I second eeeeverything MarsAtlas has said here.

I personally think that Unforgiven is not only the best western outside of the Fistfull of Dollars series, but it was the LAST western (though I haven't seen The Hateful Eight yet, and may be wrong)

this really isnt accurate. i remember this being posted on Reddit several days ago and i will point out what was pointed out then: this data only uses the Tomatometer, which is not a good indicator. for example, it says that Brooklyn is the highest-rated Best Picture nominee because 98% of the reviewers gave it a positive review.

in actuality, Brooklyn is not the highest-rated of the nominees. the person who came up with these results needs to redo them, but use the average rating for each film, rather than the Tomatometer score. when looking at the average scores, you will find that Brooklyn has a score of 8.5, while Mad Max: Fury Road, with its lower 97% approval rating, has a slightly higher average score of 8.6, as does Room. Spotlight has an even higher score than those, with an 8.9. this puts Brooklyn in 4th place among the Best Picture nominees.

and if you combine both the Tomatometer score and the average rating, which RT does with their "Top 100 Movies of the Year" lists, you will find that Mad Max: Fury Road is the highest-rated film of the year, on Rotten Tomatoes. on this list, Brooklyn is put in 4th, though it is actually in 3rd, since Selma appears on the list as a 2015 release, even though it came out last year.

the December King:

MarsAtlas:
I'm sorry, but the internet is objectively wrong on a few of these. The Crying Game over Unforgiven? Fuck that, Unforgiven is the best western not part of the Fistful of Dollars series. I'll disown my firstborn if they say otherwise. And ET, really? That movie was probably overrated at the time, I finally got around to seeing it recently and damn, its really not that good. Might be the weakest Spielberg movie I've seen, and I've seen AI. Not that the Academy was right that year with Gandhi, but saying ET is just way wronger.

Also, not to diss Annie Hall, but how the fuck does it have a higher rating on Rotten Tomatoes than Star Wars? If it were imdb I could believe it but Rotten Tomatoes works on a recommended/not recommended dichotomy.

I second eeeeverything MarsAtlas has said here.

I personally think that Unforgiven is not only the best western outside of the Fistfull of Dollars series, but it was the LAST western (though I haven't seen The Hateful Eight yet, and may be wrong)

I second everything The December King has said here, and thereby MarsAtlas' motion is carried. And as much as I love the Man with No Name series, I'd actually go one step further and say that I actually thought Unforgiven was a little bit better than any of the movies in it.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here