Print Page | Close Window

Whatta Cast! Whatta BORE!!

Printed From: Official RAZZIEŽ Forum
Category: 2007 RAZZIEŽ MOVIE FORUMS w/LYNX!
Forum Name: EVENING
Forum Discription: An Incredible Cast...An Incredible Let-Down!
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1983
Printed Date: September 22 2014 at 1:42pm


Topic: Whatta Cast! Whatta BORE!!
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: Whatta Cast! Whatta BORE!!
Date Posted: June 26 2007 at 2:25am

WITH A CAST to DIE FOR (MERYL STREEP! GLENN CLOSE! VANESSA REDGRAVE! CLAIRE DANES! BARRY BOSTWICK!) and BASED on a POPULAR WORK of CHICK LIT, http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=204&PN=1 - EVENING HAD ALL the EARMARKS of BEING ONE of 2007's BEST MOVIES. BUT EARLY WORD SEZ IT'S A CRASHING BORE. SO BORING, IN FACT, THAT AT LEAST ONE CRITIC FOUND HIMSELF WANTING to YELL at the SCREEN: "DIE ALREADY!!"

"Guess what, Gramma? Yeah, I know you're dying...but I just won First Runner Up in the Hillary Clinton Look-Alike Contest!"



-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry



Replies:
Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: June 26 2007 at 5:49am
This is going to be a good movie, I bet.


Posted By: jb razz
Date Posted: June 26 2007 at 1:19pm

I am very surprised that this movie is on the forum. This seem like a movie that even if it is boring would be totally unnoticed by the razzies. It just doesn't belong in the group of movies we usually discuss.

Response from Head RAZZberry: I knew when I chose it that picking EVENING over LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD would be controversial. But I am unclear what you mean by "it just doesn't belong"??  One of the functions of the RAZZIES is to point out when major talents, who should know better, choose projects that waste those talents (like 2-time RAZZIE "winner" Laurence Olivier in just about everything he did for the last decade of his life). The point of this Forum is not just to steer people toward spotting potential RAZZIE contenders, but to point out as well when some of Hollywood's biggest names blow it. When you read the cast of this film, you figure it almost has to be some kind of Modern Classic -- Yet the reviews overwhelmingly suggest it's a big fat boring dud. If, by pointing this out on our Forum, we also achieve the function of saving some of our members the irritation of paying ten bux to see something so dull, then again, we've served some purpose. Though at this point, I wouldn't suggest it necessarily deserves RAZZIE nominations, I would strongly suggest, based on the reviews (and word of mouth) that at best, it may be worthy of a DVD rental late on a Friday night six months from now, when everything you actually wanted to see is rented out... 



-------------


Posted By: #1-Movie-Fan!
Date Posted: June 27 2007 at 1:04am

Just a note to the above 2 posters: Our Head RAZZ is hardly alone in saying this film is a disappointment. The reviews at Rotten Tomatoes started the week at a lowly 20% approval, and have gone down since...

Also, moviewizguy -- Remind me, when was the last (first?) time you didn't like something? After all your carping on us for pre-judging stuff elsewhere on this Forum, for you to defend this movie sight unseen smacks of hypocrisy. At least Head RAZZ appears to have read reviews before picking this film as this week's worst of the weak. Just because the cast is stellar in no way means the film will be any good...



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: June 27 2007 at 1:33am

....I'm not defending it. I'm just thinking it'll be good (IMO). Yes, it has a great cast and that's probably the reason why I'll like it. I also love the commercials. 

Response from Head RAZZberry: Not having seen it yet myself, I cannot say definitively if this film sucks as badly as the reviews suggest. But as someone who makes movie commercials for a living, I feel compelled to remind you, they are designed to be misleading. A perfect recent example would be NORBIT, the endless TV spots for which made the film seem funny, light and appealing...when the actual film was heavy-handed, angry and virtually laugh-free... 



