
This week I took my missus to see a re-run of Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961) as a Valentine’s treat. As far as romance films go it’s thoroughly engaging and exquisitely shot. Beautiful cinematography blends with exceptional casting and the whole film stands as a piece of sentimentality that even blokes can stomach. It’s hard to believe then, that it was overlooked in the Best Picture Academy Award nominations back in 1962. Surely the stunning combination of all the cinematic elements was noteworthy enough to garner at least a nomination, right? Well, apparently not in this case…
This isn’t the only time that the Academy has made a mistake either… Below are ten films that were nominated, but lost out on winning the gong. Read on to discover the ten films that I believe should have won on their respective Oscar Night!
10. THE AVIATOR (2004)

Films that were directed by Martin Scorsese could have totally dominated this Top 10 – although, I have limited it to two that I feel passionately deserved the accolade…probably to your relief! – as the Academy has criminally overlooked this brilliant director’s filmography on a number of occasions. Whilst Eastwood’s winner, Million Dollar Baby (2004) was a very accomplished film, The Aviator combined exceptional performances from an all-star cast, beautiful cinematography, awe-inspiring special effects and a narrative that remained engaging throughout. Eastwood certainly pulled a gripping performance out of Hilary Swank (who deservedly won the Best Actress Award), but in comparison the more accomplished film is undoubtedly Scorsese’s masterpiece on Hollywood’s Golden Era and its key players.
Going to be interesting to see how Chris Nolan plans to top it, if indeed his biopic begins production after The Dark Knight Rises.
09. RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (1981)

It’s interesting to think that a commercially successful, blockbuster film was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar – it’s something that we don’t often see these days (before the 10 Picture expansion anyway), instead the nominations consist of stuffy, overblown productions that have been made specifically for the Academy’s members to praise. The winner of the 54th Oscars Best Picture, Chariots of Fire, falls firmly into the latter category. In comparison to Raiders it is far less entertaining and has the one redeeming feature of an iconic soundtrack. Whilst Raiders won a quadrant of consolation awards (Best Sound, Editing, Visual Effects and Art Direction) its enduring popularity leads me to believe that it is more deserving of the Best Picture gong than the relatively dull Chariots. With performances perhaps the only exception, Raiders is quite simply a more accomplished film on all levels.
08. CITIZEN KANE (1940)

It’s gone on to arguably become the most influential and important film in cinema history and whilst the benefit of hindsight is a beautiful thing, back in 1940, Citizen Kane was still like nothing ever seen before. With an aesthetic that remains unrivalled, Welles’s opus was so extravagant that his vast set pieces were built with ceilings (then uncommon in Hollywood set builds) and his deep-focus photography lovingly lingered on its director’s creation. Combining breathtaking cinematography from Gregg Toland with unparalleled performances and a mysterious narrative that gradually reveals snippets of information before its dramatic climax, Citizen Kane is rightly considered a quintessential example of Hollywood’s epic productions. The fact that How Green Was My Valley (1941) won the Award remains baffling! Yes, it’s a well-made film that brilliantly captures the gritty nature of the narrative, but in comparison to Citizen Kane it fails to impress anywhere near as much.
07. THE DEFIANT ONES (1958)

Tackling the then thoroughly taboo subject of grassroots racism, The Defiant Ones packs a weighty punch in its depiction of the racial prejudice between its two main characters. John ‘Joker’ Jackson (Tony Curtis) and Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier) are two convicts from a chain gang that hate each other passionately. When a prison truck accident gives them an opportunity to escape, they quickly flee with the police in hot pursuit. Still chained together, the two find that they are dependent on each other whilst they attempt to evade the police. When they finally rid themselves of their chains will their hostility and hate have transformed into friendship and respect?
Combining a thoroughly suspenseful narrative with touching moments of camaraderie between men who put aside their racial differences, the film is a tremendously consummate piece of cinema. In contrast, Gigi (1958), that year’s winner, falls remarkably short. One of the less fondly (if at all) remembered musicals of Hollywood’s extensive 50s output, it portrays its controversial subject manner – elderly relatives prepare young girl to become a Parisian courtesan – in what is generally considered distasteful way. In a drastic contrast, The Defiant Ones never even verges on the edge of distaste, instead offering a remarkable and moving depiction of friendship overcoming racial prejudice.
06. FARGO (1996)

