Print Page | Close Window

Fouled-Up Follow-Ups Dept.

Printed From: Official RAZZIEŽ Forum
Category: 2007 RAZZIEŽ MOVIE FORUMS w/LYNX!
Forum Name: 2007's WORST SEQUEL, REMAKE or RIP OFF
Forum Discription: Sequels, Three-Quels and Out-Right Rip-Offs Dominated This Year's Movies -- Which One (or Ones) Would YOU name as The Berry WORST???
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2231
Printed Date: September 02 2014 at 5:06pm


Topic: Fouled-Up Follow-Ups Dept.
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: Fouled-Up Follow-Ups Dept.
Date Posted: October 30 2007 at 5:16am

SEQUELS, THREE-QUELS, PRE-QUELS, REMAKES and OUT-RIGHT RIP-OFFS HAVE DOMINATED THIS YEAR's MOVIE FARE.

HERE's YOUR CHANCE to POST YOUR THOUGHTS ON WHICH of THESE GOD-FORSAKEN, STARTLINGLY UN-ORIGINAL "ENTERTAINMENTS" YOU THINK DESERVES the TITLE of THE YEAR's BERRY WORST... 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0413300/"> http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=174">

GO AHEAD...SPEW!! 

(CLOSER to the END of the YEAR, WE'LL ADD a POLL, SO YOU CAN VOTE to VENT YOUR WRATH...)

 



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



Replies:
Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: October 30 2007 at 6:05am

From the movies pictured above and from the movies being considered, I rank from "worst" to "OK":

Daddy Day Camp
Who's Your Caddy?
Are We Done Yet?
The Hitcher (2007)
Hannibal Rising
Dead Silence (rip off of Magic)
Hostel Part II
Saw IV
Elizabeth: The Golden Age
P2 (rip off of Throttle)
Resident Evil: Extinction
Halloween (2007)
Evan Almighty
The Invasion
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
Pirates of the Caribbean: At Whirlie's End (they even have a whirlie at the end of the movie!)
Spider-Man 3

Did I miss any?  Anyone have a different opinion (duh)? 

 



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


Posted By: Nasty Man
Date Posted: October 30 2007 at 6:06am

Since it qualifies as BOTH a sequel (to "Are We There Yet?") AND a remake/rip-off (of the old Cary Grant movie "Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House") I'd have to vote for the execrable "Are We Done Yet?" -- a movie populated exclusively with idiots, stereotypes and excruciatingly UN-funny "gags"... 

CLOSE RUNNER-UP: "Daddy Day Camp," featuring the most horrifying convention of hideous child actors ever assembled in one film!!!   

Response from Head RAZZberry: As someone has never had much patience with grating child actors, I too found DADDY DAY CAMP to be one of the more excrutiating movies of the year. And isn't it ironic that DDC was directed by one of the few recent child actors who wasn't grating in most of his childhood performances, potential Worst Director nominee Fred Savage...



-------------
Everything SUX!


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: October 30 2007 at 7:35am
I hated The Hitcher!!! Well, that's really the only one that I thought was bad...and I haven't seen every movie this year. So I'm not sure it would be the worst if I would've seen all those other movies...

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


Posted By: tomsmobr
Date Posted: October 30 2007 at 2:53pm

Here the ten I would pick for worst sequels, prequels, remakes, etc:  

Daddy Day Camp,  

Who's Your Caddy?    
Are We Done Yet?
The Hitcher (2007)
Hannibal Rising
Dead Silence (rip off of Magic)
Hostel Part II
Saw IV
Elizabeth: The Golden Age
P2 (rip off of Throttle), Halloween (2007)



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


Posted By: #1-Movie-Fan!
Date Posted: October 31 2007 at 12:45am

In terms of a "fouled-up follow-up," it would be hard to top "Hannibal Rising" for its come-down from the original 1991 "Silence of the Lambs." That film was not only a monster box office hit, it was also just about the only "horror movie" ever to win a Best Picture Oscar. In the "Hannibal" films since, the quality has tumbled at an alarming rate, to where this latest entry, a pointless "prequel," was little more than a pale imitation of the whole "Saw/Hostel" sub-genre of blood-n-guts "dismember-tain-ment." 

How very sad... 

