Originally posted by Jack Spencer Jr The sad thing about this and everything else that has happened to Lindsay Lohan this past year is that people have forgotten that she can act.

One of the frequent complaints by critics in both this movie and IKWKM is that LiLo demonstrates a great ability to act.  I feel it's not her performance at issue here.  It's her ability to pick good roles and scripts to demonstrate her talents.  She needs to remember we're forking over good money to watch her star in crap.

Originally posted by Jack Spencer Jr At least her other clunker, I Know Who Killed Me, was much worse, so Georgia Rule will likely be forgotten in a few years, if I Know is remembered thanks to the Razzies and, if we're lucky, a cartoon series where the twins fight crime and solve mysteries with their bionic implants.

YES!!  THAT'S IT!!  WHAT WE'RE ALL LOOKING FORWARD TO!! 

I haven't seen Georgia Rule yet.  I'm just going by the trailers, the critics and what my fellow Razzie members have said about the movie.  I don't usually do that, but in this case, I feel confident in the evidence brought before me so much that I cringe at the thought of watching it.  I'll eventually watch it, though.

I have two cats.  I don't know if that qualifies as having a "bunch" of cats.

I'm not gay, though, so I guess that means you're not talking about me. . . .

I'm with the HeadRAZZ, though.  What's that got to do with anything? 

I've been thinking a lot about this film because of the current discussion though.  I mentioned earlier that if anyone could have done this storyline right, it would have been Garry Marshall, since he was able to combine comedy and tragedy about prostitution very well in the movie Pretty Woman.  And, when I state the storyline, it actually sounds like it could work. 

"A young woman becomes so difficult that her alcoholic mother, out of desperation, sends her to her overbearing grandmother.  Although the granddaughter continues to be wild, the structure helps her to change, and eventually she reveals that the mother's boyfriend had been molesting her."

That sounds like a decent storyline to me.  Yet, by everyone's account (well, except for Jacko's, who thinks gay men who are cat lovers can't critique this movie, which makes it difficult to take Jacko seriously), it's out of whack, going from one extreme to the other.  And when the molestation comes out, it causes most people to feel far more repulsion about the movie than it does empathy for the granddaughter.

When something like this happens, I blame the director (which is why I checked off Marshall's name on my ballot).  Marshall is the one responsible for making sure the movie flows well.  If scenes aren't acted well, it's his responsibility to catch that and redo it.  If the script is bad in portions, the same thing.  Marshall failed on this one.

However, I don't hold Marshall totally to blame.  LiLo for some strange reason decided during the production that Paris Hilton, Britney Spears and Nicole Richie were great role models.  So, despite having more talent than the other three put together (please don't let that happen), she became addicted to whatever, wild, irresponsible, a danger behind the wheel and a regular on celebrity porn sites.  This behavior disrupted production so much, James G. Robinson released a letter warning that her lack of professionalism endangered production and she would be sued if she caused any further delays.  Now, if you were Marshall, and you had a scene with Lohan in it that you found needed to be redone, not because of performance so much as because it didn't fit together in the whole, would you redo it under the circumstances?  Don't know if Marshall ever had to make that choice, but I do know that, despite giving what I hear is her best performance in a film, the film doesn't fit together as a whole.  "Schizophrenic" seems to be the consensus.

And this despite it having a viable storyline.

This is why I singled out Lohan from the other actresses.  I wish I had penciled onto my ballot "Georgia Rule" after her name, because I can't help but feel that her behavior had an impact in how that film turned out.  Also, she, along with Jane Fonda and Felicity Huffman, should have demanded a better script.

And that's all from having read about it and watching the trailers.

Is this place just full of self proclaimed movie critic wannabes? This is just as bad as IMDB when people opine over films they haven't even seen.

The movie wasn't that bad, I couldn't believe it was even nominated in the first place. You people are either prissy gay men or own a bunch of cats.

A comedy about molestation? Obviously you didn't see the film. 

Response from Head RAZZberry: As a matter of fact, I did see this film, and if you didn't find its attempt to combine bald-faced pathos, slapstick comedy  and child molestation both creepy and schizophrenic, then I'd suggest maybe you are the person with the problem... 

