The Most Disappointing Films of 2000-2009

I decided to make a list of the most disappointing films of the decade. I came up with 21 that have some major significance as far as pissing people off. I did not, however, find any films in the years 2000 and 2009(because people didn't expect a lot in 2009, I guess) A rule I created for this list are that sequels or prequels do not qualify.(because I could create a whole list full of these. Yeah, I'm looking right at you Matrix and Pirates of the Caribbean sequels.) Well, to the list......................,


21.XXX(2002)

Vin Diesel+Bad Director+Crummy Script+Hot but terrible Italian Actress playing Russian woman+Dumb Plot=A lot of pissed off moviegoers and number 21 on this list. Enough explained.

20.The Punisher(2004)

Thomas Jane taking on a role much more than he can handle:check. Bad, whogivesashit director:check. Another version of a terrible movie:check. Washed-up hall of fame actor who doesn't belong at all in this movie:check. Enough said.(Why did anyone have high hopes for this? I mean, just 15 years earlier, Dolph freakin' Lundgren(the Swedish Steven Segal) was the star of this horrible movie with the same plot and story. DOLPH LUNDGREN!!!!!!!! Alright, enough said.)

19.Babel(2006)

Best example: A director makes two largely independent films.(one is this, the other one rhymes with twenty-one yams. Figure it out.) Both movies have similar characters with similar development, with similar plots and breakdowns, except, one makes sense, the other goes off in the distance to a point I can't even understand.(and I'm a David Lynch fan.)(and this also explains how bad of a year 2006 was for movies. Great example:21 yams=2 Oscar Nominations, Quality Movie. Babel=7 Oscar Nominations, and...............a win? What!? I didn't know that. Ok, lets move on.

18.Big Fish(2003)

How about big flop?(!!!!!!!!!!!) This, in addition to another Tim Burton crapterpiece later on down the list, were sure fire signs he was explicibly an overrated talent. This film loses me about 60% of the way through. 60% of the way through, I immediately knew what was going to happen from then on until the end. It seems like Burton had a super-good idea for a movie, pitched it, and didn't know at all how to put any element into the story when it came time to actually make the movie, and had someone else do it instead. Tim Burton is like Artie Buco on The Sopranos. He builds such a strong reputation with his restaurant in which he used to cook the food, but now he has Puerto Ricans and his wife do it, while he annoys the hell out of his customers. That's who Tim Burton has become in the last 10 years.

17.Road to Perdition(2002)

Can I see a show of hands of how many people were thoroughly disappointed and wanted their money back after seeing this?(I guarantee 8 out of 10 people do, but 6 out of the 8 are morons and were only disappointed because Tom Hanks dies at the end. Oops! **SPOILER ALERT!!!**) I was disappointed because the story is about bloody gangster violence, but features a father/son relationship sub-plot the prime piece.(I didn't buy the kid's performance either.) The previews tell you to expect a prohibition/mob story with a few twists and double-crosses. Not a gayed-up bonding story with minimal mob plot lines.

16.Syriana(2005)

I'm not gonna lie. This actually was a really good movie. But, considering the the simple fact that this is about as interesting as watching glass being made, I have a hard time paying attention to this.(I have a great attention span when it comes to movies. I even sat all the way through Miracle at St. Anna for god's sake.) But, even then, there's a bigger problem. The film's director just let this issue fly right by. This is a super realistic propaganda film(or it's trying to be) that never once in this movie does anything to prove true to what the films saying to be true. So, it's a subjective-ranting nonsense story that comes out of all of this. Is that what I wanted from this movie? Absolutely not. What if the film's production team told the real story? It'd be super boring. So, I guess the film's story outline is just plain rubbish and couldn't be effectively made into a movie in the first place.

15.The Number 23(2007)

What happened to this movies expectations once people actually saw it? Here's an example.(the stuff is our expectations) I assume many had a wft look on their face after this.(I didn't see this in theaters) A, for the most part, forgettable, retarded film. One positive thing to say: Jim Carry=Awesome actor. I credit him for pretending to pull our interest in even though he couldn't even make sense of this incredibly confusing story. I got nothing else.