Response from Head RAZZberry: Maybe we can take some solace from the fact that http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1681&PN=1 - HANNIBAL RISING all but totally BOMBED at the box office. Here's a http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1681&PN=1 - LINK to check out its anemic numbers at B.O. MoJo... 

 



Posted By: jb razz
Date Posted: October 31 2007 at 1:20am

Spider-Man 3 and Pirates 3: At Worlds End were parts of series, and thus shouldn't be considered traditional "sequels." They continue unresolved storylines and bring them to their conclusions.

However, we have plenty of truly unnessesary (and truly Razz-able) sequels and remakes to work with this year, which should keep us busy enough that we need not worry about the Spider-Man franchise.

Response from Head RAZZberry: I personally found the third entries in both the SPIDER-MAN and PIRATES "series" overloud, overlong and underwhelming. Guess it's up to our Voting Members to decide come nominations time whether they rise (or stoop) to the level of actually being worthy RAZZIE contenders. And, yes, there certainly IS an awful lot of other dreck to choose from this year... 

 



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


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: October 31 2007 at 3:52pm

I would agree that Spiderman and Pirates were disappointing efforts. Nonetheless, a logical justification can be offered for each. Pirates was the third part of a planned trilogy (which will likely continue on beyond that) and Spiderman is a lucrative franchise. As long as the rubes keep forking over the cash, keep dangling the bait in front of them... even if you have to waterboard your audience with Kirsten Dunst's singing voice.

But Daddy Day Camp set a whole new standard for cinematic roadkill. Did ANYONE out there ask for a sequel to Daddy Daycare? Did Cuba Gooding Jr. really read that script and say to himself, "Wow, this will help my career." This one surely deserves a nod for Worst Sequel, if only as a public service: We might just prevent Gooding Jr. from jumping at making a sequel to Pluto Nash! 

 



-------------
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: thomsonmg2000
Date Posted: November 01 2007 at 11:09am
Well, Spiderman 3 and Pirates 3 should NOT be on there. Sure, Spiderman 3 was underwhelming (why did Venom appear so late in the film?) and Pirates 3 was incredibly confusing and really long. But there are many more crappier sequels released this year, like Daddy Day Camp

So, speaking of the worst remake or sequel this year, my list would have to be the above mentioned Daddy Day Camp, as well as Hannibal Rising, and the second Fantastic 4 movie...


-------------
Seltzerberg is back?

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

http://www.disastermovie.org
http://www.vampiressuck.org/


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: November 02 2007 at 8:36am
You evil person. FF2 was a great movie. It was harmless family fun.


Posted By: thomsonmg2000
Date Posted: November 02 2007 at 1:21pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy

You evil person. FF2 was a great movie. It was harmless family fun.


Well, let's see why FF2 was not too good.

1. Jessica Alba's stiff acting
2. Bad science (just like with the first Fantastic Four)

That's enough to have at least a thread in this forums.




Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: November 02 2007 at 4:53pm

Originally posted by thomsonmg2000

Originally posted by moviewizguy

You evil person. FF2 was a great movie. It was harmless family fun.


Well, let's see why FF2 was not too good.

1. Jessica Alba's stiff acting
2. Bad science (just like with the first Fantastic Four)

That's enough to have at least a thread in this forums.


Don't forget:

3.  Making Galactus look like a gigantic dust bunny (I know HeadRAZZBerry said it first, but I can't think of another apt description).

Just because FF:RotSS had its moments, and just because I rate far and away more movies worse than it, doesn't mean that it wasn't, on the whole, a bad movie.



Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: November 02 2007 at 5:11pm

First of all, I happen to know that thomsonmg2000 is not a fundamentally evil person. He just plays one on the board now and again.

Second, FF2 was not entirely harmless. The 20 bucks it drained out of my wallet stung for 3 full days.



-------------
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: Criss808
Date Posted: November 03 2007 at 7:44am

Spider-Man 3 deserves the WORST SEQUEL OR PREQUEL AWARD. It was boring, long, and uninteresting.

Response from Head RAZZberry: Not to mention it forced us to sit through likely Worst Actress contender Kirsten Dunst SINGING -- More than once!! 

 



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


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: November 03 2007 at 10:44am
I found "Spider-Man 3" to be good. The running time was too long and Kirsten Dunst was horrific. Even she admitted it.

