Print Page | Close Window

The Berry WORST Movie Summer EVER??

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: RAZZIE® Events, Announcements & Activities
Forum Name: POLL: How Bad WERE the Movies of Summer 2006...
Forum Discription: Was It the Biggest Bummer of a Summer EVER -- Or Just About as Bad as Usual??
Printed Date: May 02 2016 at 12:58pm

Topic: The Berry WORST Movie Summer EVER??
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: The Berry WORST Movie Summer EVER??
Date Posted: August 30 2006 at 3:53am




Ye Olde Head RAZZberry

Posted By: Nasty Man
Date Posted: August 30 2006 at 4:00am

I had to vote "Totally Sucked." I can't think of one GOOD movie I saw all summer. Even the big block-busters, like PIRATES 2 and X-MEN 3, were disappointing. And original thought seems all but DEAD in Hollywood right now...WHAT A SHAME!

Response from Head RAZZberry: A shame for Hollywood...a BOON for us (except that having so MANY contenders makes it harder on our Voters to choose just FIVE in each category!)...

Everything SUX!

Posted By: #1-Film Freak!!
Date Posted: August 30 2006 at 8:31am

As someone who loves a good movie, I found this summer's cinema fare incredibly depressing. I can't think of even one good movie that came out all year (among the dozens I've seen, anyway).

Why can't Hollywood make anything exciting, original and actually entertaining any more??  Thank God my Netflix membership gives me access to thousands of good old movies...

Nobody LUVS movies more than ME!

Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: August 31 2006 at 2:51pm

On the whole, the fare this summer was numbingly mediocre. There weren't a lot of bright spots, but not a huge list of real dogs either. For me, the highlights included A Prairie Home Companion and Little Miss Sunshine. Pirates 2 was a near miss, just a little too long and I just didn't feel that Captain Jack Sparrow came off as the same character. I was also somewhat in the minority in finding The DaVinci Code entertaining. Beyond that, I'd have to agree that it was an endless string of formulaic crud.

Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken

Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: September 01 2006 at 12:22pm
Razz, what is the secret? How do you get into the Hollywood Executive
Class, make millions of dollars, and green light bomb after bomb?

Posted By: Brierfox
Date Posted: September 01 2006 at 2:07pm
I liked the "Da Vinci Code" as a book, but it failed as a movie.  "The Prairie Home Companion" was good, but no big deal, I've been a fan ever since it first appeared on PBS.   The "Pirates" movies are typical Disney fluff and can be fun to watch sometimes,  but I'd still prefer watching an oldie with Earl Flynn.   I was dissapointed with the so called Blockbusters, they all sucked!  Overall, this was a horible summer for movies.  Even the Indies were'nt special, though a few good ones might come along in the fall.

"We aren't in Kansas anymore Toto... Toto??"

Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: September 02 2006 at 9:44am
I think one of the most common carps most of us have about the product being turned out by contemporary Hollywood is the lack of originality. That is precisely why I enjoyed Prairie Home Companion and Little Miss Sunshine. Both were different than the standard fare, particulary the usual action oriented summer blockbusters.

Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: September 02 2006 at 11:06am
I though summer 2006 was The best since 2005 There was allot of good movies like Xmen The Last Stand Cars and Monster House

Posted By: jacky
Date Posted: September 03 2006 at 5:05am

Biggest rip-off so Far?

Try watching Material Girls for 2 hours and then tell me if Hilary Duff does not deserve to booted off from the silver screen

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: September 03 2006 at 12:23pm
You people expect far too much from a summer movie season.  Summer movies are meant to do only two things: give you an excuse to shovel gobs of  animal-fat coated popcorn into your gaping maw and suspend the dizzyingly horrid reality of your life for 90-120 minutes.  With that in mind, the summer movie season packed in a lot of gems: Pirates 2, X-Men 3, Superman 5, Monster House, Mission Impossible 3 (okay, MI-3 sucked) to name but a few.  For summer movies, think Laurel & Hardy not Ebert & Roeper.  Bingo.

Posted By: LBSWebsite1
Date Posted: September 03 2006 at 5:41pm
Hey, John, guys...

My Wrap-up:

Monster House was a SMASH; my first 3-D film I went to, was just the film
that will especially be a treat for Halloween come this October for the
kiddies. I hope Sony gives out the DVD in the 3-D version for me to own.

I really was wowed seeing "Superman" 'return' to the silver screen the way
Bryan Singer directed it, and newcomer Brandon Routh carrying the spirits
of Christopher Reeve and the characters of Kent/Superman in him, while
Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor and Kate Bosworth as Lois hold their own,
making their characters fulfilling as possible (at least more credit should
go to Spacey). I hope it makes it past $200 million real soon, even
though it's inching it's way there.

X-Men 3 did what the comic book franchise did to get past $200 million
and more. Visually entertaining, although I wish Brett Ratner and the
screenwriters wouldn't have spent more on the effects and have spent
more time on the storyline.

