Top ten times the Academy got it wrong

 By now you should that I have some hot takes about the films that appear on IMDB's top 1000 films of all time. You can check out my lists on some of the most overrated films ever.  But the hot takes don't stop there, as I will be counting the top times that the Academy got it wrong whether that's awarding or even nominating a film or an actor or actress. This list is in no order but chronology.

Dances with Wolves (1990)

Number 333 on the top 1000 films is Kevin Costner's epic Western 'Dances with Wolves.' Yet that isn't its only accolade for it also won the 1991 Best Film Oscar.

Yes, you read that correctly. It beat the likes of Goodfellas and Awakenings to win the Academy's most prestigious award. How? This three-hour long film is beyond tedious. Costner's wooden performance did nothing to help matters at all. And to all the critics saying it contains a white saviour complex, I challenge you to stay awake long enough to provide evidence of that. If it were up to me, then I would award the Oscar to Awakenings. Both Robert De Niro and Robin Williams excelled in that.

JFK (1991)

Oliver Stone's epic political thriller ranks 306 on the top 1000 films of all time. It focusses on the investigation following the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

Again, it stars Kevin Costner. Again, it is a three-hour snooze-fest. Thankfully, it didn't receive a Best Picture Oscar, but it was still nominated. Why? It is a bloated, over-long, unfocussed affair that is bursting to the brim with absolutely anything that is related to the Kennedy case. It quite rightly lost to the Silence of the Lambs, but it shouldn't have been in the running in the first place.

The Thin Red Line (1998)

Terrence Malik directed this Vietnam war-film to 694th on the top 1000 films and to a Best Picture nomination. But just like JFK, I am puzzled as to why it was nominated.

It is just plain pretentious. Malik seemed more interested in philosophising and arty camerawork than in telling an interesting story. It's a war film, right? So, why don't we see any war happening?

It is also unfocussed with too many cameos and not enough main characters. It ultimately lost to Shakespeare in Love, but I think its fellow nominee Saving Private Ryan explored the theme of war much more effectively.

Crash (2004)

Paul Haggis' Crash ranks 383rd on the top 1000 films.

Crash won the 2005 Best Picture Oscar. And I am definitely not alone in thinking this was the wrong decision. The concept was admirable - an exploration of race relations in Los Angeles, but the execution left a lot to be desired.

Crash was a contrived, convoluted mess that rushed and over-simplified its key themes and ideas. The far simpler Brokeback Mountain should have won instead. But Hollywood just wasn't brave enough to celebrate a film about two gay cowboys.

Michael Clayton (2007)

Michael Clayton ranks low on the top 1000 films at 977th. It stars George Clooney who plays a fixer un-masking a cover-up at his New York law firm.

Michael Clayton received a number of Oscar nominations including Best Picture, Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor/Actress. I don't think it deserved any of them.

It was a clinically, cold film which is severely lacking any heart. Although that does make sense since it is about lawyers. George Clooney's lacklustre performance did little to help things.

The Fighter (2010)

David O'Russell's biographical sports-drama ranks in as 408th on the top 1000 films.

This film follows the lives of two boxing brothers played by Mark Wahlburg and Christian Bale. Melissa Leo plays their mother and she won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar. Although she was good, I would argue her co-star Amy Adams, who was also nominated, was even better. Amy Adams should have won instead.

She was the one redeeming feature in a film that I didn't care for at all.

Argo (October 2012) 

Ben Affleck's directed this biographical history thriller to the 445th place on the top 1000 films, as well as the Best Film Oscar.

Don't get me wrong. This is a fine film, but is it really Oscar-worthy? Is it better than its fellow nominees like Django Unchained, Life of Pi, Silver Linings Playbook or Zero Dark Thirty. I'm not sure about that. Sure, it's thrilling enough, but then the tension dissipates in an overly-sentimental conclusion.

And while Ben Affleck is a good director, he is a rather wooden actor. Argo definitely would have been better if it had a different performer in the lead role.

Lincoln (November 2012)

Steven Spielberg's biographical drama ranks as 836th on the top 1000 list. It also netted Daniel Day-Lewis his third Best Actor Oscar win.

I haven't seen My Left Foot, but I can attest that he was magnificent in There will be Blood. Does the same magnificence transfer over into Lincoln? I'm not so sure. It certainly doesn't help that the film is 150 minutes long with a massive cast. 

Daniel Day-Lewis stars as Abraham Lincoln, but I'm really not sure that his performance was Oscar-worthy. It lacked the same depth that I've seen in his other roles. I would have much rather seen Denzel Washington win his third Oscar for Flight, but we know that the Academy loves a biopic.

Captain Phillips (2013)

Paul Greenglass' Captain Phillips ranks as 302nd on the top 1000 films.

Tom Hanks stars as the eponymous Captain Phillips - a shipping captain taken prisoner by Somali prisoners.

Captain Phillips was nominated for a number of Oscars including Best Film, Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Supporting Actor, but not Best Actor. It was a brilliant performance, so why wasn't Tom Hanks nominated. This has to be one of the most egregious snubs in Oscar history. In Captain Phillips, Tom Hanks plays an everyman who becomes an unlikely hero. The Academy loves a biopic, so why wasn't Hanks nominated?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022)

Being released in 2022, EEAAO is seven years too late to feature on the 2015 edition of the top 1000 films of all time. However, it still swept the Oscars winning Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor, Best Original Screen, Best Editing and Best Supporting Actress.