14. The Day the Earth Stood Still(2008)

Another year, another highly anticipated remake that falls flat on it's face and enrages all us moviegoers. What happened you ask? How about asking Jennifer Connelly to stare into the camera with a semi-surprised look for an hour and a half? Casting Kathy Bates?(for any role. It's never a good idea unless she's playing a psychotic bitch who kidnaps a famous writer and imprisons him in her home.) How about not having any story and solely relying on special effects to carry the movie?(see Transformers movies as well as just about any Roland Emmerich film) Anybody got anything else? No. Ok. (Actually, I have one little thing left to add. I am shocked that Keanu Reeves was not the problem at all with this film. I'm not saying he was good, but he didn't screw it up. The production team and director did.)

13. The Illusionist(2006)

This was totally on par with what it could have and should have been through the first 30-40 minutes of the film. I honestly can say I absolutely enjoyed this up until the point Jessica Biel shows her beautiful, plot-killing character face in this movie. That combined with Paul Giamatti who couldn't grasp his character. (or I'm convinced he's just mentally retarded. I'm not ruling that out. There's been a lot of movies he's blown it big time in these last few, couple of years.) The film also loses it's direction with Jessica Biel's character.(combined with the fact Biel can't act.) She joins a long list of other woman who kill the plots of movies.(Julia Roberts in Charlie Wilson's War, Natalie Portman in any Star Wars movie, Juliette Lewis in What's Eating Gilbert Grape, Winona Ryder in The Age of Innocence. etc..........)

12. V for Vendetta(2005)

I actually thought the reason I hated this was Natalie Portman's character. After watching it a few more times, I realize she actually was not bad. The problem with this film is how the plot develops. It develops too early, and doesn't allow the viewer to fully understand it or get swayed with it. It's a movie about revolution, but it turns out to be a character study instead of focusing solely on the story's plot? That lone reason left me very disappointed in what I thought would be this generation's version of Brazil.

11. I am Legend(2007)

Here's a classic example of a terrible novel adaption that gets made into a forgettable movie. Will Smith was good, the roleplaying as a whole wasn't bad. But, when a really good book gets butchered into a Hollywood piece of offal like this, (not to mention the retarded Bob Marley reference that I guess was supposed to be part of the story, but wasn't at all in the book.) All I can say is; thoroughly disappointed. Hollywood should not add Will Smith+awesome book+crappy additions to story+1 man tries to save mankind and ends up sacrificing it his life for it. It didn't work at all.

10. The Da Vinci Code(2006)

Ron Howard should not have directed this. Ron Howard is a family-film, imaginative type director. I find myself in a deja vu moment from the last post, with this being another crappy adaption from an excellent book. I also hate to say this, since I really like Tom Hanks, but he just was not believable. It was kind of like John Cusack in Grosse Point Blank, where I just don't see him as an contract killer no matter how good of an actor he is, or how good he was in the movie. I just can't watch that movie. Just like I can't watch this because I can't see Tom Hanks as the character he plays. On top of that, the book was gripping, powerful, and just freezing cold at times with the way the characters handled situations. This movie had none of this. This is Ron Howard's fault and the main reason this disappoints.

9. Pearl Harbor(2001)

It's a war movie that is ultimately a love story, although the love story makes no sense and the whole film is historically inaccurate. I just summed up why this movie sucks in one sentence. Very impressive. But, I'll dig deeper to destroy the performances of Ben Affleck, Kate Beckinsale, and the biggest monster stinker of them all.......................Josh Hartnett. I mean he has murdered so many big roles in big movies(see The Black Dalia, Black Hawk Down, Sin City, Lucky Number Slevin, O, The Faculty and Wicker Park) Why this movie depended so much on their performances, and the dumb love triangle sub-plot, I'll never be able to understand. I love to rip Micheal Bay and his inability to make one single believable film, but I'll save him a few spots down.(you should know for what movie it is)

8.Planet of the Apes(2001)

Awful......awful...........just awful film. Nothing much to say here except bad direction, terrible special effects and mechanical effects(where did the budget go?), some of the worst acting in a lead role aside from John Travolta in Battlefield Earth, and one of the worst remakes of all time, if not the worse.

7. Hulk(2003)

Another crappy remake. Ditto the same as last post except even more misguided and driveled. Kinda reminds me of this.

6. Transformers(2007)

How to piss off half the people who saw this-By Micheal Bay:(mostly nerdy film geeks like myself) Take a dump in the most evil way possible by making the film nothing like the original series and comic book and ignoring any urge imaginable to do any justice to the living fanbase of the origin of this story, use CGI and slow motion in every other scene, and worst of all.......make the story so hollywooded-up it doesn't seem believable at all. I'm finished. Oh, and fuck you Shia Labeouf. You're a bad actor and I hate you. Now I'm finished.

