Good summer movie but Oscar worthy?

Rating: 7/10 (14 May 2010)

I have had a great deal of discussions with people about this film. I agree it is a good movie. Its entertaining, action packed, worth the price of a ticket. However, I don't think I have ever seen a movie win so many awards without questioning the validity. Gladiator, while still a good film, is hardly deserving of all its accolades. I mean it might be worthy of winning cinematography or production awards or special effects but Best picture? Best Actor? I could think of a 100 other movies in the year 2000 more deserving than this movie. Don't misunderstand, I like this movie, but the problem is that movie awards like the Oscars,presumably, are there to honor high quality and High achievements in each respected field. Russel Crowe does an adequate job, but his acting in his other Oscar nominated films like "The Informant" or "A Beautiful Mind" were light years ahead of his performance in "Gladiator". Furthermore, Giving best picture to this film was mind boggling. I personally feel that the only reason this movie was even in the running at all, was because of the money it made. It was a good action movie and nothing more. Hey, remember that "Couching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" was also up for best picture that year. In my opinion, It ran circles around "Gladiator". Wheras "Gladiator' was just a good action film. CTHD was a phenomenal action movie and love story and should have won the top prize.