-------------


Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Date Posted: June 28 2007 at 1:05am

I went to a late matinee yesterday of LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD and was, to use an appropriate cliche, blown away. It's fast-paced, fun-as-all-get-out and surprisingly family friendly (all that Internet grousing about it being emasculated by striving for a PG-13 turns out to be specious). Both my 11-year-old son and I enjoyed it immensely -- It is, quite simply, the best popcorn/summer movie of this or any recent year...

Since this Forum is generally reserved for criticism, I will add that the theatre where I saw the film blew it big time. A Regal Cinema (the chain every devoted movie fan loves to hate) they not only still ran that hideous "Inside Look" string of infommercials and outright TV ads before the movie, but when it ended, the screen sat blank, with no explanation from the staff offered, FOR 12 MINUTES! The movie itself was so fabulous I forgot to complain when I first left. But their total lack of consideration for paying customers was so egregious that I actually went back to the theatre and asked to speak to the manager. He claimed he'd heard nothing about it (though I did see several patrons walk out, looking like they intended to complain). Regal and its "once-we've-got-your-money-we-don't-give-a-rat's-ass-about-y ou" attitude is contributing to the demise of movie-going here in America. Any chance I get to rag on them, I will gladly take... 

So that's Two Thumbs WAY Up for LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD...and Two Thumbs Jammed Way Up Their Nose for Regal Cinema Corp... 

 



-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry


Posted By: ArtGirl138
Date Posted: June 28 2007 at 4:26am

I had a feeling this was gonna be a boring movie the minute I saw the commercials  A cast chock full o' stars can't fool me!

(In fact, the BEST reviews on RT this week are going to Ratatouille - a movie with a minimum of celebrities in its cast.)



-------------
Self-Proclaimed Cartoon Geek


Posted By: wetbandit82
Date Posted: June 28 2007 at 4:55am

That is exactly one good reason I only see films in the theaters that I'm absolutely sure I'll like (and that the critics say are worth it); between refreshments priced about as much as the gross national product of Lesotho to ever increasing ads for things no one needs anyway and don't care about (that's what TV's for, if they had the brains to realize it) to absolutely shoddy projection and sound systems (which they always claim they're too broke to update even though there's no way I can see they wouldn't get a stake of the countless billions rolling in), it's no wonder people are turning to DVD rentals more.  And that is tragic, because there is something magic about watching a good film in a darkened theater with a hundred or so other people; it means that for 100 minutes anyway, we can all forget the toils in our lives and just maybe learn something about ourselves we wouldn't have otherwise realized.  Barriers of all kinds break down in a movie theater as they don't often do elsewhere in society.  It would be terrible if we lost that forever... 

Originally posted by HeadRAZZBerry

Since this Forum is generally reserved for criticism, I will add that the theatre where I saw the film blew it big time. A Regal Cinema (the chain every devoted movie fan loves to hate) they not only still ran that hideous "Inside Look" string of infommercials and outright TV ads before the movie, but when it ended, the screen sat blank, with no explanation from the staff offered, FOR 12 MINUTES! The movie itself was so fabulous I forgot to complain when I first left. But their total lack of consideration for paying customers was so egregious that I actually went back to the theatre and asked to speak to the manager. He claimed he'd heard nothing about it (though I did see several patrons walk out, looking like they intended to complain). Regal and its "once-we've-got-your-money-we-don't-give-a-rat's-ass-about-y ou" attitude is contributing to the demise of movie-going here in America, and any chance I get to rag on them, I will gladly take... 

So that's Two Thumbs WAY Up for LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD...and Two Thumbs Jammed Way Up Their Nose for Regal Cinema Corp... 



-------------


Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: June 28 2007 at 4:58am

I have to agree it has been a Veerrryyyy odd week as far as what would get the "Berry of the Week Award". Besides the fact the I am DIE HARD Die Hard fan, Live Free and Die Hard had all the classic ingredients of a exploding financial failure in the works...Well over a decade dormant since the last entry of the franchise, The Director of the Underworld Franchise at the Helm, Almost casting Justin Timberlake as McClane's Kid (Including a time that Jessica Simpson had auditioned and failed to get the part of Lucy McClane thank god!), and the years it had spent in developmental hell. I thought for sure it was going to get HeadRAZZ's endorsement as worst movie of the week. This is almost like a sequel in itself to Rocky Balboa (Rocky VI) and that I would have bet the farm on being the worst movie of the week.

