I think Kubrick was a fine director. But, specifically, how have his films "influenced directing" profoundly?

West Side Story is an amazing musical.

Kubrick's Oscar was for special effects though, not for directing.

Kubrick never won an oscar,
Kubrick did win an oscar actually, and it was for 2001.
Pick for worst best picture winners? Either West Side Story or the Greatest Show on Earth. Though Braveheart, Million Dollar Baby, Gentleman's Agreement, Rocky and Gandhi also suck. How Green Was My Valley is not necissarily a bad movie, but its boring as hell.
In other news, Im not wearing pants. Film at 11.

ecjones1951
I totally agree with you about Stanley Kubrick. Talk about being robbed! Kubrick never won an oscar, but he created so many great films that have since influenced directing in profound ways.
When Kubrick died, Hollywood didn't even see it fit to include him in their Academy Award tribute of film-industry people who had died that year. I was aghast; I remember watching the Oscars that year for that reason, just to see if he'd finally be given a nod. Nope.

Sometimes I find it more interesting to consider the films that were
not
nominated for Best Picture in a given year. 1968? I mean, come on.
2001: A Space Odyssey
. That was THE film of the year.
The Academy is predisposed against science fiction. It takes it even less seriously than comedy. I'm not much of a sci-fi fan myself, but
2001
remains an extraordinary achievement on so many levels. Countless images stay with you, and Strauss'
Also: Sprach Zarathustra
took on a whole new life thanks to this movie. After nearly 40 years,
2001
's reputation and its influence on filmmaking in general are as strong as ever.
That the Best Picture winner that year was
Oliver!
had to make Kubrick shake his head and pour another drink. I think a lot of other people did the same.

For me, it's Gigi, Kramer vs. Kramer, Braveheart, Crash, Dances with Wolves, and hate me, but I really disliked One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.
I try not to compare the film that has one to any of the films nominated that year, though. It tends ot ruin your judgement on that particular film.

Calme, vous la prostitue stupide.

Oh heavens. "Tom Jones" is a delightful, wonderful, brilliant movie. Only someone lacking in culture and/or a sense of humor would argue otherwise.

*My pick for most undeserving Best Picture winner would probably have to be Rain Man. Ugh, I just thought that movie was so cliche and after Dustin Hoffman's win, we got deluged with a million different actors playing people with "cutesy" physical/mental afflictions in order to win Oscars. Plus I was never a Tom Cruise fan (only person at my school that hated Top Gun). I would have been happier with ANY of the other five nominees (Dangerous Liaisons would probably be my pick)
I agree with you, gleeps, about both "Tom Jones" and "Rain Man." The latter has not worn well at all, and it now looks more and more like just a showcase for Hoffman's schtick. And you're right, playing a character with some sort of handicap/physical challenge/mental illness increases your chances of winning an Oscar significantly. It's like it's not enough just to be a really, really good actor. :sigh: *
I personally insulted by those statement, Hoffman deserved his oscar, his performance was actually very realistic (my little bro has autism), and it deserved Best Picture.
Also I would say How Green Was My Valley over Citizen Kane, Chicago over The Pianist (of The Hours for that matter), Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan, Forrest Gump over Pulp Fiction (I didn't hate Forrest Gump, I just thought PF should have won),

I think you're right. What was it Peter O'Toole said in "My Favorite Year", quoting Edmund Keane "Dying is easy comedy is hard."?

I agree with you, gleeps, about both "Tom Jones" and "Rain Man." The latter has not worn well at all, and it now looks more and more like just a showcase for Hoffman's schtick. And you're right, playing a character with some sort of handicap/physical challenge/mental illness increases your chances of winning an Oscar significantly. It's like it's not enough just to be a really, really good actor. :sigh:
"Tom Jones" is a wonderful movie. I am very glad I finally got the chance to see it. For some reason, the Academy seems to think comedies are beneath its dignity, but I think comedy is in some ways a higher art form than drama, because it's so much harder to get right.
So the Best Picture Oscar has sometimes gone to a mediocre drama when a strong comedy was more deserving. IMO

I love Tom Jones! It's funny how people criticize the academy for never recognizing comedies and when they do, people say its the worst Best Picture winner ever.Shakespeare in Love was also a comedy of course, and you maybe could classify American Beauty as one too. All those films are always pointed at as bad choices for Best Picture, so I think people tend to say one thing and then another, but I digress
My pick for most undeserving Best Picture winner would probably have to be Rain Man. Ugh, I just thought that movie was so cliche and after Dustin Hoffman's win, we got deluged with a million different actors playing people with "cutesy" physical/mental afflictions in order to win Oscars. Plus I was never a Tom Cruise fan (only person at my school that hated Top Gun). I would have been happier with ANY of the other five nominees (Dangerous Liaisons would probably be my pick)

The Oscars really started going downhill when Terms of Endearment was awarded Best Pic. However, the person who said Million Dollar Baby was bad don't know nuttin. It's a classic.
As to the point about politics, I would add 1941. Winner: How Green Was My Valley; Real Best Picture: Citizen Kane. Reason it lost? Nobody in their right mind would have wanted to get on the bad side of William Randolph Hirst, who, let's say, had something against the film

Unfortunately, politics has a LOT to do with what wins Best Picture.
Just three examples generally agreed upon by respected critics and film historians, (and me!, who does a little of both).
1952 Winner:
The Greatest Show on Earth
. The Real Best Picture:
High Noon
. Reason it lost? Red scare, blacklisted writers using pseudonyms. Result? Academy chose to chicken out and play it safe.
1998 Winner:
Shakespeare in Love
. The Real Best Picture:
Saving Private Ryan
. Reason it lost?
Ryan
too violent and bloody. The entire Academy membership, which votes for the Best Picture nominees, skews much older than the average moviegoer. It tends to steer away from certain kinds of controversy, which leads us to
2005 Winner:
Crash
. The Real Best Picture:
Brokeback Mountain.
Reason it lost? Hollywood became more tolerant of violence and profanity in eight years, but was not yet ready to lend its imprimatur to a love story that did not take place between a man and a woman. It's really that simple.
Significantly, none of these Oscar winning movies won for Best Direction.

I'm with everyone who said "Titanic." Also, on a side note, what was with Gwyneth Paltrow winning Best Actress for her performance in Shakespeare in Love when she was contending with Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth?

Titanic
BTW
What the hell was wrong with Annie Hall?
"Mr Friedkin, you're not wearing a tie?" - Alfred Hitchcock

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

I understand that many people on this site love a good western, so don't roast me when i state that Unforgiven might be high on this list. Honestly, i couldn't understand what was so great and acclaimed about it. If anyone could explain i would be happy to listen.

There are very few Best Pictures that I think deserved the award. Almost every year, I think at least one other film nominated was better.
I was going to list them (
Titanic
was my first thought) but I realized it would be easier to list the good ones.
I have already reached the point where I ignore the Academy Awards.

I liked Shakespeare in Love, which most people on this board seemed to disagree with me. For me Forest Gump crawled along at a snales pace, and I was so bored by the end. Also hated Tom Jones, didn't much care for Chicago, and actually found Ordinary People excruciatingly dull. Only my opinions. Feel free to disagree.

This message has been deleted.

"A little part of me dies every time I watch:
Titanic, Chicago, Shakespeare in Love"
A little part of you dies every time you watch these movies. Every time? Which implies you've watched these movies a whole bunch of times even though you think they're bad movies?
How sad your life must be if you waste so much of it watching movies that kill you just a little bit every time you watch them!