A 21st Century BAD SEED...or Just BAD?!?

Oh no, I've been waiting for this day just to prove to you that you have no clue what you're talking about, and your overhyping of this movie was ridiculous.

Just shows how trollish you are seeing that I was never waiting for this day.

Originally posted by Michaels 1. You were the one who started a whole thread about to how much Fuhrman should be given an Oscar nod. Remember this original line: "I can't praise Isabelle Fuhrman enough. She did an excellent job! She must have an Oscar nomination for the Best Supporting Actress category. Anyone agree with me?"

Umm...no. There's a difference between she "must have" an Oscar nom and she "will have" one. Learn the difference. You're arguing that I said she "will have" a nom.

Originally posted by Michaels Well, well, well. The Oscar nods have been released, and look who is NOT up for Best Supporting Actress! One Isabelle Fuhrman for "Orphan". You know, the role where she had just "as good a chance of being nominated as Mo'nique does". The role that is being considered "the next Freddy from "Nightmare on Elms Street" or Jason from "Friday the 13th"." The role in a medicore movie, which opened to mixed reviews, with no Oscar buzz behind, and only took in a modest gross at the box office. Yeah, that role.

If you've paid and ounce of attention to what I said, you wouldn't have bothered posting this. I'm seriously thinking you're the child here, since your post on this day have been the most immature I've seen you in quite a while.

I rest my case, ladies and gentlemen. Moviewizguy has NO clue whatsoever about what he's talking about.

You're the one who doesn't have a clue because I've never said the things you've charged of me saying. Prepared to have your post, yet again, be torn apart:

1. I said she has a good chance of being nominated if the Academy actually nominated actors with good performances. If you go to my original post where I say that, I added the "if" which is me suggesting that the Academy largely ignore performances from the thriller/horror genre. This is why performances like Jack Nicholson (The Shining) and Marcia Gay Harden (The Mist) are ignored. The word "if" changes a lot of things.
2. I have never compared Fuhrman to the iconic villains you've listed. In fact, you're the one who brought it up to discussion. I don't know what you're trying to do there. You ain't foolin' anybody.

I'm seriously thinking of ignoring you on this site now. This pointless bickering is spending me a lot of time by doing absolutely nothing. I shouldn't be arguing with a little simpleton like yourself.

Originally posted by moviewizguy As a fan of the director, I'm excited for his next film, "Unknown White Male" which seems like a remake of some other movie I can't pin point on but the cast look great (so far), starring Diane Kruger, Liam Neeson, and Frank Langella.

If it sounds like something done before, it might be because it was done in an episode of "Buffy: The Vampire Slayer", in which Xander wakes up on more to find out he has been replaced by a clone of himself. That or one of many other movies in which the main character is replace with a copycat for some reason. The title of the movie itself is the same as that of movie made in 2005 about a man waking up in Coney Island with no memory of who he is.

Originally posted by moviewizguy Here's a cool thing I learned about the cast for this movie. Some of them have starred in some of the best films of 2009. Vera Farmiga: Up in the Air Peter Sarsgaard: An Education CCH Pounder: Avatar Jimmy Bennett: Star Trek Why do I say this? With a cast like this, I'm surprised this movie didn't get more attention.

Well, it could be that it doesn't matter how talented your cast is, they can only be as good as the material they are given to. That and the fact everyone wrote the movie off as a female version of "The Good Son" with an M. Night twist ending, which it pretty much is.

Originally posted by moviewizguy I don't pay that much attention to the main website and Worst DVD of the Week and such so I'm not that much bothered by it.

That's okay, just as long as you also understand that this movie is not going to reach the level of success that you claim it will, because it won't.

The fact that this got a Worst DVD of the Weak is just hilarious to me, considering MWG's rabid obsession with it. But when you start comparing Orphan with the other horror movies this year (other than PA) it stops looking all that bad. Jennifer's Body also may have had some originality to it, but it seemed to have failed, too.

And, by the way, I liked your joke, Michaels.

You would too if a movie you saw was great, but nobody had seen it. 

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I hardly think a film that grossed over $40 million can accurately be described as being seen by "nobody" (B.O. MoJo LINK). Among 2009's crop of crappy horror movies, ORPHAN ranks somewhere in mid-range, as far as ticket sales go -- Clearly dwarfed by the phenomenon that is PARANORMAL ACTIVITY, but still making more money than LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT,  HALLOWEEN II or JENNIFER'S BODY.

 

DVD comes out this Tuesday! Who's going to buy it Monday midnight?!!!