The Internet at the Speed of Thought

The Oscars vs. Rotten Tomatoes: Which Films Won & Which Films Should Have

at 12:30 pm | By

Which films were truly worthy?

The Academy Awards is without a doubt the most prestigious award ceremony of the year. It’s capable of bringing audiences to low-budget indie films and turning newbie talent into full-blown stars over night. But what makes the Academy’s opinion any more valid than the average viewer at home? That’s where Rotten Tomatoes steps in!

For those who are unaware, Rotten Tomatoes is an online resource for film and television critics to make their voices heard. It’s no secret that the Oscars and Tomatoes generally don’t see eye-to-eye, but it’s always good to get a second set of eyes. Check out which films from the past 10 years won the Oscar for Best Picture vs. which films Rotten Tomatoes thinks SHOULD have won and make a decision for yourself!

The Oscars vs. Rotten Tomatoes: Which Films Won & Which Films Should Have

Source: Giphy

Keep reading!

2006 – Actually Won: Crash


Like our Videos...

Although Crash only received 75% on Rotten Tomatoes, it still managed to nab the Oscar for Best Picture in 2006. The film depicted the influx of racism in Los Angeles post the 9/11 attacks.

2006 – Should Have Won: Good Night, and Good Luck


Like our Videos...

Many were shocked that Good Night, and Good Luck didn’t bring home the gold in 2006 with its Rotten Tomatoes rating of 93% being vastly higher than its defeater. Especially since the film was both starring and directed by George Clooney.

Share