Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > FORUMS on 30th RAZZIES Choices > WHATCHA THINK of OUR 30th Annual NOMz & "Winners"???
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: BACK-TALK on OUR 30th ANNUAL NOMz & "WINNERS"
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

BACK-TALK on OUR 30th ANNUAL NOMz & "WINNERS"
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1516171819>
Author
Message
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557 		Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: BACK-TALK on OUR 30th ANNUAL NOMz & "WINNERS"
    Posted: March 04 2010 at 10:29pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

I never thought I'd say this, but Keanu is better. He at least has A personality to typecast into. Klein is about as bland as dehydrated rice.
Talk about having to choose which knee you would rather have a sledge hammer be taken to.
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
dazza82 View Drop Down
Berry New Comer
Berry New Comer


Joined: March 04 2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8 		Post Options Post Options   Quote dazza82 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 05 2010 at 7:50am
any leaks yet?
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557 		Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 05 2010 at 11:35am
Originally posted by dazza82

any leaks yet?
I'm pretty sure the people in charge of the Razzies are tight lipped until the award show.
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4803 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 05 2010 at 1:07pm
I don't care'bout the results.The worst movie is in fact LAND OF THE LOST.Why?It's the only flop.
http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2136 		Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 05 2010 at 8:55pm
Originally posted by Vits

I don't care'bout the results.The worst movie is in fact LAND OF THE LOST.Why?It's the only flop.

Just because a movie flops doesn't make it bad.
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557 		Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 05 2010 at 9:18pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy


Just because a movie flops doesn't make it bad.
If a movie flops, it's a strong hint it might suck ... or perhaps it just didn't click with audiences. However, with "Land of the Lost", it really did suck!
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
dEd Grimley View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 31 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2024 		Post Options Post Options   Quote dEd Grimley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 05 2010 at 10:03pm
Originally posted by Vits

I don't care'bout the results.The worst movie is in fact LAND OF THE LOST.Why?It's the only flop.


Do we need to get back into the "Just because it made money doesn't mean it's good argument?"

*Multiple Edits, sorry if anyone's read the one with the video link*

You can make the same argument for LotL that you can with Trannies 2; You get what you paid to see. If you wanted to see fighting robots, you can argue that Trannies 2 delivered, and thus was good. But it wasn't.

You can say that you paid to see Will Ferrell acting goofy in LotL and you got what you paid for, so it was good. But it wasn't.

One made money, the other didn't, but they were both horrible, horrible movies.
-Iron helps us play-
Back to Top
dazza82 View Drop Down
Berry New Comer
Berry New Comer


Joined: March 04 2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8 		Post Options Post Options   Quote dazza82 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 06 2010 at 12:18am
cmon trannies and sandra B
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4803 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 06 2010 at 7:05am
I did say that if a movie flops doesn't make it bad,but if it floped and had bad reviews,it's bad.
http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557 		Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 06 2010 at 7:51am
Originally posted by Vits

I did say that if a movie flops doesn't make it bad,but if it floped and had bad reviews,it's bad.

Consider this, we have both "Bayformers 2" and "LOTL" up for 7 awards each. One is the tenth highest grossing movie of all time, and the other didn't break even with its budget. Meanwhile, you have "Hurt Locker" and "Avatar", both up for 9 awards. One only broke enough with its budget, and  the other made over 2 billion worldwide. So you have to think about it this way: a movie being successful might not point out how good it was in quality, it may only prove how marketable it was.
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4803 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 06 2010 at 8:14am
That's different.THE HURT LOCKER wasn't a flop.

Box office results indicate how entertainin'(not good)the movie was,but analyzin'the demografic targets and stuff.

The 5 highest grossin'movies of the year aren't all considered good,but the 5 highest grossin'of all times,are.
http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557 		Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 06 2010 at 10:11am
Originally posted by Vits

That's different.THE HURT LOCKER wasn't a flop.

Box office results indicate how entertainin'(not good)the movie was,but analyzin'the demografic targets and stuff.

The 5 highest grossin'movies of the year aren't all considered good,but the 5 highest grossin'of all times,are.
"Hurt Locker" wasn't a flop, but it wasn't a success either. It only made its budget back. Again, the top highest grossing movies of the year are only the most "marketable", not "good" ... and some would question how "entertaining".
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4803 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 06 2010 at 11:09am
THE HURT LOCKER is still a good movie'cuz,regardless the numbers,didn't flop and had good reviews,and it's gon'na win Oscars.
 
