Printable View
As is traditional the night before the Oscars, the Razzies are on to celebrate all that is excrable about Hollywood. A choice selection of the winners are:
Worst picture: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Worst screenplay: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Worst director: Michael Bay (Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen)
I don't think any of us are surprised. :rolleyes:
A complete outrage! :mad: Travesty! The Razzies are rigged!Quote:
Originally Posted by SofaMan
...
ROTF should have won more than just three. :p
Go Bay!
okay i admitt it was a letdown... but worst?????? i dont think so.
Yes well done razzies for making a name for themselves making fun of succesful blockbusters.
In all honesty how can ROTF be the worst movie when there are abortions like Dragonball: Evolution or Anacondas 3 made. The reason ROTF won this award is because no one would give a crap if they gave the award to either of those other 2 movies I mentioned or any other steaming pile made last year.
So congratulations Razzies you get the Bartrim sarcastic applause of the year.
The Razzies are no more or less a popularity contest than the Oscars are.
I'm not sure if I agree that DB:E and A3 were 'worse' in an objective sense. Both were significantly lower budget, and were playing to a very specific viewership.
Not wanting to restart old unresolvable debates, but I think that a film like RotF, taking into account its budget and the hundreds of thousands of work hours that went into its production, had at least had a basic obligation to be coherently plotted, acceptably paced and have characters of more than 1.5 dimensions. Given how poor it was on these counts relative to the first one, I think it has thoroughly earned its Razzies.
If there was any justice in the world, that film would be on the clearout shelves with DB:E and A3 for $13....
Oh wait - it is. :p
Oh I forgot - peripherally related was Sienna Miller getting Worst Supporting Actress for G.I. Joe.
Lol I read this just then on a news website. I have to say - not surprised at all. I'm gona be honest here; I bought my movie tickets early and watched both the first and second movies on the release day...I don't think I'll be in such a hurry to see the third.
Though hopefully TF3 doesn't end up on the razzie awards list next time round.
Exactly what I said before...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
Quote:
There are other films that were much, much worse than ROTF, however you wouldn't hear about Halloween II being nominated for a Razzie cause if you did no one would give a crap anyway.
There's more shock and awe value in nominating a movie that made 800 million at the box office. It's the way that the Razzie's have promoted themselves by going after the big fish.
Now I'm not saying that ROTF was all it was cracked up to be, nor do I particularly care if it 'wins' a Razzie or not, but worst movie of the year... far from it.
And that's my 2 cents.
The Razzies are the same as the Oscars only certain types of movies are considered for each prize, those which don't fit the basic criteria don't count. ROTF fits the criteria, big loud exspensive, stupid, dissapointing and most importantly seen by many people. Something like Dragon Ball does not, I mean how many people who vote for these things would have actualy watched DBE anyway? Maybe 2? :p
I thought ROTF was a bit of a disappointment and it fits as Razzie winner, though for me the worst films will always be those that are utterly unmemorable in every sense like old what's its name...
I think for a film to fall into the 'worst' category, there needs to be a significant disjoint between the reasonable expectation a film creates and what it actually delivers. Disappointment seems to be a huge factor when voting in the Razzies.
RotF was a mess even by Bay's very ordinary standards. The difference between what should have been produced with that level of talent and resourcing and what actually ended up on the screen was vast.
It seems Bay is not altogether without a sense of humour though:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiHsxQJ9ZOo
The other thing is that I - for example - am someone for whom the Transformers franchise has produced some of my favourite media ever . People who love what they do, with limited budgets have produced amazing comic books (Marvel UK), CGI television (Beast Wars), more traditional cartoons (Animated) etc. that literally shaped my life. And yet, with $200,000,000 they somehow managed to make this film, complete with gaping plotholes, visually painful designs and potty humour. It was a film not created with love, but by a director who hates the "lame" G1 cartoon, hates the first ten minutes of the original 1986 movie (all that he's seen) hates Transformers in general (and thus focuses instead on humans and the military) and a lead actress who hates... well, everything, including the "#@$*ing pyramids". It's quite clearly not a work of passion and that message shines through the half-arsed celluloid.
My point is, that if I - someone who's actually spent months of his life watching and enjoying countless media about giant transforming robots - think this movie was awful, how might 700 film buff Razzie voters who don't necessarily have my predilection for Transformers feel about it and having to sit through it for two and a half hours.
I liked BD:E more than ROTF, its was slightly better than my horribly low expectations, ROTF was a massive turd compared to the first.
So by that rationale shouldn't the Razzie go to Avatar considering all the time and money that wwent into that and it's nothing but a glitzed up version of Pocahontas?Quote:
Originally Posted by SofaMan
I think it was said best on one of the international forums - the Razzie awards are not going to change anyones opinion... you either love it or hate it.
