Quote Originally Posted by Sky Shadow View Post
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.
QFT!! Perfect!!

Quote Originally Posted by Bartrim View Post
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?
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!