A brilliant offering from the Coen Brothers that wonderfully merges black comedy with elements of suspense and humorous horror, Fargo is one of those films that you can’t help but revisit. The English Patient (1996), which beat Fargo to the Best Pic gong, happens to be the polar opposite. Released to a plethora of accolades, the film screamed of Oscar: lavish cinematography of epic scale and a grand, overstated narrative. Whilst The English Patient isn’t an entirely awful picture, Fargo offers a unique edge to its narrative that allows it to leave a firm impression on viewers: something that the former doesn’t. With a win for No Country for Old Men in 2008, the Coen Brothers finally won a Best Picture Academy Award, but the fact that Fargo was overlooked all those years ago is sure to leave a bitter taste in many fans mouths for a long time.
05. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS (1955)

The classic biblical tale of Moses (Charlton Heston), Prince of Egypt, who learns that his true heritage as a Hebrew demands he undertake a divine mission as the deliverer of his people. His rejection of Egypt pits him further against his brother Rameses (Yul Brynner) and the rest of his adopted family.
This lavish and visually striking masterpiece was Cecil B. Demille’s remake of his own silent epic production from 1923. Loosing to a film of equally epic scope – Around the World in Eighty Days (1956) – Demille’s opus stands out as the more impressive production. With a host of extraordinary special effects (particularly the scene depicting Moses’s parting of the Red Sea), solid performances from its extensive cast and a narrative that keeps you gripped throughout the four hour running time, it is a symbol remarkable filmmaking craftsmanship on Demille’s part. Winner of 5 awards, Around the World is also a thoroughly entertaining romp, but doesn’t exhibit craftsmanship of the same scale as Commandments.
04. IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE (1946)

Similar to Citizen Kane, it’s perhaps the benefit of hindsight that suggests It’s a Wonderful Life should have won the Best Picture award over The Best Years of Our Lives (1946). Unlike many of the other entries on this list, both of these films are extremely well made and are real accomplishments within cinema history. However, the powerful endearment of It’s a Wonderful Life and its subsequent ability to endure 65 years of other phenomenal productions and countless advancements within the technical aspects of the industry, remaining just as relevant and popular as ever is truly remarkable. Whilst The Best Years of Our Lives is a touching film, it has slipped far from the public conscience and is probably only regularly viewed on film courses (as was my first introduction to it). Bearing this in mind I would argue that Frank Capra’s Wonderful Life should have won the accolade, furthered by the fact that it remains one of the few films that still appeals to audiences today.
03. A PLACE IN THE SUN (1951)

A Place in the Sun is one of those rare films where a perfect blend of melodrama and suspense is achieved. Combined with excellent casting – Montgomery Clitft excels as the angst ridden Eastman, Elizabeth Taylor simply sizzles as the socialite who captures his rapacious heart and Shelley Winters is never better as the heartbroken working class factory girl – the film is highly stylised and beautifully directed by George Stevens. With a narrative that was very bold for an early 50s production – Alice’s illegitimate pregnancy predominantly – the film makes a strong social statement.
When compared to that years winner, Vincente Minnelli’s An American in Paris, in my eyes there is no doubt that A Place in the Sun was robbed! Whilst Minnelli’s film is entertaining and Gene Kelly is his usual charming self in the starring role, it just doesn’t quite cut it as a piece of truly memorable cinema. An American in Paris seems like a piece of inconsequential nonsense when compared to the tragic doomed love story and subsequent descent into darkness at the heart of A Place in the Sun. Whilst Oscar winning pictures don’t always have to be gloomy or overly serious, here, I just can’t fathom why the Academy would have voted for a film so trivial over one with a remarkable (if gloomy) comment on society.
02. TAXI DRIVER (1976)

How Taxi Driver didn’t win the Best Picture Academy Award is a mystery we’ll never solve! Don’t get me wrong, I love Rocky (1976) as much as the next film lover, but can anyone honestly say that it’s a better film than Scorsese’s gritty, disturbing portrait of mental instability? With a narrative that undertakes the issue of loneliness and isolation within the big city and the droves of scum that inhabit it, Taxi Driver is both emotive and disturbing on many levels. Rocky may be entertaining, but it fails to demonstrate the same skills in both direction and performance as Taxi Driver does.
Plus, if my fellow OWF scribe Laurent Kelly’s recent 50 Reasons Why Taxi Driver Might Just Be the Greatest Film Ever doesn’t convince you of its deservedness of the Best Picture honour, I’m afraid nothing will!
01. SAVING PRIVATE RYAN (1998)

