As I look over the list of movies nominated for Best Picture Oscars, I find it curious that none of the top grossing films of 2005 are on this list.

Best Picture nominations are:

Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Crash
Good Night, and Good Luck
Munich

I have seen exactly none of these films, in fact none of these films was even on the top ten grossing pictures of 2005, yet somehow they are all up for best picture awards. In fact you have to go all the way down to #48 before even one of these supposed best picture nominees appears.

The top ten grossing films of 2005 are:

1 Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith
2 Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
3 The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
4 War of the Worlds
5 King Kong
6 Wedding Crashers
7 Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
8 Batman Begins
9 Madagascar
10 Mr. & Mrs. Smith

Yet not a single one of these films is getting any decent recognition, the only Oscars nominations any of these top grossing films are getting are things like ART DIRECTION, CINEMATOGRAPHY, MAKEUP and COSTUME DESIGN.

You have to come to the conclusion that Hollywood is so far out of touch with the rest of us that they have no clue what so ever what a good movie is.

It seems a poorly made film with a leftist political agenda will get more Oscar recognitions that an excellently made film that made tons of money and has no political agenda.

Sadly, a great movie like Serenity only made $25.5 million domestically and appears #97 on the list of top grossing films, but this is still higher than 2 of the pictures nominated for best picture Oscars. (Good Night, and Good Luck #99 $25.1 mil and Capote #127 $15.7 mil)....Mind boggling!!!

When Titanic won its 11 Oscars including Best Picture, it was the top grossing film of that year easily and no one could deny that it was in fact the best picture of 1997. But I would bet my house that if Brokeback Mountain was released in 1997, Titanic would have lost the best picture Oscar to it.

Why?

I don’t know but I have my suspicions, but all of us that spent our money on Star Wars, Harry Potter and The Chronicles of Narnia must be stupid in the eyes of Hollywood. They must be perplexed that Batman Begins made almost 4 times the amount of money than a movie about a couple of gay cowboys.

It must really twist their reality depraved heads.

So as the 78th Academy Awards approaches, just keep in mind of who we are dealing with when you see who is taking home the Oscars and realize that the Oscars are no longer about what the best movie was or who turned in the best performance.....rather its about politics, political correctness and making an anti-establishment statement.

And that’s just sad because there are some truly wonderful films that should be getting their dues Oscar wise and instead are getting ignored.

I do take comfort in the fact that an incredibly fantastic film like The Chronicle of Narnia has made over $500 million and will get a sequel while a crap fest like Brokeback Mountain will fade away as a footnote in Hollywood history.

And just for the record, in my mind, The Chronicles of Narnia is clearly the best film of 2005. In fact is has to be the best film in the last five years at least. But because it had some Christian themes in it, it will never be recognized by the folks in lala land (aka Hollywood).

I don't think there is even a point in watching the Oscars this year, we all know what movie is gonna win....and that's just sad.

**All stats and figures are pulled from http://www.boxofficemojo.com and http://www.imdb.com

Since I figure someone will ask....No I haven't seen Brokeback Mountain and no I wont be seeing it either. So how can I call it a crap fest?

Simple, I know some people that have seen who's opinions I trust and I hear from multiple sources that its just not that great of a movie. Its not edited well nor is there any thing special about it other than its about a couple of gay cowboys.

Well my two cents here.

I have seen parts of Brokeback Mountain, and I must say that it did break the standard norm. Taking two actors and putting them in a standard that is far away from a normal setting. I think that part of the reason it is getting the nod is that it broke with the standards. That and the acting and script work I did see was quite good.

Just because a movie grossed a lot of money doesn't make it a good movie.

Star Wars was one of the worse movies out last year. The acting, aside from a very few scenes from Palpatine, was just horrible. The whole thing was more like a demo from ILM saying "Look what we can do." than anything else. Lucas should not be put in charge of everything.

