None of which are legitimate, even as much as it pains me to come to the defense of this series. But let's get specific:

Much the same could be said of the Lord of the Rings series. Personally, I find both the LTR books and the movies to be unbearably tedious and I am not alone. There are a lot of film series that are directed to very specific fan bases.

2. The story butchers vampire and werewolf lore (and basic physics).

Vampire and werewolf lore isn't nearly as uniform as Miguels would have us believe here. Most of what we, as Americans, think of as vampire and werewolf lore is the product of reasonably recent suggestions by contemporary literature and films.  A study of the subject will reveal that there is a rich tapestry of cultural variations on the lore. As for butchery of basic physics, the same charge could be very legitimately leveled at Star Trek, Star Wars and almost every sci-fi film ever made. In any sci-fi or fantasy film, a degree of suspension of disbelief is required.

Simiar accusations could be legitimately leveled at Star Wars and Lord of the Rings with an healthy dose of pretense slipped in.

4. This saga's influence has spawned imitators (most of which are pretty bad).

Anything that gets done in Hollywood that yields a net profit over a buck and a quarter is going to spawn imitators, mostly bad.

5. Moviegoers have been enraged by these movies since the first one stole awards from "The Dark Knight".

Miguel, Miguel, Miguel. Drop the "s" from "moviegoers" there and you have a legitimate statement. The only awards this movie ever "stole" from The Dark Knight were crap awards like The MTV Awards that nobody but you gives a flying flip about. Nobody is enraged because 20 teenage girls (the base of the MTV Award voting block) picked one of these films over The Dark Knight.

It might make his top 10, although I wouldn't be particularly surprised if it doesn't given the competition this year. I'll bet you a 1 followed by a lot of zeros that it doesn't make his #1.

This is the only chance we have left to punish this series for all the bad it's done to the film industry.

I didn't care for any of the previous films in this series and I wouldn't have even watched them had they not been nominees. But none of them were Razzie worthy and I doubt this one is either, based on the buzz. If we permit this series to slip into the cinematic obscurity for which it is destined, nobody will be any worse off for it.I don't think it has done particular harm to the film industry. In fact, I think an argument can be made that it is one of the few film series that has appealed to a specific demographic that Hollywood has typically ignored.]]> Fri, 07 Dec 2012 08:09:26 +0000 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6022&PID=53037#53037 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6022&PID=53031#53031 Author: Vits
Subject: 6022
Posted: December 06 2012 at 1:57pm

Just saw this. For your consideration: Worst Actor for both Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner (or is he supporting?), Actress for Kristen Stewart (also for SN&TH), Supp. Actress for Maggie Grace (also for TAKEN PART 2), and Worst Screen Couple for Lautner & Mackenzie Foy. But not Worst Picture.

I'll research on the book changes to see if it deserves to be up for Worst Screenplay and/or Worst Remake/Sequel.
]]> Thu, 06 Dec 2012 13:57:35 +0000 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6022&PID=53031#53031 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6022&PID=52930#52930 Author: Dun-Ida
Subject: 6022
Posted: November 25 2012 at 5:32am

This movie has tumbled even deeper into the "Rotten" zone. The Rotten Tomatoes rating has now gone down to...46%!  

]]> Sun, 25 Nov 2012 05:32:19 +0000 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6022&PID=52930#52930 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6022&PID=52901#52901 Author: Vits
Subject: 6022
Posted: November 21 2012 at 11:27am

Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu Here's Peter Travers's review for "The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2": http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/reviews/the-twilight-saga-breaking-dawn-part-2-20121115

[TUBE]EKgpBc-smro[/TUBE]

Also, it's true what they say. It is not as bad as the other ones, and the movie itself is not as bad as I hoped it would be. The worst thing are the CGI wolves, and the story about the guy who is waiting for the child to grow up, so he can f**k her.  

Interesting thing is, from the example of a not naturally talented actress like Kristen Stewart, we can see who is a good director and who is a bad director. They put a ton of make up on her to make her look a little prettier, and I'll bet she also was told to smile more often. That goes to Condon's credit. Stewart still spends two thirds of the movie with her mouth open, but she was better here than as directed by Sanders in Snow White (even though she made that movie afterwards) Vits: You might be right with your theory after all!  

Pattinson bothered me twice, but he did make Cosmopolis afterwards. Lautner sealed the deal with his facial expression when he says "creepy" and gives that ass-f**ked laugh afterwards.

The "best actor" here is Christopher Hayerdahl. His screen presence (only one minute) and his reading of the one word of "Finally!" was more impressive than anyone else's performance.

Not having read the book, I had a few problems with the flow of the story, i.e. in one shot Bella has red eyes, then they are immediately golden.

And of course the logic is completely missing, since Bella is supposed to be a raging Newborn, but manages to run away from human blood, and presses her face into Charlie's neck but nothing happens.

For me, this doesn't beat The Devil Inside in the Worst Picture competition.  

FYC: 

Taylor Lautner for Worst Actor (Breaking Dawn Part 2) 

Kristen Stewart for Worst Actress (Snow White and the Huntsman), but not necessarily for BD2  

Taylor Lautner and Mackenzie Foy for Worst Couple (Breaking Dawn Part 2). 

This is the ultimate DAFUQDIDTHEYREALLYCOMEUPWITHTHISSICKsh*tMYEYES situation.

Dang, Head Razz! I didn't know you went around watching YouTube personalities!  

 

The acting is still crap, with only Michael Sheen coming out unscathed. Bill Condon's direction is great, something I thought I'd never say about a Twilight film.

 

For your consideration:

 

Worst Actress: Kristen Stewart (also for SWATH)
Worst Supporting Actor: Taylor Lautner

Worst Supporting Actress: Maggie Grace (also for Lockout and Taken 2)

Worst Screen Couple (if we keep it): Taylor Lautner and Mackenzie Foy

That being said, I wouldn't mind if this got any other nominations (except for Condon and Sheen). I'm not sure if HeadRazz would consider Lautner lead or supporting and I won't mind if he's placed in the lead category.

 

Grade: C+

[TUBE]w3i-QmgqGq0[/TUBE]