Saving Private Ryan is one of those films that had such an impact upon its release that it will forever remain one of the most significant pieces of 20th century cinema. The graphic nature of the narrative lends a horrific sense of realism to the film, an achievement that has only been afforded to a few equally remarkable war films. The fact that Steven Spielberg’s incredibly moving magnum opus was denied the accolade for the dull-fest that is Shakespeare in Love (1998) is surely the Academy’s greatest mistake. Ryan remains one of the best war films around and continues to speak to audiences over a decade later. The same cannot be said about Shakespeare in Love!
An overstated rom com in period costume, it’s a piece of forgettable fluff that made far fewer waves than Ryan and lends itself less well to repeat viewings. Both obviously have historically set narratives, but where Shakespeare in Love is an entirely fabricated piece of near nonsense, Ryan bases itself in a lot of fact and builds fiction upon this. Allowing contemporary audiences to actually feel something of what their relatives were put through the war is uncomfortably realistic here, but the film is all the better for this uncompromising sense of realism. In all aspects, Saving Private Ryan is by far the superior production and infinitely more deserving of the Best Picture Academy Award…I’m just glad that it was rightfully voted the accolade in OWF’s 1999 Oscars retrospective!
Want to write about this topic and have your work read by thousands every day? Click here to become a contributor to WhatCulture.