As far as Evening goes with the stellar cast it has I can see why it is somewhat of a surprise on the not so joyous reviews. Then again I have not seen most of the "Stellar Cast" in a movie as of recently and can only think that they may have only done it for a paycheck, but can try to excuse it as a "Decent Dramatic piece" to ease their conscience.

 



-------------
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: moviewizguy
Date Posted: June 28 2007 at 1:07pm

I have also seen Live Free or Die Hard, and I loved it better than the original!!!! Review:

In the past few years, the aging John McClane has managed to get divorced from his wife Holly and become estranged from his daughter Lucy, but still remains with the NYPD. On his way to turn a young hacker named Matt Farrell into custody, he experiences a modern version of a terrorist attack first hand when he gets stuck in traffic. A group of hackers, led by Thomas Gabriel, have struck at the vulnerable United States computer infrastructure and are systematically shutting it down, performing a "firesale" beginning with the traffic light system.

As they move on to crash utilities, banking networks and the stock market, the indexes plummet and America's economy becomes crippled. As usual, McClane gets caught up in the middle of the excitement. It turns out that the recently captured Matt seems bright enough to understand exactly what the terrorists are doing and what steps they are taking to achieve their mission. Soon, the crime-fighting duo of McClane and Farrell are pulling out all the stops and matching wits with the terrorists, hoping to figure out the motives behind their actions and to stop them before the entire nation collapses to its knees on Independence Day.

I wasn't really looking forward to this film because I've never seen any Die Hard films or really wasn't interested seeing them. Well, I finally got to see Die Hard for the first time and I liked (not loved) it. Then I find out this movie was rated PG-13, which got me excited and let down at the same time. I knew they wouldn't say the line in the movie but I was excited because it might be good to see something different for a change.

So it was late when I saw this in theaters but wow, when I saw this film, I did not get sleepy for a second! I didn't even bother to look at what time it was. This movie was so entertaining and action-packed, it was so much better than the original! Well, this is coming from a person who haven't seen the second or third Die Hard films, so my opinion might be different than the others. Yeah, it didn't feel like a Die Hard film but it certainly did give references to the original. If you watch this film, it will feel like an R rated film. It really does. Yeah, you don't get much profanity but you wouldn't be thinking about it when watching the movie. I never liked Len Wiseman's Underworld but I'm glad to say I love this movie!

Now getting the rating controversy out of the way, I'll talk about how fantastic the film is. This film is pretty much a notch up from the original. It has more imaginative/creative ideas to make you go in awe. It is much smarter, much suspenseful, and has many more action sequences that are top notch! I'm glad they used as little CGI as possible because so many films this summer has! It's great to see them doing it the "old skool" way using real stunts and props. No, I'm not saying this is a better film because of the action, but I'm saying it was better because it basically tops everything off from the original (yeah, except for the language).

In this film, John McClane is much more crankier. I loved it! The film was much funnier because of his fantastic one liners and comedic scenes! Bruce Willis' acting is great as always. Justin Long's acting is surprisingly good as well as Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who didn't shine through her previous roles in other films. Timothy Olyphant, who plays the villain gives a realistic evil and sinister role and Maggie Q's performance is kick ass! I'm surprised to say this film is fast paced, even for a two hour movie. I thought it wasn't possible.

This film uses what Die Hard didn't. It has a much thrilling score to make the action scenes much suspenseful. The camera movements are great! The film is much funnier and entertaining. This is possibly one of the most surprising summer movie sequel out this year! Average movie goers will get really entertained. Die Hard fans, well, will also get entertained but might get disappointed because of the PG-13 rating, which I wouldn't say they need to worry. This film is a solid action-packed film that delivers! 9/10



Posted By: ArtGirl138
Date Posted: June 28 2007 at 3:15pm

Well, a consensus has been made on RT. According to the critics, Evening is "beautifully filmed, but decidedly dull". The Tomatometer is at 31%.