5. Walk the Line(2005)

Let me say: Good film. Powerful where it needed to be, emotions are felt. But, that's the story's doing there. The only reason this is on here and high as it is, is because of the wildly overrated performance of Joaquin Phoenix as Johnny Cash. This is not only Joaquin's fault but director James Mangold's. I am a huge Johnny Cash fan and have watched tons of old videos of his performances and interviews. Joaquin acts almost nothing like Johnny. The retarded facial expressions he makes me bewildered as to what he's trying to do. Lousy performance from Joaquin Phoenix. And I could never understand the whole "lets make him look like nothing more than a troubled drug addict" schick. I asked several people what they thought of this and they all gave me a variation of "I didn't know he was such a big drug user" response. That's not exactly the reaction you want to get out of people who see the movie about a legendary musician.

4. Jarhead(2005)

I already ripped this movie already in my soon to be overrated directors post under the Sam Mendes section. Refer to that for a good review that hammers the nail on the head of why this movie should not have been made.

3. The Village(2004)

"What? Huh?" I swear those words were uttered out of my mouth when the whole plot came undone and I discovered the true horror of the creep terrifying the crap out of this small community. He was a deranged person who felt he was told by the voices in his head.(I guess?) Why M. Night Shyamalen movies are so confusing and have more questions than answers I can't understand. I can't wait to slam him in my overrated directors post.

2. Righteous Kill(2008)

Robert De Niro and Al Pacino acting on screen for the first time ever. How'd it go? Not so well. This would be like Micheal Jordan and Larry Bird playing on the same team except they're both about 90 and don't really care anymore. I don't think they (Pacino and De Niro) really did care as much as we (moviegoers) did. They probably just wanted to get paid, do the damn movie so people (like me) would get suckered into paying to see it, and continuing on with whatever was left of their careers. The worst part of the whole situation was the injustice of everyones expectations for this movie. I and everyone else were completely disappointed. The other part that was really terrible about the films consequences is how we will view Pacino and De Niro when they pass away. What will be made of their legacy? Why do they stand among the greatest actors of all time? One thing is for sure though. These two no longer are elite or even good actors anymore in the present. They can't carry a entire film like they used to. We'll see what becomes of them in the next decade. I can only hope.

1. Miracle at St. Anna(2008)




I light of the Chisrtmas season just being over, I have a short video to show you that sumed up my reaction outside the theater after seeing this from one of the greatest and delightful Christmas films ever. Enjoy: (oh, and uhh....What I thought of Spike Lee is what is said of Frank Shirley. So, yeah. Enjoy)




Here's what became of this film; We will NEVER take Spike Lee seriously again. When he crumbled after Crooklyn, then rose from the ashes of it's disgust with Clockers, He got Game, Summer of Sam, 25th Hour, and Inside Man, we could consider him a good director. But, after this and (just for sports fans) Kobe Doin' Work, I can say I can't him seriously anymore. This was supposed to be his answer to Steven Speilberg's Saving Private Ryan. Spike gets too caught up in personal opinions about race(which is what the big problem is with this film. Not the only one, the big one.) and can't make a good movie at times because this screws with the dynamic of everything that goes into the film. The editing, the story, the film's message, the acting of the Italian actors and D.W. Sweeney, the script, and the stupid degrading scenes such as the scene near the beginning where the German woman speaks on the intercom to the all-black platoon, and the actual effects during the war/fighting scenes. Much of the editing was attempted to be covered up by emotional continuity(such as the scene where the Germans questioned a group belonging to an Italian church and murdered them in slow motion while Angelo and his invisible friend escape. Sounds rediculous right? It gets worse. I'm not going to spoil the rest for you. Just watch it for the scattered scenes of humor especially when Angelo calls Train 'Chocoltate Giant'.(that's the only reason I rewatched it)

Proof that Brian De Palma is truly overrated(and a bit of a hack)

In my last post,(scroll down to the Untouchables part) I stated The Untouchables was only a few bad scenes from being terrible. Well, I didn't see this connection until recently, but apparently, the best scene in The Untouchables was ripped off from the 1925 silent classic The Battleship Potemkin !!!!! To the videos.

From The Battleship Potemkin:

The focus is on the baby carriage part(skip to 6:30) that is the focal point of this analyzation. Watch the next video from The Untouchables to see what I mean.