-------------
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: Transcendence


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: November 03 2007 at 1:10pm
Hostel Part II seems to be a rip off of more than just the original Hostel...but of an old Lights Out episode on radio titled It Happened (dated 380511)...

Makes you wonder if the writers were fans of the show...and if they weren't...WHY did they have to do it???

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


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: November 04 2007 at 6:41am

It would surprise me far more if Eli Roth was NOT familiar with Lights Outhttp://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hostel_2/news/1685335/ - Take a look at his list of the best horror movies you never heard of over at Rotten Tomatoes .  He is familiar with every torture and gore film ever made.  That seems just a short step to a radio show.

Originally posted by Razzilla

Hostel Part II seems to be a rip off of more than just the original Hostel...but of an old Lights Out episode on radio titled It Happened (dated 380511)...

Makes you wonder if the writers were fans of the show...and if they weren't...WHY did they have to do it???

 



Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: November 07 2007 at 5:20pm

Head Razz, just five nominees aren't enough with this, how about going to TEN, like the old Academy days?

Response from Head RAZZberry: Interesting suggestion. And, yes, there certainly ARE A Nawful Lot of Contenders this year -- Especially in these two categories. Actually, we DID have ten nominees in our top three categories (Worst Picture, Actor & Actress) our Berry First Year. Unfortunately, having that many choices dilutes the results, seems to confuse our Final Ballot voters, and makes tabulating the ballots (an already Herculean task) that much harder. One possible solution might be to expand our Nominating Ballot choices in over-crowded categories from the usual ten listings to an even dozen.

Bottom Line: Berry Sorry, but methinks for our Final Ballot, we'll stick with FIVE eventual nominees in each category. 

 



-------------
2014 Pic: LEGEND OF HERCULES! Actor: Aaron Echkardt, Director: Renny Harlin, Remake: Transcendence


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: November 08 2007 at 2:25pm

1) Why do people always complain about Galactus? Come on! If you have some sense, a giant with a purple hat does NOT, NOT look more frightening than a hurricane-looking, "The Day After Tomorrow-like" tornado. Maybe that's my opinion. It looks more threatening, I shall say?

2) If you expected FF2 to be so bad, why spend $20 on it? Why not watch it in the internet? $20?!!! I won't even spend that much on a great, fantastic masterpiece (unless it's IMAX).



Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: November 08 2007 at 5:41pm

The $20 was for two tickets, since my wife usually accompanies me on my cinematic pilgramages. Toss in a large popcorn and a couple cokes, and it generally soars close to $40. Thank goodness we are both overpaid.

Incidentally, a quick note to applaud Head Razz's decision to limit final nominations to 5 in each category. I've pointed this out before, but even with 5, the possibility exists that two worthy candidates can split the vote and send the third most deserving nominee into the winner's circle (which I contend explains why some undeserving winners have walked away with Oscars in the past). Put 10 in the running, and that will become a highly likely outcome.



-------------
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: orly1971
Date Posted: November 14 2007 at 2:44pm

2007 will go down as one of the worst years ever for remakes and sequels. The Hitcher and Halloween were a discredit to the originals. Hostel 2 and Saw IV -- enough already! Hollywood continues it's downward spiral with talks of an Alice Sweet Alice remake(say it isn't so!) and Prom Night and Escape From New York remakes. Plus talk of a Wedding Crashers sequel!

Where is the originality and creativity in Hollywood? 

 



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


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: November 15 2007 at 12:51pm
Originally posted by orly1971

Where is the originality and creativity in Hollywood? 

Originality and creativity are risky.

However, regurgitation and rumination possibly tastes good only the first few times around. . . .

Jon Voigt's winking at you! . . .