Harry Potter wasn't nearly as good as Prisoner in my opinion, and if fact the whole run is getting a little stale to me. I just felt that the story didn't flow that well. The special effects were kinda neat, but how many times can you see the same story of Potter saving the day over and over?

The Chronicles... was pretty good, and it probably should have gotten a nod for Movie of the Year, but overall I got a little bored with it. To me some of the scenes, especially with the Queen, were a little overacted in my opinion.

War of the Worlds, well that was just another one that just plain out sucked. Nuff said.

King Kong, while a fairly neat remake, was just a tad long in the tooth for my taste. Add in the fact that how many times can you give a nod to Jackson without thinking something is going on?

Wedding Crashers I won't even comment on as I hate those stupid comedy type movies.

Charlie... was a fair remake, but I just liked the original better. They did stay pretty close to the original, but overall it was just a little too odd.

Batman Begins, well I liked the overall flow of the movie, but they screwed up the history of Batman. I do watch it every now and again, but a nod for PotY, no.

Madagascar, aside from The Lion King, there hasn't been an animated movie that has come close to deserving a nod.

Mr & Mrs. Smith I thought was entertaining, but in a Die Hard/Lethal Weapon sort of way. The dialoge was quite humerous at times with the give and take between Jolie and Pitt, but deserving of a nod, no.

If you haven't seen Good Night, and Good Luck, give it a go. While I thought it seemed a little rushed, it was filled with an all-star cast, and was completely well written and Very well done. One of my top movies, and highly recommended from me.

I have thought about seeing Munic, Capote, and Crash, but just haven't gotten around to it yet.

Though every year there are movies that people feel should be in there, and that the Oscars are out of tough, no doubt you will see that in "news" media, but the Oscars were never about what movie made the most money, and they never should be.

I saw Brokeback too and it was absolutely outstanding, the most moving film I've seen since Cold Mountain. Heath Ledger's performance was simply amazing; he literally inhabited that character to such an extent that his loneliness was visceral. I don't cry at much at all but the waterworks were just about ready to flow at the end of this movie, I felt so bad for the character.

I'll also say this: what made Brokeback great was that it was a great story with beautiful cinematography, a good soundtrack, great acting, and a wonderful script. It doesn't try to defend or promote "gay love," and it has no real political agenda. Hell, if I were gay I'd almost be pissed because the film sends the message that if you're gay you're going to be one miserable, unhappy SoB and your worst fears realized.

And I gotta agree with Koskun: box office gross doesn't always correlate with the quality of a film. I hope either Capote or Brokeback win best picture because either truly deserve it, though I do hope Heath wins for best actor.

Honestly, if Revenge of the Sith, War of the Worlds, or Kong were nominated for any of the major oscars, I'd be annoyed because they were $%^& films, utterly derivative dreck that wasted my time and money. Batman Begins is another story since I really enjoyed it.

I understand, lets take out the franchise films and see what we are left with:

1 The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
2 Wedding Crashers
3 Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
4 Madagascar
5 Mr. & Mrs. Smith

We can probably throw out Madagasgar as its a cartoon. So besides Narnia, not much to choose from here.

And dont get me wrong, I dont have any anti-gay agenda going here. but besides John Reynolds, everything I have heard from friends that have seen it was that is was a piece of crapola and I even heard the same thing from some online and radio film critics.

I just get the feeling that Brokeback is winning awards simply because of the gay subject matter and not because it was a good film and that annoys me because in my opinion Narnia should be one of the nominees.

Hollywood politics rarely has anything to do with whether a film is good or not or how else can anyone explain Annie winning best picture over Star Wars in 1977?

I think that it is important to remember this...

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, a professional honorary organization of over 6,000 motion picture professionals, was founded to advance the arts and sciences of motion pictures; foster cooperation among creative leaders for cultural, educational and technological progress; recognize outstanding achievements; cooperate on technical research and improvement of methods and equipment; provide a common forum and meeting ground for various branches and crafts; represent the viewpoint of actual creators of the motion picture; and foster educational activities between the professional community and the public-at-large.