53 Comments
Children of Men, for me, is the biggest oversight in Oscar history, in fact, it’s a huge oversight in marketing history as Universal really dropped the ball on what is, in my opinion, one of the greatest films produced so far this century!
Agree about Raiders and Ryan but disagree on Rocky. It’s certainly about isolation, and misconceptions (people think he’s a creep) and ultimately proving to yourself you can be somebody, even if you fail. I really don’t see the problem with it winning, especially since it’s still considered a classic, is as culturally relevant and known over 35 years later. It’s not like they rewarded a film that’s forgotten as soon as it wins.
1994. Unbelievable mistake – any of the other four nominees, particularly Pulp Fiction & Shawshank were far more worthy than the lumpy markish Forrest Gump.
Good read Stu. Much enjoyed. I agree whole-heartedly with Citizen Kane and Taxi Driver which are both in my all time top five favourite films and think that Fargo is the Coens next best film after Miller’s Crossing. I’m also now really desperate to see The Defiant Ones which sounds fantastic.
I do have one slight disagreement with your list however and that concerns Chariots of Fire. I think this is a compelling film about inner grit and determination and whilst not structurally proficient it still does a brilliant job of showing what it means to be on the start line with some stunningly filmed sports sequences. I love Indiana Jones but I don’t see that year as a big snub.
My ten would probably be Citizen Kane, High Noon, Taxi Driver, Apocalypse Now, Raging Bull, Goodfellas, The Shawshank Redemption, The Pianist, Fargo and LA Confidential,
Pulp Fiction should’ve been Best Picture in ’94. Forrest Gump was good but Pulp Fiction was better and not to mention groundbreaking.
I completely agree. Pulp Fiction is a very overlooked and underrated film. I liked Gump, but Pulp Fiction was just better to me
Ordinary People over Raging Bull. There is no bigger crime.
Literally everything in 1984 that got nominated over Once Upon a Time in America. Travesty.
Agree with many of this list, particularly Fargo, although even as a huge Scorsese fan I completely disagree with The Aviator. It’s a very good movie, but not in the same league as his best work, and not in the same league as Million Dollar Baby either which is the only movie in the past 10 years I really thought was justified in winning best picture.
On the other hand Scorsese’s masterpieces Raging Bull and GoodFellas losing to Ordinary People (d. Robert Redford) and Dances With Wolves (d. Kevin Costner) is particularly crazy. Maybe the best director alive and he kept getting beaten by ACTORS.
Indeed, though Scorsese now has his statuette, Oscar has a pretty bad history at rating directors: I was sorry to see Christopher Nolan get overlooked on this year’s noms, but heck if he never wins a Best Director Oscar he’ll be in the company of Kubrick, Welles, Hitchcock, Chaplin, Lubitsch and Altman, who never got one either. When you consider the greatest directors of all time, the list of people who have won best director, particularly in the past few decades, is kind of hilarious.
Would also say Bonnie and Clyde should have won over In the Heat of the Night.
Dances With Wolves over Goodfellas is possibly the biggest upset in Oscar history.
Goodfellas? Sorry, love that movie like everyone else but Dances is a classic Americana movie made for wide screen viewing.
The Thin Red Line > Shakespeare in Love > Saving Private Ryan
The Thin Red Line was the real best picture of 1998. That film was leagues ahead of Spielberg’s overrated epic.
Well, I agree with everything except your #1. Saving Private Ryan’s script was nowhere near as good as Spielberg’s direction.
The most overrated movie ever, “Titanic”, beating “LA Confidential” is the most egregious snub.
Aesthetically, a lot of films were better than Titanic. But nothing was going to beat Titanic that year, for the same reason that nothing could beat Gone with the Wind. It was a good film (not great) that made a gazillion dollars at the box office.
The Thin Red Line over Saving Private Ryan anyway, though both were better than Shakespeare in Love.
and no Raging Bull?
Swank did not deserve to beat Kate Winslet in “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.”
There Will Be Blood.
Can we agree as a whole that the 2009 Oscars were a travesty in at least two major categories? The fact that “The Reader” was nominated over films like “The Wrestler” and “The Dark Knight” (the latter of which should of won it all), not to mention that the VASTLY OVERRATED “Slumdog Millionaire” won is mind boggling. I’d be willing to bet that in 20 years, The Dark Knight will be on this list, if not on top of it for the way it not only transcended the genre, but the impact it had (and will continue to have) on cinema. Outside of that, we have two other massive screw ups in Sean Penn (Milk) over Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler) and Slumdog Millionaire script over Frost/Nixon script (To make a bunch of interviews interesting and create the scope of their impact is no small task).
Dark Knight is going to have a profound impact on cinema? Why? For awkwardly trying to shoehorn the superhero genre into a meandering rehash of various other crime films? It transcends the genre in the sense that it crosses a major line between being an excellent superhero film and being a pissweak crime drama. It is muddled, boring, convoluted, poorly-structured, horribly written, badly acted, has more plot holes than I count, and time is going to be intensely unkind to it (as it will to most of Nolan’s filmography).
The big mistake the academy made in 2008 was overlooking The Wrestler or Wall-E in favour of the dreadful Reader.
Two words: BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN. It was a bigger deal than CRASH.
Forgot something: in 1991 Terminator 2 should have won and Point Break should have been nominated.
Thank you very much for all your comments everyone! I am pleased to see that many people feel the same way as I do and the debate sparked is great. I’m interested to see that there are some out there that don’t agree with Saving Private Ryan for the 1999 winner, as I’ve often found that most people believed it would be a shoe-in for the award.
Next week’s Top 10 will be 10 Performances that Should Have Won the Best Performance Oscar. I’d love to have your opinions once that’s up!
The Thin Red Line should’ve won instead of Saving Private Ryan anyway. Malick investigated the nature of his subject, while Spielberg tends to over-sentimentalize all his movies. Just my opinion though.
Thanks very much for all the comments everyone – I’m glad to see that some of you agree with my feelings, as well as having your own gripes with the Academy! The debate generated is great and I think we can all agree that there have been some horrific Oscar snubs…