 



Posted By: Brierfox
Date Posted: November 19 2007 at 5:32am
I don't know where to begin!
,
I can understand sequels for Spiderman, after all, look how many comic books were printed.   Pirates was supposed to be a trilogy, though if they had used the same writer-director-producer-team for each movie then maybe the movies would have been more consistent.
,
But follow-ups to comedy hits, and I use the word hits cautiously,  are simply attempts to squeeze more money out of dead horses.  Some of these sequels, (and prequels) use scenes left out in the originals.  While this was plausible in the "Superman Returns" movie, it's simply another way to be cheap.
.
Then of course, we have to consider whether the original movie was funny, well acted, exciting, worth the admission price etc etc.
The answer for most of the the movies of 2007 is a big NO!
.
As for rating these movies, I'd prefer a system that starts with 20 or even 30 movies, then pick the top ten, then the top three.  With a long list, the worse movie will often show up very quickly because it was indeed the very worse.
On the other hand, I don't place a vote with a movie unless I see it.
 I stay away from horror movies and dumb looking kiddie movies.  Quite frankly I would never be able to earn a living at being a movie critic as I would not review half the movies made!  Come to think of it, maybe that is the case with movie critics today?


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


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: November 19 2007 at 8:53am
I don't get it: merely adequete three-quels like "Spider-Man 3" and "Pirates Of The Caribbean: At World's End" get targeted, while unholy abombinations like "Rush Hour 3" skate on by?

-------------
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: Transcendence


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: November 19 2007 at 12:13pm

Originally posted by Brierfox

Quite frankly I would never be able to earn a living at being a movie critic as I would not review half the movies made!  Come to think of it, maybe that is the case with movie critics today?

I've long held the suspicion that some critics hand off their press passes to a friend now and then and write their reviews on the basis of second hand information. In another thread, I pointed to Roger Ebert's review of Gods and Generals. His review contained several mistakes so glaring that I have to seriously doubt that he watched the movie. Let's face it; the number of movies made in a given year generally falls in the neighborhood of 200-300, most of them are awful, and most of them are going to be about subjects that any given individual isn't going to be particularly interested in. Would anyone really be shocked to find out that there are celebrated professional reviewers out there that really aren't watching all those movies?



-------------
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: moviewizguy
Date Posted: November 22 2007 at 5:48am
Ok, I don't like Hills Have Eyes 2 and Are We Done Yet? Still, although they may be part of the bottom films of this year, well, they were not very bad. I rate them both 4/10. Both uneccessary sequels.


Posted By: thomsonmg2000
Date Posted: November 23 2007 at 6:07am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

I don't get it: merely adequate three-quels like "Spider-Man 3" and "Pirates Of The Caribbean: At World's End" get targeted, while unholy abominations like "Rush Hour 3" skate on by?


Very good point. Speaking about Rush Hour 3, how come Head-Razz never had a forum topic for that movie, while Pirates 3 did?



-------------
Seltzerberg is back?

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

http://www.disastermovie.org
http://www.vampiressuck.org/


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: November 23 2007 at 5:14pm

Originally posted by thomsonmg2000

Very good point. Speaking about Rush Hour 3, how come headrazz never had a forum topic for that movie while Pirates 3 did?

Maybe because nobody even bothered to see Rush Hour 3? There comes a point where you have to start hoping that if even we ignore it, it'll just go away.



-------------
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: Fizzbin
Date Posted: November 24 2007 at 6:35am
[QUOTE=saturnwatcher]

 As long as the rubes keep forking over the cash, keep dangling the bait in front of them...

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

I guess that would explain why there were 7 "Police Academy" films, which starting with #3, proving you can make a worse film than its horrible predecessor

 



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


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: November 26 2007 at 11:02am

Not to mention Sylvester Stallone's entire career...

BTW, welcome to the board!

Originally posted by Fizzbin

I guess that would explain why there were 7 "Police Academy" films, which starting with #3, proving you can make a worse film than its horrible predecessor

 



-------------
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: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: November 29 2007 at 12:18pm

Funny, you defended "Are We Done Yet?" in another area of the forum, and now you don't like it. As for "The Hills Have Eyes 2", it's nowhere near as bad as the "original" "Hills Have Eyes 2", where Pluto and Jupiter came back from the grave (Why not just bring Mars and Mercury back as well?), german shepards have flashbacks (at this point, I was laughing hysterically), and annoying bikers filling in for the sympathetic Carter family...

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Ok, I don't like Hills Have Eyes 2 and Are We Done Yet? Still, although they may be part of the bottom films of this year, well, they were not very bad. I rate them both 4/10. Both uneccessary sequels.



-------------
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: Transcendence


Posted By: SuperGlucose
Date Posted: December 01 2007 at 7:15pm
Are We Done Yet would get my vote.  I'd even vote for it twice!