Although we, the public, benefit through the form of entertainment, from the craftsmen in this industry, it was not created for us.

We are drawn to it because it is an extension of our fantasies and imaginations, which these people realize for us.

_________________
"There's no right way to eat a rhesus"!

I am not clear on what point your trying to make here.

Please elaborate

It's a celebration among the members of the motion picture industry of what they consider crowning achievments of the past year in their various fields.

It doesn't have anything to do with what the movie going public deems popular or worthy of recognition.

That is what ceremonies like the 'Peoples Choice Awards' are for.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that is comes back to the basics of acting and storytelling and how it relates to the human condition.

I think that's why most of the fantastic tales that you mentioned earlier will rarely get the nod for nominations.

_________________
"There's no right way to eat a rhesus"!

Well, not to be the gay defender of Brokeback but there's a reason the film has won so many critics circles across the country. And, Scorp, living in such a deeply red state as you do, were the critics tearing into the film locals? Wouldn't surprise me at all that Brokeback wouldn't be too palatable to the cultures of Colorado, Wyoming, etc.

At least the "icky" parts of the film were very brief and not too explicit. I'd love to see the outtakes too.

Heath: "Dear god, Ang, where the hell is the mouthwash you promised us after we shot this scene???"

Well keep in mind that Denver and Boulder are very liberal cities that are Democratic strongholds. If I remember right both the Denver daily papers liked the film as they usually like films like B.M.

I wonder if there is a state by state breakdown of the critics of the film so we could see if it similar to our blue/red state map.

Crow made a very good point that I have to digest for a while. But I still stand by my assertion that Hollywood has no clue.

No big surprise, but Brokeback was generally loved by the critics on both coasts. Heck, I wouldn't have bothered with it if the critical acclaim hadn't been so unamimous. A love story between two Wyoming cowboys isn't exactly my cup of tea, but it turned out to be a fantastic movie. I heard Larry McCurtry (Lonesome Dove author) read the original short story years ago, loved it, and thought it would make a great movie. I hope he wins for adaptation.

I just heard that Hollywood in concerned that ratings for the Oscars will be down because so few people have seen any of the best pictures nominees.

Thus few will care and want to watch.

I think that demographics has a lot to do with that.

The 'Best Picture' nominees play to a considerably more mature section of the public.

Whereas the 'Big Budget Blockbusters' appeal to a much younger crowd with more 'disposable income'.

Without those 'Big' films being represented I agree that could result in lower ratings.

I don't know that to be a fact, just a theory on my part.

_________________
"There's no right way to eat a rhesus"!

Though it usually results in the movies getting another run in theaters and/or a boost in DVD sales/rentals.

2006's Awards aren't any different from other years

Last years top films
Gross Movie
436,471,036 Shrek 2 (2004)
373,377,893 Spider-Man 2 (2004)
370,614,210 The Passion of the Christ (2004)
279,167,575 Meet the Fockers (2004)
261,437,578 The Incredibles (2004)
249,358,727 Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
186,739,919 The Day After Tomorrow (2004)
176,049,130 The Bourne Supremacy (2004)
173,671,234 The Polar Express (2004)
173,008,894 National Treasure (2004)


Can you honestly tell me that any of these should be compared to Gone with the Wind?

I can tell you one thing, the day a movie as crappy as The Day After Tomorrow gets an Oscar for Best Picture is the day I start hunting down each and every member of the Academy. I'm sure that Roger Ebert will help me on that quest, along with every single other person who is assaulted with the endless stream of crap flowing out of Hollywood each and every day. Threads like this complaining that these high grossing films DESERVE TO BE IMMORTALIZED AS THE BEST MOVIE OF THE YEAR truly makes me afraid of how many bullets I'm going to be buying in the near future.

_________________
Never Knows Best