Soooo...apparently, it's not exactly worthy of RAZZing, but still boring.



-------------
Self-Proclaimed Cartoon Geek


Posted By: whennow
Date Posted: June 29 2007 at 1:55am
I don't see this as incompetently made or a cynical excercise or a vanity project so I don't expect to this on the razzie ballot even though it may be bad. It doesn't seem the right kind of bad.


Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: June 29 2007 at 4:26am

I have to agree that I am about 95% pretty sure we will not see this on our ballot in January, The main consensus was the acting is fine the story is just boring...unless of course HeadRAZZ decides to add the category for worst boring film...I really don't see it making the list.

On the up side, I'm taking my kid to see "Live Free or Die Hard" this weekend...So Yippee Kiyaa...(You know the rest )! 

Response from Head RAZZberry:  ENJOY! As I posted on our Main page this ayem, I consider DIE HARD 4 to be this year's Best Popcorn Movie...



-------------
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: moviewizguy
Date Posted: June 29 2007 at 4:33am
DIE HARD 4 is a great film! You'll be entertained! So much better than Knocked Up, IMO.

-------------


Posted By: ITbeast
Date Posted: June 29 2007 at 1:33pm
Thanks, I will post back at this thread once we've seen it!

-------------
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: #1-Movie-Fan!
Date Posted: July 09 2007 at 7:06am
This movie represents a new low level in directing achievement: Getting this amazing group of actresses together, and still managing to make a snore-fest of a movie, is quite an accomplishment!


Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: July 09 2007 at 1:53pm

Hey HeadRazz, what'd you think of Timothy Olyphant as the lead villain in Live Free or Die Hard? When I heard the casting I thought that his Deadwood Co-stars Ian Mcshane, Brad Dourif, or even Gerald McRaney (Who was pretty outstanding last season) would have made better villains, but people are telling me that Olyphant did a pretty good job, what'd you think?

PS: I think that the best film villain of 2007 will be Ralph Fiennes in the new Harry Potter film. Fiennes is always good as a bad guy (Schindler's List, Red Dragon, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire), actually the only movie that I've ever heard that he wasn't good in was The Avengers. ( I didn't read anything about Maid in Manhattan, but I know he went un-Razzed for that one)... 

Response from Head RAZZberry: As I have posted elsewhere on our Forum, I found LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD to be the Berry Best Summer Popcorn Movie I've seen in many a summer. Its weakest element, especially compared to Alan Rickman and Jeremy Irons as the uber-villains in two of the previous DIE HARD films, was Olyphant. It's not so much that he gave a poor performance as that the prior films set such a high standard for McLaine's adversaries that this one being as run-of-the-mill as he was left me  disappointed -- A fault of the screenwriters as much as the actor playing the role. Maggie Q as Olyphant's Karate-kicking sidekick, though, was a fabulous character I almost wish could be brought back if they do a fifth film...



-------------


Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: July 23 2007 at 11:13am
I just watched a Die Hard movie for the first time (The first one), I feel bad for any actor playing a Die Hard villain for having to follow Alan Rickman's incredible performance as Hans Gruber. I can see why he was on both the AFI and Online Film critics society's list of the best villains in film history. That standard would seem to be very hard to live up to (Although I heard that Jeremy Irons did a good job in Part 3)


Posted By: dipitlow555
Date Posted: July 30 2007 at 4:06pm
This is a cast I would LOVE to see in a movie! Just...not this one.

-------------


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: September 06 2007 at 12:54pm
Originally posted by HeadRAZZBerry

I went to a late matinee yesterday of LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD and was, to use an appropriate cliche, blown away. It's fast-paced, fun-as-all-get-out and surprisingly family friendly (all that Internet grousing about it being emasculated by striving for a PG-13 turns out to be specious). Both my 11-year-old son and I enjoyed it immensely -- It is, quite simply, the best popcorn/summer movie of this or any recent year...

