Print Page | Close Window

A 21st Century BAD SEED...or Just BAD?!?

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: FORUMS on 2009 RELEASES
Forum Name: ORPHAN
Forum Discription: Adopting an Over-the-Top Attitude with a Horrifying Result...
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3753
Printed Date: October 24 2014 at 8:36pm


Topic: A 21st Century BAD SEED...or Just BAD?!?
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: A 21st Century BAD SEED...or Just BAD?!?
Date Posted: July 20 2009 at 2:48am

THE PROCESS of ADOPTING a CHILD IS SCARY ENOUGH WITHOUT HOLLYWOOD SUGGESTING YOU COULD BE BRINGING SATAN's SPAWN into YOUR HOME to DESTROY YOUR FAMILY on TOP of EVERYTHING ELSE...

ESSENTIALLY a 21st CENTURY KNOCK-OFF of http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048977/ - THE BAD SEED , http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=372 - ORPHAN PLAYS MERCILESSLY on EVERY PARENT's FEAR THAT THEY MAY BE RAISING a MASS MURDERER (OR, WORSE YET, an UNPOPULAR CHILD).

WHEN IT WORKS, THIS CONCEPT CAN BE SCARY as HELL. WHEN IT DOESN'T -- AND THIS ONE DOESN'T -- IT CAN STILL PRODUCE SCREAMS...of LAUGHTER.

NOW IT's YOUR TURN to ADOPT an UNFORGIVING ATTITUDE and HAVE AT the NEWEST MEMBER of OUR 2009 RAZZIE® FAMILY...ORPHAN. 

FURTHER FODDER for OUR FORUM MEMBERS: TURNS OUT THIS WAS DIRECTED by the SAME GUY WHO HELMED the RAZZIE® "WINNING" 2005 PARIS HILTON REMAKE of http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0397065/awards - HOUSE OF WHACKS . WHILE THAT FILM WAS a WORST PICTURE NOMINEE, the FIFTH WORST DIRECTOR SLOT, WHICH COULD'VE GONE to ORPHAN "AUTEUR" http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1429471/ - COLLET-SERRA , WENT INSTEAD to NORA EPHRON for http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0374536/awards - BEWITCHED ...

"Mirror, mirror, on the wall...am I the most RAZZ-able brat of all??"



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



Replies:
Posted By: Movie Man
Date Posted: July 20 2009 at 3:12am

You've already got a page for this up ----- and surprisingly, no G-FORCE???!!!!

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: What do you mean we've "already got a page for this up"??  This discussion, and the ancillary Forum pages for credits, official site and R.T. reviews on ORPHAN ( http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=372 - LINK ) were just posted about one hour ago. A "search" of the entire RAZZIE® Forum for the word "orphan" brought up no other pages specifically related to (or discussing) this title..

As for http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0436339/ - G-FORCE , I am awaiting reviews before deciding if it's actually RAZZIE® Worthy, or merely another mediocre Dizz-knee family film (like last year's dopey but essentially harmless http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10008587-beverly_hills_chihuahua/ - BEVERLY HILLS CHIHUAHUA )... 

 



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


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 20 2009 at 4:40am

Orphan seems like a perfectly reasonable choice. I was expecting this one, since I saw the preview months ago, and though that it might just be the lamest horror movie of the year!

 



-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Berrynoia
Date Posted: July 20 2009 at 8:17am

...why is Leonardo DiCaprio among the producers?  I think of him as a great actor, but producer... I don't know.

If this is a knock off of The Bad Seed, it isn't the first.  Anyone else remember The Good Son (starring Macaulay Culkin and Elijah Wood)?  Same kind of thing.

As for G-Force, I bet it will be Bonus Worst, and likely NOT screened for critics in advance. 

 



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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 20 2009 at 11:09am

I didn't know it was produced by DiCaprio....maybe there's a reason.  Anyway, I really look forward to this movie. Unlike some, I just fell in love with the trailer and seeing that it's from the director of House of Wax (the best slasher I've ever seen!) I'm even more excited. However, the main reason I think this will be good is because I just have this feeling. I don't know...I think I can tell good horror films from bad ones before they are released. This is one of them...

EDIT: I have a link to show you guys: http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/Audiences+scream+Isabelle+Fuhrman+Orphan/1809722/story.html - http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/Audiences+scream+I sabelle+Fuhrman+Orphan/1809722/story.html

And here's the best part from it: After all, Orphan is proving to be more than merely scary. Preview screenings have left many moviegoers terrified and screaming in fear at the screen. And, once the movie is finally over and has delivered its final frightening plot twist, they're reluctant to leave the multiplex and head for the parking lot.