Agreed ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
QFT!! Perfect!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky Shadow
Avatar was excellent! At least it had a coherent plot and characters that were interesting. Plus its visuals were astonishing! On top of that, it was made by a fastidious director who is passionate about the material. ROTF was slapped together (proudly) by its pre-set release date, even though it was well documented that the Writers were on strike! As Sky Shadow wrote (above), it was evident watching the movie that there was no passion whatsoever!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
In your opinion Robzy (which you are entitled too and I respect it)Quote:
Originally Posted by Robzy
In my opinion Avatar was visually excellent but it was a very basic plot filled with a whole lot of character stereotypes. I prefer ROTF as atleast I didn't know what was going to happen. I had Avatar worked out in about 20 minutes and I don't wish to insult anyone by assuming but if anyone couldn't tell what was going to happen then I seriously question that persons intelligence. My wife is dying to watch it and I'm actually shuddering at the thought of losing another 3 hrs of my life.
Please noone use the excuse that Avatar was super successful because ROTF was too.
Again just my opinion.
Unoriginal =/= Bad.
yeah, almost every thing is ripped off or inspired by something else. i believe there's a chinese proverb that says, "there has been no new thought for the last 100 years."
the 1st star wars movie was a blend of flash gordon + kurosawa jp period epic + mythology + etc. yet it is awesome. :)
jedi = samurai in space w/ laser swords
sith = ninja in space w/ laser swords
i like avatar even if it's scifi pocahontas ;)
Ah, but you see.... even if the plot was "basic" at least it was (as I wrote earlier) "coherent"...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
As Gutsman Heavy wrote a few post ago, not every film's plot has to be incredibly complicated to work. In fact, with all the visuals going on, I dare say Avatar wouldn't have been as successful if its plot was any more complicated! Star Wars' plot is very basic... is that a crap movie too?
Sadly, ROTF was full of plot holes (not to mention the biggest Deus Ex Machina [literally] I've seen in years).
But, again, I don't care that you liked ROTF. More power to you!
No one did... not even Michael Bay! :rolleyes: That's what happens when you start filming before the script is finished!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
Geez, and that's supposed to not be insulting???! So, if I was surprised by anything that happened in Avatar I must be an idiot? Cheers!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
The difference with Avatar is that its Box Office numbers got stronger, which meant it was doing something right on the word-of-mouth scene! Obviously more people liked Avatar then disliked it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
Yep. Star Wars was almost a "remake" of The Hidden Fortress. And what about Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs... that was very "similar" to both City on Fire and Kansas City Confidential! Almost exactly similar! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Did I say you must be an idiot? No I don't believe I said those I words. I said I would question your intelligence. Unfortunately this is not a perfect world and we not all created equal and intellenge levels differ person to person.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robzy
I will say this. My brother does not watch a movie unless it involves Star Wars, The Simpsons, James Bond, Ford Fairlane or a dead guy named Bernie (but not the sequel) and I described the first 20minutes of Avatar to him and he basically cut me off and finished the story.
I've said my peace for this thread. I'll leave everyone here to make fun of a box office success at their own will.
:D
I can do that too!
Rom-com: they'll get together!
Horror: the baddie will come back for one last scare!
Action/Adventure: the good guy will win!
The Oscars speaks alot about Avatar, so if it wasn't for the visual effects & sets... it's nothing more than a glorified version Pocohontas (like some have suggested)
Hey, ROTF won an Oscar for sound effects. :)
It was nominated, but I don't think it won it.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
It's funny that Sandra Bullock gets the worst actress razzie, and then gets the Oscar for best actress. Go figure.
I heard that too this morning on the radio. Just another example of why I don't take any of these 'awards' seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AZRAEL1
Yeah, she shouldn't have got either. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by 5FDP
Of course, it was for 2 completely different films. If she'd won them both for the same performance, then that would be something.Quote:
Originally Posted by 5FDP
Of course big films or performers are more likely to cop a Razzie. Of those who have much to give, much is asked. If they do not deliver, it will be made known.
So... not an idiot, just someone with questionable intelligence! I see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartrim
Well, going by that logic, that would mean Cameron's other film (Titanic) is one of the 3 best films ever made...?! (That's if, as you seem to infer, the Oscars are the be all and end all)Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintly
Personally, I don't think so.
Actually, I think it speaks more about the Awards system in general... Sci Fi (like Comedy) is never taken seriously as a genre at the Academy Awards. I wasn't surprised by Avatar's results at all - it was never going to win best picture! The Oscars are not a good indication of anything (nor are the Razzies for that matter)
Agreed! I hate awards for films/music etc... How can you really judge art? How can art win? I don't get it - that's just me though.Quote:
Originally Posted by 5FDP
Having said that, I'm pleased for Kathryn Bigelow... she's impressed me for years (I love Near Dark) and I certainly think The Hurt Locker was one of the most enjoyable films I've seen in a while.
avatar is the updated Fern Gully!:p
The oscar for best actress suprised me, I didnt think she could act to be honest. If I see her name on a movie = AVOIDQuote:
Originally Posted by 1AZRAEL1
Agree, I think she is a shocker of an actress. My wife dragged me to one of her films years back, Miss Congeniality. I've never gotten those hours back:(:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tetsuwan Convoy
The ads for the movie she was nminated for though look amazing. It's a movie called The Blindside. Its set against an NFL backdrop, but appears to be more than that. Kind of like remember the titans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetsuwan Convoy
It's kinda Sandra Bullock's Erin Brokovich.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraphim Prime
Sandra IRL is a mom, so playing a mom was like first instinct IMO