Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > RAZZIE® Basics > Entire RAZZIE® History, Year-by-Year: 1980-2013
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: DISCUSSION of 2008 RAZZIE® "WINNERS"
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

DISCUSSION of 2008 RAZZIE® "WINNERS"

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Message
HeadRAZZBerry View Drop Down
Berry Important MODERATOR
Berry Important MODERATOR


Joined: April 23 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5094
Post Options Post Options   Quote HeadRAZZBerry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: DISCUSSION of 2008 RAZZIE® "WINNERS"
    Posted: March 26 2009 at 5:33am

HERE'S WHERE to JOIN the LIVELY DISCUSSION of OUR 2008 "WINNERS"...

...and HERE's the LINK to SEE WHAT "WON" for 2008...  



Ye Olde Head RAZZberry
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6885
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 12 2010 at 11:29am
I guess it's too late to continue bashing you for awarding INDIANA JONES 4 a Razzie. Anyway, here are my ratings(0-10)for the INDY saga: 

1)6 for RAIDERS.
2)5 for TEMPLE OF DOOM.
3)4 for LAST CRUSADE.
4)8 for CRYSTAL SKULL.  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: While we did get some angry feedback for our choice of INDY 4 as 2008's Worst Prequel, Sequel, Remake or Rip-Off, I've never heard of anyone but you claiming it was the best -- nor even one of the better -- titles in the series... 

You can follow me @Vits_Chile
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: October 12 2010 at 4:50pm
Originally posted by Vits

I guess it's too late to continue bashing you for awarding INDIANA JONES 4 a Razzie. Anyway, here are my ratings(0-10)for the INDY saga: 

1)6 for RAIDERS.
2)5 for TEMPLE OF DOOM.
3)4 for LAST CRUSADE.
4)8 for CRYSTAL SKULL.  
Okay, you REALLY need to switch your ratings around, because "Raiders" OWNED all the other movies and "Crystal Skull" doesn't even come close. Yeah, "Skull" might be the most fresh in your mind nad has the most current sfx, but "Raiders" tears it apart when it comes to story, dialog, characters, etc.
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: 6885
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 12 2010 at 5:49pm
I mispoke.Whenever I bash you for awarding INDY 4 it's not just me talking.It's also audiences and critics.As for the ratings...yeah,I have a history like that.I also think BACK TO THE FUTURE PART II is the best of the 3!
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
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: October 12 2010 at 6:08pm
Originally posted by Vits

I mispoke.Whenever I bash you for awarding INDY 4 it's not just me talking.It's also audiences and critics.As for the ratings...yeah,I have a history like that.
Critics and audiences only liked "Indy 4" because it was a throw back to their childhoods, but once the childhood memories pass, you realize the movies sucks compared to the original 3. I don't care if people don't like that choice, but it was the right choice because the movie was a big let down. Take a note from How It Should Have Ended:
 
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
GTAHater767 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: October 25 2009
Location: I shall not say
Online Status: Online
Posts: 1407
Post Options Post Options   Quote GTAHater767 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 12 2010 at 7:08pm

That's right! Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was the worst sequel of 2008, because although it isn't near the level of Uwe Boll and Seltzerberg, it was the biggest disappointment in terms of lofty duties to fulfill of its predecessors. Is that how the Worst Prequel, Sequel, Remake, or Rip-off is usually judged? All in relation to a film's predecessors and not quite as much the movie itself?

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: October 12 2010 at 7:14pm
It is a tradition with sequels that they pay homage to the original movies, but should also top them in their quality and grand scale. "Indy 4" did pay homages here and there, but in terms of quality, it was nowhere as good as the past 3 movies and was just bloated with bad adventure movie cliches. But that's how I judge sequels, I guess others just like that they have childhood memories come washing over them from watching the movie (although, if that is the case, then why not just watch the original movie on DVD?).
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: 6885
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 13 2010 at 5:33am
What makes you so sure critics didn't judge INDY 4 on it's own?They did. You know how I know? Of course it would've gotten bad reviews compared to the original. 90% of sequels are inferior. If that's really how you decide how you award "Worst Sequel," you may wanna re-think it.  

You can follow me @Vits_Chile
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: October 13 2010 at 3:30pm
The joke was that "Indy 4" was like a bad dream -- but wasn't! And Lucas didn't seem to care, so long as he has money. 

Not only was "Indy 4" inferior, it just plain sucked: The logic was flawed, the dialogue was stupid, the characters were 1-D, and some scenes were just totally unbelievable. Plus, as you just said, if 90% of sequels are inferior, why do we need to re-think the category?  
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: 6885
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 13 2010 at 6:16pm
Not re-think the category.Re-think how to choose the nominees.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
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: October 13 2010 at 7:02pm
Then what do you think should have won? I can't think a sequel that has come along since  that was as disappointing as "Indy 4" (not counting "Transformers 2", because it I knew it was going to suck from day one).
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: 6885
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 15 2010 at 2:58pm
Any of the other nominees.Is unlikely for a sequel or remake to be better than the original one,but the others were bad on their own,while INDY 4 was good standing alone.Once again,that's not me talking,it's the world,based on reviews and box office.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
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: October 15 2010 at 4:21pm
Originally posted by Vits

Any of the other nominees.Is unlikely for a sequel or remake to be better than the original one,but the others were bad on their own,while INDY 4 was good standing alone.Once again,that's not me talking,it's the world,based on reviews and box office.
"Indy 4" is not a good stand-alone movie, in fact, fi you haven't seen the past three movies, you are not going to have a clue what's going on (who Marion is, Indy's fear of snakes, etc.). As I said before, Indiana Jones is a beloved character whom many people consider to be a role model and hero from their childhood. After nearly 20 years, those same fans would go running into the theaters to see any movie with Indy's name attached to it, even if the movie was 2 hours of Indy drinking soda and belching the alphabet. Sure enough, that's exactly what happened. They made a crappy movie and everyone run to it, only to realize late that it was crap, much like what happened to the "Star Wars" prequels. Once the fond childhood memories go away after the first 20 minutes, you realize, this movie sucks.
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: 6885
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 15 2010 at 5:42pm
No offense,but like I said my comments are also the ones from critics and audiences.You're the only I hear saying those things about the movie.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
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: October 15 2010 at 6:27pm
Originally posted by Vits

No offense,but like I said my comments are also the ones from critics and audiences.You're the only I hear saying those things about the movie.
Well, you can like it all you want. The votes were casted and counting and in the end, the paying members voiced their opinions. It's in the past and can't be undone.
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
GTAHater767 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: October 25 2009
Location: I shall not say
Online Status: Online
Posts: 1407
Post Options Post Options   Quote GTAHater767 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 16 2010 at 11:47am

Mr. Burn, I don't know if Kingdom of the Crystal Skull still has between 60 and 80% at Rotten Tomatoes, but with how bad you think it is, are you implying that those critics were patently lying?

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down