Oscars: All 89 Best Picture Winners Ranked

89 Best Picture Academy Award winners. Votes came in thick and fast over the two month window. Bloggers, journalists, film critics, movie buffs, Oscarologists, et al. You all voted for your favorites, or what you considered the best, and the results are now here. A huge, huge thank you to all that got busy ticking boxes. There were no campaign ads or screeners here.

I will say many of these are ranked lower than perhaps they ought to be because, well, folk have just not seen some of the very oldest winners. That’s the way it crumbles, cookie-wise. Just look at the films that could have won each year. What a list that would have been. And there will be placings of movies that will be painful to see no doubt. The trick, is not minding that it hurts.

So, take a look at the results, all 89 Best Picture winners ranked from worst to best. Round up the usual suspects. Tell your friends. Share with your Oscar-mad peers. If you make it to the end, I guess you are the real winner. And please throw your comments below. Fasten your seat-belts. It’s going to be a bumpy night.

CONTINUE – Part I: The Impenetrable Cloak

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “Oscars: All 89 Best Picture Winners Ranked

  1. I see what you did with #52 and #51. But…can epic filmmaking really be brought back twice in six years? I think you’re just testing us to see if we’re paying attention.

  2. I don’t understand your caption for Chicago (2002):
    “Some exquisitely executed set-pieces don’t really make this familiar musical a big screen classic. On the verge of war, were America looking for some razzle-dazzle relief a la post World War II?”
    Was America on the verge of war in 1931, when Chicago is set? What makes you say there was “famous razzle-dazzle relief” around 1946? Having studied the period, I don’t see it. Or did you mean World War I? That would make a certain sense, that’s when women went from dresses to skirts, start of radio and magazines, Great Gatsby stuff. But then it would be weird to ask if 1931 was trying for that, when 1931 was in many ways a continuation of that (to some degree, Cabaret is about that).
    Confused.

    1. It’s a basic and casual reference to the flourish of musicals in Hollywood after the second world war. Not just the reflection on Oscar nominations and winners, but cinema in general. Almost like the world needed cheering up or distracting. Which we did. And not that many of those musicals were uplifting. The Chicago win may in some part be on a similar vein, post-9/11 and the resulting fiasco.

    1. Yeah very high. It’s on the back of the recent win. If we did this in 5 years, 2 years, it’d be lower.

      Or are you complaining it should be higher? 😁

Leave a Reply