Since this Forum is generally reserved for criticism, I will add that the theatre where I saw the film blew it big time. A Regal Cinema (the chain every devoted movie fan loves to hate) they not only still ran that hideous "Inside Look" string of infommercials and outright TV ads before the movie, but when it ended, the screen sat blank, with no explanation from the staff offered, FOR 12 MINUTES! The movie itself was so fabulous I forgot to complain when I first left. But their total lack of consideration for paying customers was so egregious that I actually went back to the theatre and asked to speak to the manager. He claimed he'd heard nothing about it (though I did see several patrons walk out, looking like they intended to complain). Regal and its "once-we've-got-your-money-we-don't-give-a-rat's-ass-about-y ou" attitude is contributing to the demise of movie-going here in America. Any chance I get to rag on them, I will gladly take... 

So that's Two Thumbs WAY Up for LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD...and Two Thumbs Jammed Way Up Their Nose for Regal Cinema Corp... 

 

                                                                                            

Same thing happened to me. The movie was so great that me and my dad forgot to complain. Also, the Regal system is very incompetent. Before 6 P.M., there are no guards on the theaters. Anybody could sneak in! And the ushers didn't even bother to check the age of anybody. The were a bunch of kids obviously under 13 sitting in front of us, and the ushers didn't seem bothered.



-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: November 15 2007 at 1:11pm

Does it mean anything that the Evening bashing thread has turned into the Live Free and Die Hard praising thread and the Regal Theatres bashing thread?

I can't think of a more cruel way of bashing a movie than to talk of everything but the movie in the very message message board devoted to bashing the movie!



Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: November 15 2007 at 1:24pm
You're right cvcjr, Actually I was going to make a list of all the Oscar baiters gone wrong to see if there are enough to make it a new category (There are most likely more to come) but so far we have: Evening, Elizabeth: The Golden Age, Love In The Time of Cholera, Lions for Lambs, and September Dawn.  (And to a lesser extant, The Martian Child, Rendition, and The Brave One, although I believe the latter will be like last years Pursuit of Happyness, in that it's reviews weren't impressive, but it's star will most likely be nominated for an Oscar.) Some think Georgia Rule was made with Oscars in mind......man, did that one backfire.


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: November 15 2007 at 7:26pm

I was thinking of movies more in the line of the first four you listed:

Evening
Elizabeth: The Golden Age
Love in the Time of Cholera
Lions for Lambs

I'd be amazed if September Dawn was meant to be anything more than a message film.  Would you define it as a film obviously going after an Oscar?

I actually enjoyed The Brave One, and have seen it twice, but I realize once again I'm in the minority, although it's a good sized minority.  And do The Martian Child, Rendition or The Brave One really compare to the four listed above?



Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: November 18 2007 at 12:14pm
Well there was a lot of early Oscar talk for Cusack in The Martian Child. (I'm sure he's good in it, though), but that didn't pan out as they hoped.


Posted By: Mrs. Magnatech
Date Posted: December 09 2007 at 8:15pm

I've seen this, and it is definitely Razzie-worthy!Dead  Pretentious, annoying, boring, poorly written and directed - just a giant turd all around. Claire Danes deserves a Worst Actress nomination, and I wouldn't rule out Hugh Dancy for Worst Supporting Actor...



-------------


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: December 12 2007 at 8:57am
I can't stand Hugh Dancy! Let's take a look at some of his films: "King Arthur", "Basic Instinct 2", "Blood And Chocolate", and this. Worse yet, he's dating Claire Danes! How did he accomplish that?

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles


Posted By: Mrs. Magnatech
Date Posted: December 13 2007 at 10:32am
I actually like Hugh Dancy, but he was awful in this movie. Like, cringe-inducingly bad.



Print Page | Close Window