Not sure if serious, but if you notice there is actually only one film from 1997 on that list, and none after 97. So Titanic (1997 release) is barely at the point where it would really be considered. It did win 11 academy awards, so your argument is pretty shaky here.
Glad to hear about the pacifist playthroughs in Dishonored. I still plan on getting it on day 1.
Kubrick only won one academy award and it was for "special effects". That's how meaningless those trinkets are.
So basically you guys are saying a film can be incredibly profitable, receive great reviews from critics, appeal to a widely diverse audience from ages 8 to 80, and garner a ton awards, but that doesn't make it a great movie?
I know it's trendy to hate on stuff that's popular, but we've reached the point of absurdity.