Enough said. This leads me to want to do an overrated/underrated directors list.

A good rule to live by for filmmakers: Never name a movie after a great movie quote

Alright, so there's this movie on Hulu entitled You Talkin' to me?(read the comments for some more perspective.) that really blows, (and I think it's meant to do this) but I can't seem to get anything going that resembles a good film diary, so I'll just do a mini-review and point out the awfulness. The story is about a young actor living in New York named Bronson Green, (some no-name actor) who has a stupid obsession (one that's not clearly defined with origin or principal, or any specific reasoning to why this happens by the way) with Robert De Niro.(especially in Taxi Driver, hence the title) His friend (it's the guy who was Bubba in Forrest Gump) is a model and decides to move to Los Angeles and wants Bronson to come with him. (wait a minute, wait a minute...........isn't this the plot set-up from Stir Crazy?) Bronson arrives in LA and gets a job ironically as a taxi driver. He continuously gets rejected for auditions for acting roles. Eventually he has an epiphany and realizes production companies are looking for a certain look, not acting skill. (which he has neither) The look, for some reason, is blonde hair and a stupid surfer persona. So, he decides to change his look (before he had dark hair, had a New York accent, and acted like De Niro. Seriously.) to the surfer look. (It's apparent he's terrible acting this look. Even the actor's in the movie think he sucks.) (Some guy he meets on the street tells him he thinks he's insane.) He meets an attractive blonde girl (played by Faith Ford who was Corky Sherwood on Murphy Brown. Here's a good clip.) He begins to date her, and her father finds out. Her father meets Bronson and decides to hire him as a spokesperson for his TV show. Bronson eventually finds out he's a christian...and a raving racist. His black friend, (named Thatcher by the way) has a problem with this and confronts Bronson. Then, after that melo-drama, the kicker in the story happens. Bronson and his girlfriend are at the movies (watching Taxi Driver undoubtedly even though he has a different look) (Worth Noting: This movie takes place in the late 80's. Taxi Driver was released in 1976. So how the hell can Bronson continue to watch the movie in theaters?) His old girlfriend barrels in to the theater where she automatically knows where Bronson is.(I don't know how she knew this.) She confronts Bronson who walks out of the theater with his girlfriend trying to ignore his ex-girlfriend. She then reveals Bronson isn't who he says he is. (he had a different look before he met beautiful blonde) She says this as if it's a horrible thing he's done, in which his current girlfriend gets upset and starts bawling before she runs off. (she even says the classic "How could you do this to me!?" line.)(Why she's upset, I'll never know) Bronson now torn with his bombarded relationships between his friend and girlfriend, fritters around until he finds out the plot of his friend's embarrassing conclusion. (or the dumb moviewatcher may think) Archer(blonde's father, Bronson's boss) plans on taking his goons with him to kidnap Thatcher, taking him to the top of a billboard where he's featured in a milk advertisement, and dumping white paint on him to embarrass him with self-humiliation. (yeah, this is the plot of the exciting climax. But, it does match the rest of the awfulness of this movie) To make a long story short, Bronson and his girlfriend (who shows up out of nowhere to help him) save the day, predictably. Nothing else noteworthy happens, the end. The moral of the story; anyone can make a feature film, I guess. Especially the son of a famous movie producer.

John C. Reilly stepped on the elevator and pressed down

This picture sums up John C. Reilly's career right now very nicely

With the release of Cirque du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant, I'm wondering what happened to the once great supporting actor known as John C. Reilly. He began his career with such promise. Even after that, he went on to have some great success. A few years after the great success, he hit the shit slide. This new film of his hasn't been released yet, but I can tell you already it's gonna blow bigger chunks than this.(Not the film, the scene.) Here's some proof. And some more regarding John. Alright, so here's a list of his early success:

• What's Eating Gilbert Grape(1993)
• Boogie Nights(1997)
• The Thin Red Line(1998)
• Magnolia(1999)
• The Good Girl(2002)
• Gangs of New York(2002)
• Chicago(2002)(Oscar Nomination)
• The Hours(2002)
• and The Avaiator(2004)

Then the shit list:

• Dark Water(2005)
• Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby(2006)
• Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story(2007)(This movie sucks. Don't try to make a case.)
• The Promotion(2008)
• Step Brothers(2008)(Again, don't make a fucking case. I forgot about this movie until I wrote this.)
• Cirque du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant(2009)

I think I've made my point. John, stop working with doucebags like Will Ferrell and Judd Apatow. That's the only advice I can give you.

