Not the worst Best Picture winner

Any online review or commentary about the 1931 western Cimarron will note that it is the lowest-rated Best Picture winner on IMDb, among those who bother to rate movies on the site by a 10-star ranking (as of today, it has an average of 6 stars). Its critical reputation as a long, slow-moving, poorly acted family saga of the old West is what had kept me from watching it, but on a snowbound afternoon recently, I broke down and gave it a shot. And guess what? It's not nearly as bad or boring as I was fearing. It may not be great, and it may tax the viewing habits of today's movie fans, but classic movie fans should not avoid it.

The above poster, from its premiere run in New York City in January of 1931, makes it look like Gone With the Wind, with Richard Dix starring as Superman, or a Greek god. It couldn't possibly live up to that image, but as a sprawling family story goes, it moves along nicely and has some well done action sequences. Dix's stolid acting style is dated, but Irene Dunne is better, and at just a smidge over 2 hours, it's much less difficult to sit through than today's average superhero flick. (For my money, there are many worse Best Pictures, or at least pictures that did not deserve to win: Oliver!, An American in Paris, Midnight Cowboy, Forrest Gump, Birdman.)