And "MI:3" was fine-tuned with exceptional performances, but only made
$130 million at the box office. I care to take it the only fault here was to
look no further than Cruise's behavior and his fault his relationship with
Paramount's deal gone bust. Don't know what to say, but Tom Cruise
better start getting his act together, or his relationship with not just all of
Hollywood, but with the studios he works with and the stars will really fall

"Pirates: Dead Man's Chest" was truly worth the $400 Million and more it
earned and worth both me and my mom's time. I guessed the surprise
ending right to the credits' distribution lines and my mom just loves
Johnny Depp's character Captain Jack Sparrow all to pieces, believe me!
Can't wait to get the second film on 2-disc and take my mom to the final
installment next summer.
Let's just PRAY that scriptwriters Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio and director
Gore Verbinski DON'T screw up the finale like the Matrix trilogy, and
others like it have done before!

The films I avoided were "The Da Vinci Code," "Little Man."

If it's a bad idea for a movie - “Put it out of your mind. In no time, it will be a forgotten memory!” - Samuel Goldwyn

Posted By: sportsartist24
Date Posted: September 04 2006 at 5:44pm

I'll definitely say, there were hardly any good movies this summer. PIRATES right now has made more money at the box office. If George Lucas' prediction is true, then it looks like the Blockbuster is DEAD!!!

Also, for the US B.O. No., well, here they are by far of the Labor Day Weekend.

1. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest-$414 Million
2. Cars-$241 Million
3. X-Men: The Last Stand-$234 Million
4. THE DA VINCI CODE-$217 Million
5. SUPERMAN RETURNS-$196 Million
6. Ice Age: The Metdown-$195 Million
7. Over the Hedge-$155 Million
9. CLICK-$136 Million
11. The Devil Wears Prada-$121 Million
12. THE BREAK-UP-$118 Million

NOTE: The titles in THIS are titles discussed in the forums of likely 2006 Possible RAZZIE contenders.

The Mormons were'nt really popular in the beginning, they're now becoming more popular, even in Hollywood.

Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: September 19 2006 at 2:42am

Overall the 2006 Summer was was more of what I would have classified as a "Big Disappointment, witch had a lot of potential". I hate to say it but Mission Impossible III I think pretty much set the tone for most of the Summer. The sure fired choices barely ended up paying their production cost, and the ones that looked like Razzie contenders ended coming out on top. Just a lot of mixed feeling on the whole "Summer of 2006".

The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger

Posted By: Brierfox
Date Posted: September 30 2006 at 5:56pm
Hollywood is relieved that there were overall gains in box office, but insiders point out that "Pirates" pulled up the averages.
Fact is, when you print out the BO you should also compare the COST of the movie, this will indicate wether the studio actually made a profit.  Consider how much a ticket costs, and check attendence figures and you'll see Hollywood just barely squeaked by.
  Go to the IMD and you'll see that a lot of summer movies lost money.
S.O.A.P.  Posidon, Click, etc were all supposed to be summer hits, the DVD's are already on the discount racks.
As usual, Miramax made money on EVERY film they made.
As usual,  it was a "quiet" indie movie, "Little Miss Sunshine", that was the real blockbuster. 
Superman dissapointed me, I kept expecting the Man to act heroic, but he couldn't save himself, let alone a city.

"We aren't in Kansas anymore Toto... Toto??"

Posted By: deadguy76
Date Posted: October 01 2006 at 11:53am
I think studios are taking into consideration that DVD are making more money than the box office. Although I can't figure out why they haven't just lowered the ticket price.

"Woody Allen, whatever his failings, does not make movies for morons. Most directors do. Of course, most directors are morons."

- Joe Queenan

Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: November 02 2006 at 8:04am
They were so bad...they made last year's movies look like Academy Award winners...

Posted By: deadguy76
Date Posted: November 02 2006 at 9:22pm
I hate to see what next year's movies will look like!

"Woody Allen, whatever his failings, does not make movies for morons. Most directors do. Of course, most directors are morons."

- Joe Queenan

Posted By: #1-Movie-Fan!
Date Posted: December 01 2006 at 5:04am

As bad as this summer's movies were, I actually think this year's crop of crappy Christmas movies is worse.  Not just SANTA CLAUSE 3 and DECK THE HALLS (which were, specifically, crappy Christmas movies) but December movies in general (VAN WILDER 2, anyone??). And ROCKY BALBOA has yet to be released!

Can't wait to see how desperate the Academy gets, come time for their nominations -- How on Earth can they come up with FIVE Best Actress nominees for 2006 that anyone will take seriously??

Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: December 01 2006 at 9:41am
Originally posted by #1-Movie-Fan!

Can't wait to see how desperate the Academy gets, come time for their nominations -- How on Earth can they come up with FIVE Best Actress nominees for 2006 that anyone will take seriously??

I'm trying to figure out where 5 Best Picture nominees are going to come from. Quite honestly, I haven't seen ONE really Oscar winning film so far. We have a couple weeks to go, but there isn't really anything in the next few weeks that jumps out as the 800 pound gorilla on the horizon. If I were an Oscar voter and I had to pick right now, I'd be seriously tempted to vote for Happy Feet.

We certainly won't face a similar problem. So many Razzie deserving films have come out that this year that I'm really having a tough time trying to decide what is going to get checked on my ballot.

Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken

Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: December 02 2006 at 4:57pm
The Only thing maybe to come close is maybe "The Departed", other than that I think all the sweeps will most likely be in all our Razzberry Category's, we have so much crap to choose from this year!

The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger

Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: December 03 2006 at 2:50am
I think it's going to be a challenge to limit the RAZZIES to JUST five nominations per category this year...

Also they should cancel Academy Awards for lack of quality ANY Category...

Comparing Uwe Boll's movies to a sack of horse manure will only get you sued by every fertilizer company in existence...

Posted By: jb razz
Date Posted: December 20 2006 at 8:38am

You guys are the most pessimistic people I have ever heard!

There are plenty of films that have received Oscar buzz, but many of them are art-house films that no one else has heard about. This fall there have been a lot of films that were trying to achieve Oscar status. Some of them have been misses, but none of them are Razzie worthy.

This year there have been many movies that are just plain bad (i. e. bloodrayne, the benchwarmers, date movie), but there have been even more films that are so-so, that could be seen in either a positive or a negative way, and Razzie members always see them in the most negative way possible. For example I thought that the Pink Panther sequel was fine -- okay, but not great -- but every other person who posted thought it was very bad, and Razzie worthy.

I agree that this summer was kind of slow. With The Prestige, Casino Royale, The Departed, and Blood Diamond this fall movie season has been much more exiting than the summer "blockbuster" season. 


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: December 23 2006 at 2:38am

Okay, let's take this point by point.

First of all, the guess here is that most of the regular posters on this board are probably well aquainted with this year's crop of indies...I'd guess better informed than the average movie goer. In another thread I took a tongue-in-cheek poke at Babel and it certainly appears that perhaps the majority of this year's Oscar nominees may well be indies. Typically, we don't spend a lot of time discussing the year's better films in this forum. On the other hand, there hasn't been a lot to discuss this year.

Second, if you take a few moments to browse through the thread specifically devoted to The Pink Panther, you might be surprised to see that the film had its defenders. Certainly, not every post about it was negative. The majority, the large majority were negative, reflecting the consensus at IMDB and RT where the critical and public response to the film was mostly negative.

Third, on a board where the majority of discussion centers on the identification and celebration of bad cinema (and a lot of our discussion is tongue-in-cheek) it shouldn't be particularly surprising that presentations will tend to be made "in the worst way possible."

Finally, if anything, I would generally regard this year's fall and holiday season as even more disappointing than a very lackluster summer season. Typically, this is the time of year when the Oscar heavyweights roll into the theaters, and we just haven't seen clear favorites emerge this year. Box-office numbers have also been pretty unimpressive for the holiday season, reflecting a general suspicion that Hollywood no longer has a very firm grasp on what movie goers want to see. As further evidence, as has already been noted, the year's strongest Oscar contenders are likely to come from independents.

Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken

Posted By: jb razz
Date Posted: December 26 2006 at 2:32am

Thank you saturnwatcher.

I am new here, and was not informed of the customs of the Razzie Forum cult. I thought it was an open-minded Forum, like the IMDb message boards. I am sorry I rocked the boat by questioning the traditions of the Razzie Forum cult.        

Will anything that is say on this forum have any outcome on this year's nominees? The main reason I joined was to campaign to get Date Movie nominated.

And what is HCE?


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: December 26 2006 at 11:28am

The IMDB board and the Razzie board have rather different purposes. IMDB offers posting boards for virtually every movie released. We, on the other hand, are more specifically focused on discussion of bad cinema. To be sure, there is a free form thread on this board which permits discussion of good movies, as well as whatever may be on a given member's mind.

In other words, if you wish to participate in broad range discussions of the paranormal, going to a board which offers that sort of topic is a good idea. On the other hand, if you go to a board which specializes in discussions of Sasquatch, it's a little disingenuous to criticize the members for their general lack of enthusiasm for discussing ghosts. (In point of fact, many of the members on the board may be very interested in ghosts, but they go to other forums to discuss them.)

Nonetheless, all points of view are welcome. If you think a film is Razzie worthy, we always welcome having it brought to our attention. If you disagree that a particular film is worthy of Razzie consideration, you should feel free to post in its defense (hopefully without any characterizations implying "closed-mindedness" on the part of those with a different opinion).  

Response from Head RAZZberry: And while we're on the subject, jb razz, YES, postings on the Forum DO indeed have an effect. You were not alone in pointing out the Razzie-worthiness of DATE MOVIE. After several postings questioning the lack of attention it appeared to be getting, I was prompted to check it out on RT, the IMDb, and elsewhere, and came to the conclusion that DATE MOVIE should be among those films listed on our Nominating Ballot (it was released in mid-February of 2006, when I was bizzy putting together last year's ceremonies, and it disappeared from theatres so quickly I never got a chance to see it). If you are a dues-paying, actual Voting Member, jb razz, you'll find DATE MOVIE listed in several places when you receive your 27th Annual Nominating Ballot in about a week or so. If you're NOT a dues-paying, formal Voting RAZZIE Member, here's a - LINK to rectify that situation.....

Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken

Print Page | Close Window