Ok. This ballot has redeemed itself...for now.

Originally posted by moviewizguy After seeing One Missed Call not being on the list...I doubt many more are on there. How about 88 Minutes?

Oh, "88 Minutes" was on there alright, many times.

After seeing One Missed Call not being on the list...I doubt many more are on there. How about 88 Minutes?

Originally posted by wolfee37 Film had its moments but it was too slow moving. Liv Tylers voice was too quiet for most of the movie. All in all a forgettable film that slightly creeped me out. NOT RAZZIE MATERIAL.

Don't worry, I don't remember it being anywhere on the voting ballot.

Starts out relatively suspensefully but quickly devolves into slow-paced, dull, mind-numbing tedium.  We quickly found ourselves yelling "WOULD YOU F---ING RUN!!!!" repeatedly.  Every suspenseful minute is milked into 5 or 10.  You see the "accidentally shooting the friend" scene coming for 10 minutes.  Lots of annoying "gotcha" moments. 

Too bad...it was a creepy premise and there was some genuine suspense and terror in the movie.  My wife was careful to keep doors locked when we were home for weeks after seeing it. 

Overall, not great (not even particularly good,) but certainly not Razzie material.  Too many "eh..." movies getting Razzie nods waters down the Razzie achievement, IMHO. 

I completely disagree. It's a decent movie, yes. I really do love the characters, but then they make one stupid mistake after another. It's not even scary because the trailer shows everything, especially close to the end where the baddies come in. Ugh!  And the beginning ruins everything, because they tell you exactly what's going to happen. Omg! They just spilled everything, taking any suspense out of seeing it. There's literally no suspense throughout the film, but I was surprised at the end...

The film is short, but even so, it feels like 2 hours, because literally nothing happens. It's done in 90 minutes, but it could've been done in 20 minutes. 

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: "Omg" back atya, moviewizguy. This is one of the most schizophrenic posts I've ever seen on this Forum! You argue throughout that this film is pointless, overlong, has "no suspense" and "nothing happens" -- yet you start out by saying "it's a decent movie." Every remark you make after that suggests you think STRANGERS sucked, yet you are incapable of just saying so... 

Why isn't it okay for you to occasionally admit you actually dislike a movie?? That's really what this Forum -- and the RAZZIE Awards themselves -- are all about... 

Funny thing is, this movie rarely has any blood spilled. People who liked this movie (and who found it scary) say it's not about the blood, violence and gore. But I still wasn't impressed.

Every single movie that's made has a 50/50 chance of being considered either a success or failure -- not just movies of horror genre. Although, horror movies do get the blunt end of bad critical reviews, since all they really are about is how over-the-top their violence can be. Most horror movies these days are about pushing the envelope on how much gore can be shown on screen, rather than how to scare people. 

Originally posted by moviewizguy You'll either love it or hate it. On IMDb, every day, there's at least one "It's so scary!" thread and another "Oh, God! This movie is so horrible!" thread. You have a 50/50 chance. Are you willing to risk it?

Well, I'm a person who watches literally every mainstream horror flick that comes out and coming from a person who hates R-rated horror more than PG-13-rated horror, it wasn't that good. It was better than The Fog (remake) if that means anything.

You'll either love it or hate it. On IMDb, every day, there's at least one "It's so scary!" thread and another "Oh, God! This movie is so horrible!" thread. You have a 50/50 chance. Are you willing to risk it? 

Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu How was it, compared to other recent horror flicks?

To be honest, I haven't watched many other recent horror flicks, But compared to the classic movies, it was dumb. I wasn't scared at all -- it was just flat-out boring.

I thumbed through the future releases at Box Office Mojo, and noticed there was far, far fewer horror films being released.  At this point, there's barely enough horror films being released, forget being bad enough, between now and December 31st to justify a Worst Excuse for a Horror Movie category. 

Using "horror" loosely, we have coming up:
The Strangers
Stuck
Mother of Tears
The Happening
Hellboy II
Baghead
Mirrors
Blindness (Omega Man and I Am Legend with a different affliction)
Quarantine
Saw V

Not counting the upcoming The Strangers and The Happening, we are currently considering five horror films:
One Missed Call
The Eye
Shutter
The Ruins
Prom Night (2008)

Could the industry have curtailed horror movies (after the poor quality of the last few years, we could only hope), or might they be waiting until horror movies are in the can before announcing their release dates? 

WHEN WILL HOLLYWOOD LEARN THAT CHURNING OUT 57 of THIS KIND of MOVIE EVERY YEAR, YEAR-AFTER-YEAR, ONLY RESULTS in HALF of the DVDs in the REMAINDER BINS at WAL-MART BEING HORROR MOVIES?? AND THIS ONE LOOKS ALMOST AS SCARY AS...THE LAST FAILED HORROR ATTEMPT...

FROM a FIRST-TIME DIRECTOR WHOSE ONLY PREVIOUS CREDITS ARE MINOR ROLES in TWO FORGOTTEN FILMS (and DOUBLING AS a GAFFER ON ONE of THEM) THE STRANGERS PRESENTS ITSELF as a CLEVER, LOW-BUDGET SHRIEK-FEST. BUT EARLY WORD-of-MOUTH (and the STILL BELOW) BELY THAT CLAIM.

NOW IT's YOUR TURN to SHRIEK RIGHT BACK!!

AND, NO, WE WON'T INSIST THAT YOU PUT A FLOUR SACK OVER YOUR HEAD WHILE YOU POST...

HOSTAGE HUSBAND: "No, Mr. Scarecrow, I don't think Petunia Pig and Betty Boop are reasonable replacements for the Tin Man and Cowardly Lion..."