That first movie?  Painful.  The second movie was eyes-bleeding awful.  Family Movie Night was also torture.


-------------
Up, in the Cytoplasm, is it an amino acid? Is it a nucleotide? No, it's SUPERGLUCOSE!


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: December 02 2007 at 2:41pm
Well, I defended it because I liked the first movie and thought the second would be harmless. It was but I felt it was there to cash in (since the first was like the 2nd highest grossin film in that company). Oh, and I defended it without even watching it.

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


Posted By: #1-Film Freak!!
Date Posted: December 05 2007 at 6:36am

If it weren't for the God-awful "Daddy Day Camp," "Are We Done Yet?" would get my vote as 2007's Worst Sequel. But "Done Yet" had only a handful of horrible child actors, while "Day Camp" had enough of them to haunt the dreams of the ENTIRE Osmond family for all eternity...

 



-------------
Nobody LUVS movies more than ME!


Posted By: Mrs. Magnatech
Date Posted: December 14 2007 at 7:50am

I don't get it: merely adequete three-quels like "Spider-Man 3" and "Pirates Of The Caribbean: At World's End"

 

 

I think "Pirates" was worse than adequate. A true piece of sh*t, featuring a lame script, uninspired direction, and two very sh*tty "performances" from Keira Knightley and Orlando Bloom.



Posted By: PopcornAvenger
Date Posted: December 16 2007 at 9:24pm

I guess Superman doesn't qualify being a 2006 release (?)

Gotta be one of the most horrible superhero sequels made. It'd be the absolute worst, but Elektra and the remake of The Punisher share that dubious honor (who'd have thought a movie with Dolph Lundgren would actually be better?) 


 



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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: December 17 2007 at 8:59am
Superman Returns was one of the best superhero movies ever made! What's wrong with you!!! Well, people have opinions for a reason...HOW CAN YOU NOT LIKE SUPERMAN?!!!


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: December 17 2007 at 4:43pm

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Superman Returns was one of the best superhero movies ever made! What's wrong with you!!! Well, people have opinions for a reason...HOW CAN YOU NOT LIKE SUPERMAN?!!!

Because it sucked?



-------------
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: 9lolp
Date Posted: December 30 2007 at 3:39am
from worst to "best"
Evan Almighty
Saw IV
The Invasion
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
Elizabeth: The Golden Age
Resident Evil: Extinction
Hostel III
Spider-Man 3
Pirates of the Caribbean


Posted By: tomsmobr
Date Posted: December 30 2007 at 5:53am
How about "Are We Done Yet" and Shrek The 3rd


Posted By: tomsmobr
Date Posted: January 01 2008 at 11:11am
I saw that I NOW PRONOUNCE YOU CHUCK & LARRY was on The Worst Rip & Remake Catagory what was it a ripoff or remake of.


Posted By: StudioKaiju
Date Posted: January 15 2008 at 1:03pm

I am a lifelong animation fan who grew up watching Underdog and Alvin and the Chipmunks.  They weren't classics, but they were fun.

Their live action incarnations are totally charmless and unfunny...

I don't think they were even made with the intention of being shown to the general public. They were probably originally commissioned to be used as interrogation tools at Camp X-Ray!



Posted By: thorshammer
Date Posted: March 20 2008 at 5:13am
Hills Have Eyes 2.  One of the worst movies I've ever seen.  Almost as bad as Date Movie.


Posted By: thorshammer
Date Posted: March 20 2008 at 5:15am
Originally posted by saturnwatcher

Superman Returns sucked!

You know, it REALLY did.  I was sorely disappointed.  What an incredibly dumb storyline as well.  Singer should have stuck with Xmen.  Sorry moviewizguy, this was almost as bad as Superman 4. 



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


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 16 2010 at 3:05pm
http://www.razzies.com/forum/epic-movie_forum172.html - EPIC MOVIE .

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: princessklei
Date Posted: August 13 2011 at 5:26am
I didn't really like Batman and Robin, although it has a lot of big stars in it and I like George Clooney, I don't think the movie was that good. I also agree that Pirates 3 and Spiderman 3 did not live up to expectations. The only thing I like about Pirates 3 is Capt. Jack Sparrow. 



Print Page | Close Window