Next week’s Top 10 will be very similar, focusing on Performances that Should Have Won the Best Actor/Actress Oscar. I’d love to hear your thoughts when that’s up and recon that as it will obviously be very personal to my tastes etc that you may want to add your own choices in the comments. Look out for that next week!
Thanks again for reading/commenting!
Ooops…it said that my first comment didn’t work – I didn’t mean to comment twice!
Fine, I’ll say it: STAR WARS. Sheesh, guys!
Over Annie Hall? No. Just… no.
Seems more important to Woody Allen than it is to film.
I liked “Shakespeare in Love” a lot, but Ryan was the clear, unquestionable best picture of that year. “Thin Red Line” was agonizingly pretentious and plodding. Shouldn’t even have been nominated.
Apart from it’s opening sequence “Saving Private Ryan” has nothing to offer. It is NOT a great film and was rightly overlooked.
“Shakespeare in Love” is a great Comedy with engaging performances and a feast for the eyes as well. The production value for this light entertainment was worth every award out there. I wish more comedies, and just entertaining films in general, would get the big prize.
Annie Hall is one of my least favourite Woody Allen films and I’m not a massive Star Wars fan either. Out of the two I probably would go for Star Wars though.
I can’t believe that “A Few Good Men” is not on this list! I have seen Unforgiven, but you CANNOT tell me that that win was anything other than “Oh, Clint Eastwood directs and stars in this movie – BOOM, Oscar!”
Men had a ridiculous cast, perfect storytelling, the acting was superb, and the entire movie was riveting from beginning to end!
The fact that Jack lost out to Gene Hackman as Best Supporting Actor is one of the biggest crimes in Oscar history! Jack was in it for 15 minutes, yet STOLE the movie! I thought Denzel was a better villian in Training Day than Hackman was in Unforgiven. I’ve seen Hackman play better Oscar-worthy roles, too.
But I think that Men over Unforgiven was the biggest crime in the history of the Best Picture race…
The Aviator, really???, you must be on crack.
You left out, two big ones, Pulp Fiction and L.A. Confidential
You’re wrong about #4. The Best Years of Our Lives was not only an important film and a topical film, but it’s a joy to watch. I’ll nominate a replacement: High Noon over The Greatest Show on Earth.
Probably Goodfellas and L.A. Confidential are the biggest snubs in Oscar history. And @Mark, I totally agree, Titanic is the most overrated movie of all time. My two favorite movies of the decade (L.A. Confidential and Boogie Nights) were nominated in that category and list to that piece of crap.
Can’t believe Shutter Island or Inception didn’t get a look in this year. Nice blog guys!
Inception, for me, should have won pest picture this year. I had a feeling that The King’s Speech would take it though, which was a good movie, but nothing like Nolan’s above-mentioned masterpiece.
Of course the best film never to win an Oscar didn’t even receive a Best Picture nomination: 2001 A Space Odyssey
Seriously, the nominations for that year were:
Oliver!
Funny Girl
The Lion In Winter
Rachel, Rachel
Romeo and Juliet
Hey, where is The Shawshank Redemption?
12 Angry Men and Funny Girl…
Titanic over LA Confidential…stunning technical achievement wins out over taut storytelling and unparalleled acting.
Terminator 2 1991 Had it ALL
You completely missed the biggest and most egregious Best Picture snub of all time. The Shawshank Redemption was, in my humble opinion, not only the best film of that year – It got beat out by Forest Gump, a good but not a great film – Shawshank is one of the best films of all time.
I would probably pick Dr. Strangelove over the too long My Fair Lady. I would pick The Graduate over In The Heat of The Night. From 1965, Darling over The Sound of Music. I love John Schlesinger’s films from the 60s and early 70s and wonder why Sunday Bloody Sunday wasn’t up for Best Picture. I loved Atlantic City and wish it had beaten Chariots of Fire. I would pick the topical and brilliantly acted Missing over the admirable but stultifyingly long Gandhi. I preferred A Passage to India over Amadeus.
I find it odd that you say that CITIZEN KANE’s not winning is baffling. We know precisely why it failed to win: it essentially got blackballed. The studios pretty much made it impossible for anyone to see. CITIZEN KANE did not become the acclaimed masterpiece it is today until many years later. But shortly after it was made Hearst managed to get the film crushed (it lost a huge amount of money) by persuading the studios not to put it into distribution. What is amazing is that it got as many nominations as it did.
It is amazing how many great movies were failures at the box office. BRINGING UP BABY barely broke even. So did THE GENERAL. And METROPOLIS to this day probably is the biggest box office failure in history, in terms of getting the smallest amount of money back as a percentage of its production cost.
But anyway, it isn’t baffling at all why CITIZEN KANE didn’t win the Oscar for Best Picture.
I’m sorry, but I totally disagree. It’s very definitely baffling. Even though the general public must have found it hard to watch Citizen Kane, the movie insiders (and those responsible for the Acadamey Award winners) would have undoubtedly managed to take a look. Despite Hearst’s actions, Citizen Kane would still have been an incredible piece of cinema for those who saw it and therefore, it certainly is baffling why it didn’t win!!
I don’t think it’s baffling at all that Kane didn’t win. Because it was supressed it wasn’t widely seen, so it was neither popular nor a big financial success. Best Picture Winners are always far more visible, and with very few exceptions are movies that got big audiences. In some way or another, Best Picture winners are always popular choices, even if only at the time.
Far better list than Chris Swanson’s recent one. This is a much better read with better choices and better writing style
Where are snubs like L.A. Confidential(Titanic was garbage), Children of Men(not even nominated), Heat, and seriously… everything that is usually nominated sucks. Crash won over Brokeback while the best film wasn’t nominated(A History of Violence), and Saving Private Ryan and all the other nominees of 1999 weren’t deserving. The Truman Show and a Simple Plan were actually better movies, and Spielberg’s lame war films are pathetic. After we’ve seen such classics like The Deer Hunter, Full Metal Jackson, Three Kings, Das Boot and of course Apocalypse Now and the Great Escape… hell Red Dawn is better than what Spielberg considers great war films.
Apocalypse Now should have won over Kramer vs. Kramer in 1979.