P.S. What do "prissy gay men" or owning "a bunch of cats" have to do with not liking GEORGIA RULE?? 

I do hope you're kidding about Lady in the Water! But Georgia Rule was merely mediocre, and Lohan's performance in it was actually wonderful...

Originally posted by moviewizguy Lady in the Water is one of the best films ever made. Gerogia Rule was a decent film with great performances but has its inconsistancies.

 

Response from Head RAZZberry: While we are planning to list Lohan on our Nominating Ballot for Worst Actress, it will likely be for her dual performance in I KNOW WHO KILLED ME and not for this. GEORGIA RULE was a big disappointment (any film with Jane Fonda, Felicity Huffman and Lindsay Lohan that barely rises above run-of-the-mill would be disappointing) it didn't quite rise (or sink) to the standard of being RAZZable. To me, the worst thing about the film was the confusing and seemingly cavalier way it treated the Lohan character's accusations of sexual abuse against her step-father -- It seems to me that subject is serious enough it should simply NOT be used as fodder for what's being sold as a family comedy for release on Mother's Day weekend...

Wait...what?

moviewizguy, you're confusing me...

Georgia Rule was....Lady in the Water was not...

Originally posted by moviewizguy Georgia Rule and Lady in the Water were two of the better recent films! People must be smokin' crack because Lady in the Water was FANTASTIC!!!!

  

You must be smokin' crack...

Originally posted by moviewizguy Well, that's not what I meant. Sure, there are some bad movies that weren't bad as critics say they were. That's when I mention it. But if I don't mention the movie was bad, it's because the movie was actually good, which goes for Georgia Rule and Lady in the Water, which was one of the best films in 2006! People must be smokin' crack because Lady in the Water was FANTASTIC!!!!

                                                                       

"Delta Farce", "Lady In The Water", "Perfect Stranger", "Showgirls", and "Waterworld", weren't as bad as the critics said they were, but they were still bad. Just because a movie is better than what the critics said, doesn't make it a good movie.

Originally posted by moviewizguy Ok, I finish watching this movie and I don't get all the hate. The ONLY main problem in the movie is that it was being dramatic and funny at the wrong places because there's a serious scene and then the next one turns into a comedy, which confuses you. Should a movie really get a bad rating for that because I remember Independence Day having the same thing, especially wanting us to feel sad for the people while Will Smith works out his comedy in another scene and that wasn't recieved as bad as Georgia Rule, which I gave a decent rating (2.5/4). It's not as bad as people said it was, just because it has mixed tones...  Response from Head RAZZberry: Okay, moviewizguy, here's my main question for you: Is ANY movie "as bad as they say it is"??  Of the more than 180 postings you've added to this Forum, about 97.8% of them are in defense some mediocre movie or other that bombed with both critics and the movie-going public. If you honestly believe that most of what Hollywood puts out there for our so-called amusement is "not as bad as they say it is," why do you seem to have ambitions of becoming a movie critic??  Your tone sounds to me more appropriate for someone who aspires to replace the late Jack Valenti as the Goodwill Ambassador (i. e. apologist) for the movie biz, rather than someone with valid, critical commentary to impart...

                                                                                              ]]> Sun, 23 Sep 2007 06:07:17 +0000 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1877&PID=13544#13544 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1877&PID=13494#13494 Author: moviewizguy
Subject: 1877
Posted: September 20 2007 at 1:17pm

I don't want to be a movie critic! Who ever said I was going to be one! I certainly, positively don't want to be a movie critic. People are calling this movie one of the worst movies ever. I don't get it. It was mediocre. It wasn't bad because the mixed tones.]]> Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:17:45 +0000 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1877&PID=13494#13494 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1877&PID=13487#13487 Author: cvcjr13
Subject: 1877
Posted: September 19 2007 at 4:13pm

Originally posted by moviewizguy Response from Head RAZZberry: . . .Your tone sounds to me more appropriate for someone who aspires to replace the late Jack Valenti as the Goodwill Ambassador (i. e. apologist) for the movie biz, rather than someone with valid, critical commentary to impart...

And all this time, I thought he was trying to be the Paula Abdul of movie critics. . . .

