Amazing.... Empire magazine runs a list of its Top Ten worst winners of the Oscar for Best Picture, and leaves out "Titanic". Not to mention those critics' darlings, "The Silence of the Lambs", "American Beauty", "Shakespeare in Love" and the king of crocks, "The English Patient" (on which subject, as I may have mentioned before, I agree with Seinfeld's Elaine):

ELAINE: Quit telling your stupid story, about the stupid desert, and just die already! (louder) Die!!

Being a contrarian, I actually enjoyed "Forrest Gump". Did the reviewers really dislike it that much, or were they anoyed at seeing the counterculture held up to ridicule? As for "Braveheart", I've somehow avoided seeing it. But Hannah McGill makes a good point in The Herald:

Back in 1995, the same magazine awarded Gibson's movie five stars, praising its "breathtaking beauty, resonating brutality, and rip-roaringly good storytelling".

Blogcritics are none too impressed with Empire's choices either. They go for "An American in Paris" and "Gigi", among others. Here's a complete list of BPs, if you want to choose your own non-favourites.

PS. Want to see how an actual Academy member is voting on this year's Awards? Roger L. Simon unburdens himself today.
|||Clive|||http://clivedavis.blogspot.com/2005/02/dud-oscars-amazing.html|||2/25/2005 08:58:00 am|||||||||