Least deserving "Best Picture" of the 2000's

Title says it all. The last 10 years what in your opinion was the least deserving Best Picture winner. All of these movies can be considered great but when thinking of if it's deserving or not, you have to look at what movies it beat out to be best picture.

This is funny, because i nominate A Beautiful Mind or Chicago because the first two LOTR trumped both of those...but i also nominate Return Of The King because it was the most boring of the series. That was the year City of God should have clearly won best picture but it was not even a nominee. I mean City of God was a richer mans Slumdog Millionaire IMO...but if not that, Mystic River was a superior motion picture to ROTK.

But the first vote shall be casted for Chicago. No excuse that it should have beat out not only Two Towers..but Gangs of New York as well. Road to Perdition was also superior and didnt even get a nod.


Here are the runner ups from the last 10 years. I plan on doing this for the 90's, 80's, 70's and maybe even the 60's as well. I'll be going into deep waters with the 50's and lower.

Discuss

2000
The Cider House Rules
The Green Mile
The Insider
The Sixth Sense

2001
Chocolat
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Erin Brockovich
Traffic

2002
Gosford Park
In the Bedroom
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
Moulin Rouge!

2003
Gangs of New York
The Hours
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
The Pianist

2004
Lost in Translation
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
Mystic River
Seabiscuit

2005
The Aviator
Finding Neverland
Ray
Sideways

2006
Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Good Night, and Good Luck.
Munich

2007
Babel
Letters from Iwo Jima
Little Miss Sunshine
The Queen

2008
Atonement
Juno
Michael Clayton
There Will Be Blood

2009
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader

Chicago would be my vote. I can't stand it, but the ladies love it. That should win by a landslide considering there are two chicks on this board and none post anymore. Wolf is the more emo type of gay so I can't count on him to vote for this either.

A Beautiful Mind, Fellowship is a far superior film.

but Chicago robbed us of the glory Gangs of New York rightfully deserved.

Gangs Of New York isn't really that great, it's a decent movie but nothing special.

It's a lot better than Chicago

I haven't seen Chicago so I couldn't comment.

Seems to me the majority are voting with their masculinity.

I hated Gladiator(Insider should have won that year), so it's a tie between that and Chicago.

The travesty of Chicago winning is that it beat out The Pianist, which I think was one of the great movies of the decade.

The Pianist was an excellent film.

Not me...i like Mean Girls. Chicago was just not best picture quality..if not GONY definetly Two Towers should have beat it out.

Canvas wrote:

I hated Gladiator(Insider should have won that year), so it's a tie between that and Chicago.

The travesty of Chicago winning is that it beat out The Pianist, which I think was one of the great movies of the decade.

The Pianist was an excellent film.

Insider got beat out by American Beauty the year before...Gladiator's biggest comp in my opinion was Traffic, but Gladiator was better.

Chicago by a landslide

how the fuck did Babel even get nominated

still think Michal Duncan Clark got hosed for not winning for Green Mile he was great in that

god 2009 was so weak

I see the Departed got a vote. Don't be shy...

KingsOwn19 wrote:

I see the Departed got a vote. Don't be shy...

That's me. A typical Scorcese movie. 45 minutes of brilliance followed by 90 minutes of mediocrity descending into stupidty. I grew up around Boston, know the Whitey Bulger story and that may have been part of the problem. The locations chosen for "secret meeting" shots were awful, Leonardo DiCaprio as a tough guys is always hysterically funny, only Mark Wahlberg's role was remotely credible and the rat at the end was the most insulting "in case you idiot viewers didn't get the point" reference in years. I'd have had it no better than third that year.

I voted american beauty!! Sixth Sense is a great movie to me and that would have been my choice.

LOTR

Boring

gomez1012 wrote:

LOTR

Boring

Only if you have a vagina and a small brain.

KingsOwn19 wrote:

Canvas wrote:

I hated Gladiator(Insider should have won that year), so it's a tie between that and Chicago.

The travesty of Chicago winning is that it beat out The Pianist, which I think was one of the great movies of the decade.

The Pianist was an excellent film.

Insider got beat out by American Beauty the year before...Gladiator's biggest comp in my opinion was Traffic, but Gladiator was better.

Thanks for the correction.

LudoCain wrote:

Only if you have a vagina and a small brain.

I couldnt get into man, not my type of movie

really someone didnt like American Beauty that movie was hilarious

i never was a big fan of the LOTR films either

I'll make one more comment. The best movie of 2003 didn't get nominated. The amazing House of Sand And Fog. Jennifer Connolly, Ben Kinsgly. Sad, sad and sadder yet but a wonderful piece of filmaking.

Chicago easily, would've given it to LOTR TT. I'd have Crash after that but the other nominees that year were nothing special either

To the person who voted for No Country for Old Men- I pray to God that There Will be Blood is the movie you would've subbed for it because the rest of those suck dick

A Beautiful Mind
Sick of Ron Howard making movies based on real events and then making up alot of the movie.

Yeah, Nash only heard voices. He never hallucinated like they made out in the movie.

I loved American Beauty and think it deserved the oscar...but i understand if a lot of people though Sixth Sense should have probably won that year. That movie was great and had a much bigger impact on the decade than American Beauty did considering every horror/thriller/mystery just HAD to have a twist after that.