Made-Up Movie Lingo

"Career Achievement" Oscar Winner

Enjoy the moment Kate. God knows you're not getting it again. And you didn't actually deserve it you bitch.

Definition-An Oscar that an actor, actress, or director wins after multiple nominations or many years in the movie business, but doesn't actually deserve and is only awarded the award because it's been long overdue.

Origin-Lots of long time speculation by movie fanatics (like myself) and critics. So it's more like a conspiracy. Ok not really.

Qualifications for the Award-

• Has to have 20 years of experience, or over 50 years of age, or have at least 5 other nominations.
• Someone who has possibly deserved it more in another year, but won over someone else who deserved it more years later.
• Someone who fits the qualifications cannot be counted for the theory if they outright deserve it. (Example: Martin Scorcese-2006)
• If the person fits the qualifications, but won earlier in their career, they can't be counted.
  
  
  All the examples-(in chronological order)

For Best Actor-

1973-Jack Lemmon-Save the Tiger

Jack plays disgruntled businessman Harry Stoner who questions his faith in the decency of society and looks to regain the love for life he once had in his youth. That basically sums up the role.

Previous Nominations- 1959 for Some like it Hot, 1960 for The Apartment, and Days of Wine and Roses in 1962.

Who should have won-Al Pacino in Serpico. Pacino's character development was nearly flawless in Serpico. How he adapts to the mood of the character throughout the film is nothing short of Oscar-Worthy. Although, Pacino was glad to lose according to recent sources. I just hope it doesn't happen again, like maybe next year..................

1974-Art Carney-Harry and Tonto

Art plays old fucker Harry Coombes in this delightful comedy? Wait a minute, this is a comedy? I own this movie and love it, but it's never funny. Anyway, Harry gets kicked out of his New York apartment to live with his son in LA. Along the way, he meets some interesting characters(but not too interesting) and takes his beloved cat, Tonto with him.

Previous Nominations-No Oscars. But, plenty of Emmy's.

Who should have won-Al Pacino in The Godfather:Part Two. What an outrage! I wasn't even born before this happened and I'm furious! The Godfather part one and two are among the greatest films ever! Al Pacino is at his absolute best and there's no doubt the academy screwed up big time here.

1976-Peter Finch-Network

Alright, Peter was amazing in this role. It was like he watched the 1931 version of Frankenstein on an endless loop everyday before shooting and emulated Colin Clive. He was insane and totally focused in his portrayal of anchorman Howard Beale. The film begins with Beale getting fired. After this unfortunate occurrence, he begins with this mad on air raving while finishing his tenure with the company. Oddly, the news ratings explode because of Beale, he proclaims one of the greatest quotes in film history, he gets killed because he takes things too far. The End

Previous Nominations-Just one. For Sunday Bloody Sunday in 1971.

Who should have won-Robert De Niro in Taxi Driver. De Niro does what Finch does(goes insane over a period of time) only a little better probably due to a simpler plot which allows De Niro to progressively change with the story. So, I guess it's more of the situation that work in De Niro's favor, but he didn't get the prize at the end because......ya know. He got to say a famous line in his movie though.

1981-Henry Fonda-On Golden Pond

Fonda plays another old fucker(this seems to be a popular choice for the academy. Give it to the guy who's old and is about to die soon. Or so it seems.) who is retired along with his wife(Katherine Hepburn) living in their summer home near a pond called Golden Pond. Henry's real life daughter(Jane Fonda) visits with her fiance and son as her and Henry try to get along and eventually do. That's the story.

Previous Nominations-For The Grapes of Wrath in 1940 and 12 Angry Men in 1957(as a producer.)

Who should have won-Paul Newman in Absence of Malice. Call it a crapshoot if it would have been him, but his portrayal of dead mafia boss's son Colin, is ridiculously well done. I can't say that about Fonda. Fonda was good, but Newman was way better.

1986-Paul Newman-The Color of Money

Newman plays Fast Eddie Felson again in this sequel to The Hustler(1961) that doesn't quite measure up to it's predecessor. Substitute young Newman for Tom Cruise, Jackie Gleason for old Newman, a totally invested Robert Rossen for a not so committed Martin Scorsese. Guess what you get? A good film that isn't as memorable, but an Oscar for Newman? Make Sense? Didn't think so.
Previous Nominations-For Cat on a Hot Tin Roof in 1958, The Hustler in 1961, Hud in 1963, Cool Hand Luke in 1967, Absence of Malice in 1981, and for The Verdict in 1982.