Ever see the movie What's So Bad About Feeling Good?  I think he has the virus. . . .

Ok, I finish watching this movie and I don't get all the hate. The ONLY main problem in the movie is that it was being dramatic and funny at the wrong places because there's a serious scene and then the next one turns into a comedy, which confuses you.

Should a movie really get a bad rating for that because I remember Independence Day having the same thing, especially wanting us to feel sad for the people while Will Smith works out his comedy in another scene and that wasn't recieved as bad as Georgia Rule, which I gave a decent rating (2.5/4). It's not as bad as people said it was, just because it has mixed tones... 

Response from Head RAZZberry: Okay, moviewizguy, here's my main question for you: Is ANY movie "as bad as they say it is"??  Of the more than 180 postings you've added to this Forum, about 97.8% of them are in defense some mediocre movie or other that bombed with both critics and the movie-going public. If you honestly believe that most of what Hollywood puts out there for our so-called amusement is "not as bad as they say it is," why do you seem to have ambitions of becoming a movie critic??  Your tone sounds to me more appropriate for someone who aspires to replace the late Jack Valenti as the Goodwill Ambassador (i. e. apologist) for the movie biz, rather than someone with valid, critical commentary to impart... 

No offense HeadRAZZ, but I wasn't the first to mention CHAPTER 27:

Originally posted by Criss808 Poor Lindsay...Her career started off so promising with movies like "Freaky Friday" and "Mean Girls" but then she got into the party scene and started hanging out with RAZZIE-winners Paris Hilton and Britney Spears!!! I think this year she'll definitely be nominated for WORST ACTRESS for her performances in "GEORGIA RULE", the awful-looking "I KNOW WHO KILLED ME", and "CHAPTER 27". At least Jane Fonda redeemed herself from that terrible piece of crap that was "MONSTER-IN-LAW"!!!

 

Response from Head RAZZberry: I stand semi-corrected. I was simply pointing out that I (as Head RAZZberry) had said nothing about listing CHAPTER 27 as an eligible Lohan title for 2007. With  I KNOW WHO KILLED ME not being screened for critics, I'd say that even if 27 isn't released, Lohan certainly looks like a Worst Actress contender this year...

And now things are even worse for Lohan: She's been arrested in Santa Monica, California on suspicion of drunk driving and cocaine possession, just days after she completed a 45-day rehabilitation program. Now many that are saying that jail might be the only way to save Lohan...but I don't know for sure.

Originally posted by Criss808 Poor Lindsay...Her career started off so promising with movies like "Freaky Friday" and "Mean Girls" but then she got into the party scene and started hanging out with RAZZIE-winners Paris Hilton and Britney Spears!!! I think this year she'll definitely be nominated for WORST ACTRESS for her performances in "GEORGIA RULE", the awful-looking "I KNOW WHO KILLED ME", and "CHAPTER 27". At least Jane Fonda redeemed herself from that terrible piece of crap that was "MONSTER-IN-LAW"!!!

And of her career starting off so promisingly, you left out "The Parent Trap" which was actually the first film of her career. 

But can she be nominated for CHAPTER 27 if it wasn't released in the US? That really doesn't make much sense.

Response from Head RAZZberry: Where did I say we were planning to nominate Lohan for CHAPTER 27? You're the one who mentioned it. And you are correct in suggesting that if it isn't theatrically released in the US, it doesn't qualify as a RAZZIE contender...

I think she will, because the movie was not recieved very well and early reviews for Chapter 27 have been bad. Plus the Razzies always nominate people who are in the media all the time. Remember Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes were nominated for their performances in "War of the Worlds" and "Batman Begins" in 2005? Both those movies were well liked (especially Batman Begins!!!) so I think Lindsay has a good chance of being nominated this year...

Response from Head RAZZberry: It's a tad early to be predicting, but I'd say Lindsay's chance at being a RAZZIE nominee for her "body of work" this year (including the about-to-open I KNOW WHO KILLED ME and her latest DUI over the past weekend) is fair-to-good. Unlike Those OTHER Awards (aka The Giving Out of the ittle Gold Naked Men) we admit that "zeitgeist" (the public mood towards a celebrity in the year they're nominated) does play a role in our members' voting process...