I've gotta give credit where credit is due -- Hoffman and his "Don King hair" as a Screen Couple choice was submitted on this Forum by saturnwatcher, and I found it SO amusing that I added it to our Nominating Ballot just moments before taking it to the printer...

I loved that you guys listed "Dustin Hoffman & Don King's Hair" as a Worst Screen Couple choice on the nominating ballot! But the choices this year are hard to narrow to just five picks in many categories -- Whatta "Berry" Rotten Year 2007 was at the movies!!

I agree here, the number of good stories is limited. If you look at literature, there are so many good novels that are either "rip-offs" of the Bible or Classic (old Greek and Roman) literature. I don't find that necessarily bad. I mean does being a "rip-off" make "The Great Gatsby" a bad novel? Or "Life of Brian" a bad film?
What matters is how well the story itself is narrated, and this is actually where the variety lies. Literatary scholars will tell you that the most important stories have already been told. I am no scholar in this field, therefore I prefer to accept this opinion...   

Originally posted by jb razz Tomsmobr, please lighten up about "rip-offs." On almost every thread, you mention that some aspect of the film is a rip-off of another film. There are so many recycled ideas in the film industry that we don't need to make a case of it every time, much less make a case out of similar ideas movies share.

I was watching a better movie starring Kermit the other day. That was "Emmet Otter's Jug Band Christmas". My 3 year old nephew Jim-Jim really liked it. Nice to see little kids liking classics.

Originally posted by Bombbot Kermit, of all people, turns up in THIS? Jim Henson must be rolling in his grave... Along with Dustin Hoffman's pride!

                                                                                                      ]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2007 13:22:41 +0000 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2276&PID=14400#14400 http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2276&PID=14391#14391 Author: jb razz
Subject: 2276
Posted: December 03 2007 at 7:43am

Tomsmobr, please lighten up about "rip-offs." On almost every thread, you mention that some aspect of the film is a rip-off of another film. There are so many recycled ideas in the film industry that we don't need to make a case of it every time, much less make a case out of similar ideas movies share.

Response from Head RAZZberry: Actually, if you read his post, tomsmobr referred to Mr. Magorium as "a take-off of Willy Wonka." It was me who used the phrade "rip-off":

Originally posted by tomsmobr I'm Glad The Head RAZZberry picked up also on MR. MAGORIUM character being a take off of Willy Wonka Response from Head RAZZberry: I think instead of "take-off" you may actually have meant "rip-off"...

Kermit does indeed make a brief cameo appearance. 

Originally posted by Bombbot Kermit, of all people, turns up in THIS? Jim Henson must be rolling in his grave... Along with Dustin Hoffman's pride!

Kermit, of all people, turns up in THIS?

Jim Henson must be rolling in his grave... Along with Dustin Hoffman's pride!

Because Kermit's a far better actor than Notalent Portman... 

Originally posted by Sanndman228715 Just when I was wrapping my head around two time Oscar winner Dustin Hoffman, and Oscar nominee (And multi-time Razzie nominee) Natalie Portman being in this, I find myself wondering why in God's name Kermit the Frog would be in this? (...)

 

Just when I was wrapping my head around two time Oscar winner Dustin Hoffman, and Oscar nominee (And multi-time Razzie nominee) Natalie Portman being in this, I find myself wondering why in God's name Kermit the Frog would be in this? This is a dark day for Muppet fans everywhere. What's next Gonzo appearing in a Michael Bay film? Miss Piggie signing a three picture deal with Uwe Boll?! I always knew the Muppets had hands up their arse, but I never thought their heads would be there too.

Excuse me while I weep. 

I mentioned in another thread that we went to the premier of this movie last Saturday, and I wasn't impressed by it. The movie is not particularly memorable, and Hoffman's performance is downright embarrassing. The only good thing I can say about it is that I really didn't pay anything to see it. They were giving two free tickets to anyone who brought a new toy to the event. All the toys were donated to Toys for Tots. Evidently, this movie will be used as a vehicle to collect toys for that very worthy charity in several large markets. For that reason I hesitate to smack it down too badly. But Hoffman definitely deserves consideration for Worst Actor.

I actually didn't think Portman was all that bad, I think she was just struggling along with a very poorly written role. There probably isn't an actress in Hollywood that would have come off looking good with what she had to work with in this film. Then again, nobody is going to come out of this one looking good.

"So if you have any questions, dial information, thank you for calling." 

I don't want to know how the hair stylist came up with Hoffman's look here.  He looks like he ran into a pack of zombies while standing next to a nuclear power plant. 

And how in the world did they dupe Kermit the Frog of all people to take a part in it?  You'll think he would certainly know better than to jump into this kind of shallow pond.  Then again, times have been comparatively tough for him lately too, so may he's eager to get Robin a load of Xmas gifts with the cameo cash...   

I'm Glad The Head RAZZberry picked up also on MR. MAGORIUM character being a take off of Willy Wonka

Response from Head RAZZberry: I think instead of "take-off" you may actually have meant "rip-off"...

I'm one of the few people who liked Toys.  Okay, okay, put down the stones and tomatoes, I know, I know, but I still liked it.

I brought that up because the second I saw the trailer for Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium, I felt like this was similar to Toys, except with Toys you had an underlying political theme of war versus peace.  The only underlying theme this movie has is to discover who you really are, which Toys already had.

So, I figured if most people hated Toys, how are they going to feel about a movie that's only half of Toys?

It's looking like my hunch is right.

I haven't seen this yet, and I may be totally off base, but I'm guessing that's the problem.  If it didn't work the first time around, why the hell did they think it would work the second time?

What was it that I said about regurgitation and rumination in another thread?  That it possibly only tastes good the first time around?  Kinda like Jon Voight in Anaconda? . . .