Who should have won-William Hurt in Children of a Lesser God. Not too many people(men especially) can sink to the sensitivity level that William Hurt did in this one. He totally convinced me that he was truly in love with a deaf woman. He won the previous year for Kiss of the Spider Woman , so the academy thought "he's already got his, so lets give it to Newman already." Horseshit.

1992-Al Pacino-Scent of a Woman

Pacino plays Lt. Colonel Frank Slade in this captivating tale of two men, one young, one old, who find common ground as they feel out each others differences, and become friends over a disreputable trip to New York. Did I mention Pacino is also Blind in this movie? Yeah, that and this shit theory won it for him, even though the script and direction were honestly in question.(Blow me if you disagree. This same guy directed Gigli. The least they could have done is some Jo-Lo TandA, but I'll cover that horrible movie another time.) Anyway, absolute bullshit.

Previous Nominations-For Serpico in 1973, Dog Day Afternoon in 1975, ...And Justice for All in 1979, along with some supporting nominations.

Who Should have won-Denzel Washington in Malcolm X. Ok, so the film itself isn't even as close to as memorable as it should be.(Considering the historical significance of the character.) It was wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too long(credit to Spike Lee) but the intensity Denzel brings to the table in this scares me at some parts in the movie. I have to say, I personally don't care for the real Malcolm X, but Denzel made me care about him. And remember, this was before we figured out that Denzel is just a really good one-dimensional actor(passion, but nothing else) and we all got sick of him.(If I told you in 1995 that Johnny Depp would be a top-3 most successful actor today and Denzel and Tom Hanks were almost nonexistent, would you have believed me?

2001-Denzel Washington-Training Day

Denzel plays renegade undercover narc Alonzo Harris in this film. Alright, for the god honest record, he wasn't that convincing in this. His best moment was at the end right before he got shot-up. Nothing else really pulled my attention. Anyway, Alonzo takes Ethan Hawke's character Jake on his first day of narc training, through the god-awful, desolate land known as inner-city Los Angelas. Jake finds out Alonzo's crooked, he gets his in the end like I said, and Jake goes home. Fin.

Previous Nominations-For Malcolm X in 1992 and The Hurricane in 1999.

Who should have won-Sean Penn in I am Sam. Remarkable. Astounding. Astonishing. This year's best. Yes indeed, Sean nailed this role. But, because of the theory and this bullshit, Penn went home empty-handed. I didn't know a guy who fully convinces me he has down syndrome(or whatever) loses out to a guy in a worse movie, and is not even nearly as convincing. Mind-Boggling.

For Best Supporting Actor-

1971-Ben Johnson-The Last Picture Show

Johnson plays Sam the mighty lion in this coming of age classic. His character is well respected, apprehensively, but perhaps a dolt to say the least. The depression just grows more and more on the people in this film, to the point of feeling absolute pity for them. Ben Johnson does this really well, but not as much as I'd like for an Oscar winner.

Previous Nominations-None. He was in a solid 53 movies and TV shows up to this point though.

Who should have won-Leonard Frey in Fiddler on the Roof. Frey is super good as Motel, the husband to Tzeitel, Tevye's(lead character) oldest daughter. His character of fear, hope and delight behavior in poverty with the true love that is clear for his character. Frey does what most supporting actors(or lead actors) wish they could do in this.

1987-Sean Connery-The Untouchables

Alright, I loved this movie. One of my favorites, but what is up with his accent in this? And who the fuck thought a super thick Scottish accent could sound Irish? This is why Brian De Palma is extremely overrated. This film has to be the luckiest film of all time. It was a few bad scenes away from being terrible. But, luckily, everything went right. Robert De Niro as Al Capone? Sounds stupid, right? But it worked. Kevin Costner making too many dumb faces in close-ups? Somehow, it worked. Charles fucking Martin Smith? The geeky douche from American Graffiti? It worked. Alright, enough about the film itself, lets go into Connery's character. There's not a lot to say. He was really good, but not great. End of story.

Previous Nominations-None. But James Bond deserves an Oscar, right?