I take issue with the Best Supporting Actress win. Jamie Lee-Curtis won this Oscar for the role of IRS inspector Deirdre Beaubeidre. While Michelle Yeoh and Key Huy Quan were well-deserving of their Oscar-wins, I can't say the same for Jamie Lee-Curtis. She was good, but definitely not Oscar-worthy. It didn't have the depth I would expect to see from an Oscar performance. I would argue that her co-star Stephanie Hsu, who was also nominated for the same role, should have won the award instead.

Have I missed out anything? Gone with the Wind? Shakespeare in Love? Tommy Lee Jones in the Fugitive? Don't worry. A second list will be coming soon enough. 

Another Ten films that should not be on the top 1000 films of all time

 There are many films that should not be on the top 1000 films of all time. Ten of them appear on my first list. Here are ten more. I'm sure I will get some heat for this list, but that doesn't change the fact tat these films are overrated and plain bad. This list is in no particular order except chronology.

Aguirre: The Wrath of God (1972)

Defenders of Aguirre may argue that director Werner Herzog was making this film on a shoestring budget, but there are plenty of low-budget films which are so good. Once comes to mind. Aguirre: the Wrath of God was tedious from the start. The characters were stupid and annoying, there was too much philosophy and too many shots of characters standing around doing nothing. Klaus Klinski also gave of the most boring lead-role performances ever.

The Goonies (1985)

I can just hear all the Gen Xers and early millennials sharpening their pitchforks in protest. For many, the Goonies was a stalwart of their childhoods.

But I found this coming-of-age drama incredibly irritating. it didn't help that I couldn't understand much of the dialogue due to the pre-pubescent child actors screaming over one another.

The adult actors weren't much better. The usually charismatic Joey Pantoliano was reduced to a cartoon villain. At least Key Huy Quan redeemed himself in Everything Everywhere All at Once.

Dances with Wolves (1990)

How on God's Green Earth did this film win the Best Picture Oscar? How did Kevin Costner win Best Director? How did it beat Goodfellas and Awakenings?

I'm sure Costner would explain it to me in the verbal exposition that made Dances with Wolves such a tedious watch. This three-hour slog could be number one on the top ten films to put you to sleep. It has been accused of white saviourism, but I don't know how anybody stayed awake long enough to make that judgement.

The Thin Red Line (1998)

If you like your war films interesting, dramatic and explosive, you best look elsewhere than Terrence Malik's World War two film.

This boring affair spent too much time philosophising and too little time actually showing the characters fighting in the war...which is the subject matter of the film.

It also wasted its great cast. From Sean Penn to Adrian Brody to Woody Harrelson to John Travolta and George Clooney, I would challenge you to name the protagonist of this confused, pretentious mess.

The Boondock Saints (1999)

Where do we start with this disaster of a film that polarised audiences and critics? Audiences loved it. Critics hated it. Guess what side I came down on?

From the over-the-top performances to the cheesy dialogue, gratuitous violence and confusing direction, this film had the feel of being shot, written and directed by a twelve-year-old boy picking up a camera for the first time. Definitely not worthy of a place on the top 1000 films of all time.

In the Mood for Love (2000)

We are going all the way to Hong Kong for this romantic drama that was lacking in suspense, tension and anything that would have made it remotely interesting. It was dull with a capital D.

There were too many characters making stupid decisions, plus too many shots of characters sitting in empty rooms not doing anything. In the Mood for Love? In the mood for an interesting film to watch.

How to Train your Dragon (March 2010)

Another film that started a franchise. But I am baffled as to how. Yes, the animation was cute enough, but that did little to make up for the predictable, tepid plot.

The supporting cast all blended into one another. And Hiccup and Astrid were two cliched, poorly-drawn characters.

Megamind (November 2010)

As I am writing this article, I am struggling to remember why I didn't like it, but that is its most damning criticism. It was not a memorable film. It wasn't even entertaining, as I could barely keep my eyes open. 

Maybe if I were a kid I would have appreciated the silly humour and Brad Pitt and Will Ferrell's lacklustre performances, but I didn't. I didn't appreciate this film either.

Despicable Me 2 (July 2013)

How the first Despicable Me got a sequel is a mystery to me. How the sequel ranked 733rd on the top 1000 films of all time is the bigger mystery.

It is as bad as its predecessor with its infantile humour and Steve Carrell's incredibly irritating voice performance. Yes, the animation was eye-popping, but, beyond that, there was nothing to appeal to anybody over the age of ten.

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (November 2013)

Just like the Goonies defined the adolescence of early millennials, the Hunger Games did the same for late millennials. Except this late millennial.

Like Despicable Me 2, I'm puzzled as to how the Hunger Games got a sequel. Catching Fire is slightly better than its predecessor, but that isn't saying much.

It was mired by the same plot holes, the same tepid love-story and the same confusing action scenes. Yes, J-Law, PSH, Donald Sutherland and, especially, Woody Harrelson, gave good performances, but they were not enough to save this film. Catching Fire? Dumpster fire more like.

If I haven't given you enough reason to light your torches and sharpen your pitchforks, I wouldn't worry. There'll be another of these lists coming soon enough.