In this case,"Marketable" and "Entertainin'" mean the same.
 
You might say that people pay money to see a movie not knowin'that it's bad.Right?Wrong.
 
I hate to say this about a Shyamalan movie,but THE VILLAGE had a very good openin',but after people didn't like it,it fell.
 
COP OUT open in #3 with bad reviews.Is it a bad movie?No.It went up to #2,somethin'very hard to do,which means it's at least entertainin',just like the highest grossin'movies of the year.
 
Regardless of the ones that made to the top 10,it's the #1 that counts,and that's always a good movie(last year was AVATAR).Only 4 of the top 10 had bad reviews.That's nothing.
 
Althought it's true that 3 of them were teen targeted,ANGELS & DEMONS wasn't,and it did well despite the bad reviews,and you can't say people were expectin'much,'cuz THE DA VINCE CODE mixed reviews.Why?Those two are entertainin'.
http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557 		Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 06 2010 at 12:01pm
Originally posted by Vits

In this case,"Marketable" and "Entertainin'" mean the same.
 
You might say that people pay money to see a movie not knowin'that it's bad.Right?Wrong.
 
I hate to say this about a Shyamalan movie,but THE VILLAGE had a very good openin',but after people didn't like it,it fell.
 
Actually, that is a prime example of why studios go out of their way to block critics from seeing the movies. By the time audiences see it, the movie has made its money and audiences feel robbed.
 
As for Shyamalan, the one-hit wonder, he needs to drop his gimmick-full movies. "Airbender" may be his comeback movie, but he should stick to his plan of only producing movies from now on.
 
 
COP OUT open in #3 with bad reviews.Is it a bad movie?No.It went up to #2,somethin'very hard to do,which means it's at least entertainin',just like the highest grossin'movies of the year.
 
Regardless of the ones that made to the top 10,it's the #1 that counts,and that's always a good movie(last year was AVATAR).Only 4 of the top 10 had bad reviews.That's nothing.
Again, that's being marketable. Bruce Willis is a marketable star, even if his acting is hit or miss. If the movie was all bad reviews, chances are it was bad (at least from critics POV). This is another prime example of "entertaining" over "quality". As for the top grossers of all time, well, those 4 with bad reviews have no right to be there. "Phantom Menace" and "Bayformers 2" are the ULTIMATE examples of audiences choosing entertainment or market over quality, just for loyality for a series or to see giant CGI robots fight.
 
Althought it's true that 3 of them were teen targeted,ANGELS & DEMONS wasn't,and it did well despite the bad reviews,and you can't say people were expectin'much,'cuz THE DA VINCE CODE mixed reviews.Why?Those two are entertainin'.
Well, when you have two books that are strongly against Catholic beliefs, people are going to run to see what it's all about. For the most part, everyone said the movies were boring as hell. Again, all about being marketable.
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
dEd Grimley View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 31 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2024 		Post Options Post Options   Quote dEd Grimley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 06 2010 at 12:20pm
Simple word of mouth doesn't make or break a movie. People go to see another movie, see a trailer, and give it a thumbs up or down, so to speak, and then they see it. The word of mouth factor generally doesn't come in to play until several weeks in.
If there's a stupid movie that's well marketed, and people want to see it, they see it right away. If the marketing stays strong, it might get another week or two. Sometimes people don't get to the stupid movie in the first week. So they go the next. And THEN, once people've missed it two weeks in a row, they start to ask around to see if it's worth it or not.
-Iron helps us play-
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4803 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 06 2010 at 1:57pm
That makes no sense.

If those 4 nominees for "Worst Picture" were close to being in any "Worst" list,they wouldn't be hits.

Regardless of the openin',if a movie is awful,the box office status can't keep high for weeks,unless it's a teen and/or children targeted movie,but that can depend.

There are tones of animated flops,and G-Rated MR. MAGORIUM'S WONDER EMPORIUM.

Regardless of how not well done COP OUT is,a bad movie can't go up in the b.o. like that.Therefor,it's entertainin'.It succeeded in one it's missions,although it's not the main one.
http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1516171819>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down