Who should have won-Morgan Freeman in Street Smart. Okay, so this movie is mediocre at best. The whole thing focuses on Christopher Reeves' character, whose development is just unconvincing as hell and the story just goes in weird directions where you're constantly telling yourself "It's a movie, and this is why it's happening"(this horseshit theory will be covered on here. I can promise you that.) But, enough about the awfulness, Morgan Freeman saves this movie. He's in it for about 4 or 5 scenes(If you wanna count the one as a "scene") for a total of 10 to 20 minutes. Anything good or great about this movie contains a Freeman moment. He plays a pimp for God's sake! And as far as we know, he's nothing like this in reality. How he rebounds from this in other movies years ahead shows the versatility of a great actor. They should have given him this unanimously.

1991-Jack Palance-City Slickers

You're fucking kidding me right?

Previous Nominations-For Shane in 1953 and Sudden Fear in 1952.

Who should have won-Anyother nominee?(sound) But, really. Ben Kingsley in Bugsy. So he wasn't in that movie for more than 15 minutes. Blow me. Ben Kingsley has such a natural ability to automatically play any character at any given time. Did you see him in Schindler's List? How about Sexy Beast? And how about Gandhi? Wasn't he so good he scared you? So, Kingsley plays Meyer Lansky, famous gangster, the brains of the Segal-Lansky crime outfit. How much more did he have to convince you, Academy? Idiots.

1998-James Coburn-Affliction

Coburn plays the hardass dad to Nick Nolte. Actually, it's more like ogre master. Coburn looks terrible in this film. (his appearance, not the role. He's actually pretty good.) It's like the Academy thought Coburn was dying during the filming and wanted to hand him the award out of sympathy. The pity award. That's something worth mentioning when you reflect on a outstanding film career. He actually did pass away less than five years later though. What a shame.

Previous Nominations-None as always with these certain tough guy actors. But his first film was in 1959 and he was 69 when he played this role. So, yeah.

Who should have won-Billy Bob Thorton in A Simple Plan. Thorton's portrayal as the dumb, loser brother of Bill Paxton(who was equally as good) carries shame, guilt, and just the biggest bag of regrets in this film as anybody I've seen in a long time. Thorton captures his character's pain, anguish, and bag of regrets incredibly well. Less than a handful of guys could have captured all that at the time of the film.

2006-Alan Arkin-Little Miss Sunshine

Can everybody say it on 3 with me? One..Two....Three....! MOST OVERRATED FILM OF THE LAST TEN YEARS!!!!!!!! My god did everyone drool over this kinda good crapshoot film? It wasn't that good people!! Besides for The Departed, no critically acclaimed film even mattered in 2006. I guarantee you if you ask 10 people if they actually remembered this movie today, without giving them any hints, almost all of them would say no. Totally forgettable, overrated crapshoot. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't that good either. As for Alan Arkin's role in this, all I have to say is, Alan, I love ya, but give it to somebody who actually tried.

Previous Nominations-For The Heart is a Lonely Hunter in 1968 and The Russians are Coming, the Russians are Coming in 1966.

Who should have won-Jackie Earle Haley in Little Children. Damn was he great in this or what. Unbelievable grittiness mixed with a character of sorrow and pain. Yet, there's a strange sense of innocence of his character. Earle Haley plays a registered sex offender who's just been released from prison. The way he's able to deal with each situation throughout the film and allow the audience to see the fear and quiet mayhem he brings. I only hope this is his first of many nominations.

For Lead Actress-

1983-Shirley Maclaine-Terms of Endearment

Maclaine was incredible in this film, let me say. She plays the mother of Debra Winger who also like her, trys to maintain a joyful life while dealing with obsticles. I wouldn't put her in here except the simple fact that James L. Brooks character's in his movies always have an offbeatness to them. They have a strange unlikness unlike many other director's characters. I'd have no problem with her winning except for her character doing stupid shit that I just can't quite get into. Other than that, she deserves it. But, there's got to be somebody that year who was more likeable.....

Previous Nominations- For Some came Running in 1958, The Apartment in 1960, Irma la Douce in 1963, The Turning Point in 1977, and believe it or not, for Best Documentary, The Other Half of the Sky: A Chinese Memior in 1975.

Who should have won-Meryl Streep in Silkwood. (The movie North Country ripped this movie off. I just thought I'd mention that.) Streep sinks so low, I lose focus with who she is when I thought about it several times throughout viewing this. She plays a character that not many woman can play, and pulls it off beautifully. If a character loses their identity in the process of a film, and pulls any and every viewer's attention who saw this, (not many people saw this) to the point where everyone is cheering for her to make it out, than she deserves an Oscar. End of story,

2008-Kate Winslet-The Reader

She was the whole reason I came up with this post. She's really electrifying in about five scenes in this movie, and pretty good the rest of the time. Winslet plays a woman living in Post World War Two Germany who has an affair with a 15 year old. Yeah, that's the story. I went to see this in theaters on a Saturday night, the first week it opened.(yeah, that's how I killed a Saturday night) Only 4 other people showed up. So, I'm guessing it didn't do wonders in the box office. But, anyway, Kate's pretty good in this, but was a lot better in other movies. The Oscar ultimately should have went to someone more deserving....

Previous Nominations- For Sense and Sensibility in 1995, Titanic in 1997, Iris in 2001, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind in 2004, and Little Children in 2006.

Who should have won-Anne Hathaway in Rachel getting Married. Several people mentioned to her what an excellent job she did in this at the Oscars, (including Judi Dench during a presentation) I thought somebody would've hand delivered it personally. Same deal with Streep in Silkwood, an attractive woman sinking rock-bottom low to play a part, pulling it off wonderfully. Hathaway plays a recovering drug addict who goes home from rehab to attend her sister's wedding. She's everything you want from this type of character. She's moody, ungrateful, depressed, but yet somewhat joyous about being home. Nobody, and I mean nobody could have done as well as she did. It's alright, Anne. Just get naked already and it will come.

For Best Director-

2002-Roman Polanski-The Pianist

The lone recipiant in this category, this is defiently one of Polanski's best.(That's not saying a lot though) The pianist is a remarkable holocaust film starring Oscar theif (just kidding,....but not really) Adrian Brody. Brody's character loses everything, including his family, scavaging through World torn Poland, trying to stay alive. I don't have a lot of negative things to say, other than this films characters, besides for Adrian Brody, have terrible balance. None of the characters offer any more than one solid emotion, with no versatility. Other than that, he deserved it. But,..............yeah.

Previous Nominations-For Rosemary's Baby in 1968, Chinatown in 1974, and for Tess in 1979.

Who should have won-Martin Scorsese for Gangs of New York. This would be a crapshoot if he didn't derseve it, but he did. 7 nominations...and zero wins for this extraordinary epic. This is an instant classic and much more rewatchable and memorable than The Pianist. The screenplay and story was better, the roleplaying was better, and most importatly, the direction the film had was better. Marty could have won 3 Oscars up to this point, but the academy's judgement is flawed and the timing was just bad. It's ok, he'll get his in the end.

The rise and fall of Michael Cimino aka the fastest ever

Michael Cimino began his short mainstream Hollywood career as a fairly successful screenwriter for the film Magnum Force(1973) and Thunderbolt and Lightfoot(1974)(which he also directed making it his first.) So, somehow (probably because of his educational achievements and semi-successes in his screenwriting abilities) he writes and directs The Deer Hunter(1978). Upon doing this, the film wins 5 Oscars including 2 for Mr. Cimino with Best Director and Best Picture. With this film launching him into the pantheon of great directors of that time, less than two years later he is awarded with the freedom of making the film Heaven's Gate(1980) however the fuck he wants. United Artist fronts him $7.5 million originally, which would stretch into $44 million eventually due to the demands of Mr. Cimino. Well, the film pulls in less than $2 million total. So, doing the math, United Artist made negative $42 million plus change. In 1980, that's a shitload. It almost bankrupted poor United Artist and ruined the promising acting career of Kris Kristofferson(ok, not really. He wasn't promising hardely at all) Michael made films such as Year of the Dragon(1985), The Sicilian(1987), Desparate Hours(1990), and Sunchaser(1996) with little success after the Heaven's Gate waterloo. This brings me to this point: Can you name an actor, producer, actress, director, writer, or even stagehand with a bigger uprising and callapse in a shorter frame than 2 years? You can't. It's astonishingly remarkable that he was chewed up and spit out faster than a porn actor. His stint in Hollywood was here than gone as soon as it came. I don't get it. If this stiff can stay in his buisness three times as long, it makes you think doesn't it? I personally loved The Deerhunter, but found Heaven's Gate(which is declared the worst film of all time according to this source.) and all his other rubbish not good. I think he has to be one of the most disappointing directors of all time but also one of the most misunderstood. Anyway, I certainly hope the two years of fame he had was worth it to him. I'd take it.

And in other news....John Bender predicts the future!

Yeah, ....................he was right.........................