 



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


Posted By: Headbanger14
Date Posted: July 20 2009 at 1:36pm

This movie is like the lovechild of The Bad Seed and The Good Son. Take a good movie, combine it with a half-assed knockoff, then have it directed by the bastard who did the House of Wax remake, and there you go: A possible Razzie contender.

Where do they get the kids for these roles anyway? If Isabelle Fuhrman's "acting career" continues, I can see her probably growing up to be Christina Ricci...and I'm not sure if that's a good thing.

 



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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 20 2009 at 1:55pm

To be fair, a lot of people are starting to find HoW to be an under-rated film. Anyway, to the answer for your question, you can click on the link I've provided. Read it, and it should shut you up about bad-mouthing that talented girl. God, I hope she doesn't grow up to be one of those crazy girls who are spoiled... 

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Exactly which "people are starting to find out http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0397065/ - HOUSE OF WAX " is "an under-rated film"??  With about 27,650 votes, it's currently got a 5.4-out-of-10 rating at IMDb; It rated a mere 37 favorable reviews versus 107 negative at RT; And over 52% of those rating it at B.O. MoJo gave it a "C" or worse. Not exactly a sterling series of endorsements...


 



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


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 21 2009 at 5:11am

House of Wax was a PASSABLE film, i.e. not as bad as you're inclined to expect, but not exactly The Omen or Nightmare on Elm Street.

Unless someone wants to ruin the end of Orphan for me, I'm guessing that it turns out the little girl is a ghost, and that is JUST a guess, which would mix Bad Seed with... well, The Sixth Sense (as the most recent example). But nothing about Orphan looks any good to me.



-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 22 2009 at 7:08am
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

House of Wax was a PASSABLE film, i.e. not as bad as you're inclined to expect, but not exactly The Omen or Nightmare on Elm Street.

Unless someone wants to ruin the end of Orphan for me, I'm guessing that it turns out the little girl is a ghost, and that is JUST a guess, which would mix Bad Seed with... well, The Sixth Sense (as the most recent example). But nothing about Orphan looks any good to me.


I "think" I read the twist. I try to refrain myself from the IMDb board but my excitement for this movie ruined it....and ruined the twist. Let me say this: It'll make or break the movie. It's not ghosts. It's different and I find it ingenious and quite disturbing....unless it was a troll making up the twist.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 22 2009 at 8:14am
I read that too... It's NOT a good twist, if that is indeed the case. That's EVERY bit as lame as ghosts, and is almost the same thing, anyway. It's not original, it's the same thing only called something else.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: tomsmo35
Date Posted: July 22 2009 at 8:58am

I have not seen The Bad Seed, but I have seen The Good Son. It's the first movie I thought about when I saw the trailer for Orphan...

 



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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 23 2009 at 5:27am

YES! Roger Ebert gave this 3.5 stars out of 4! Not that anyone on this Forum cares anymore...

Here's a http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090722/REVIEWS/907229993 - LINK to read Ebert's review...

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: It should also be noted that "Users" at Ebert's site (as of this posting) have rated ORPHAN 1 Star Out of 4...



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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 23 2009 at 6:14am

Oh, shoot. I think the twist I'm thinking about is not actually true. I finally clicked on the thread that revealed the "twist" and I'm reading that people are now saying it's false. Thank God! I thought the movie was ruined! Now I just have to stay away from this board (and the one from IMDb) so I won't have the twist ruined.



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


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 24 2009 at 9:55am
It looks like it's ultimately going to end up in the mid-40s to mid-50s. So, not as bad as it looked, but still pretty mediocre.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Berrynoia
Date Posted: July 24 2009 at 10:25am
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

House of Wax was a PASSABLE film, i.e. not as bad as you're inclined to expect, but not exactly The Omen or Nightmare on Elm Street.

Is that because Paris Hilton gets impaled?

Anyway, I was looking at the Tomatometer and saw Orphan at 45%, G-Farce at 18%, and The Ugly Truth at 15%.  I guess Orphan is the one destined for mere mediocrity while the other two smell like ugly rodents.



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


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 7:56am
I dunno, I just thought HoW was a watchable movie, at the least. And I have no beef with Paris Hilton, so it was a bit more than that. The beginning of the movie was pretty god awful, but it got to a sort of watchable, lazy pace as it went on, and ultimately, stands slightly above the recent horror offerings... which have been worthless, so that may not be saying much or anything at all.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 10:29am
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

I dunno, I just thought HoW was a watchable movie, at the least. And I have no beef with Paris Hilton, so it was a bit more than that. The beginning of the movie was pretty god awful, but it got to a sort of watchable, lazy pace as it went on, and ultimately, stands slightly above the recent horror offerings... which have been worthless, so that may not be saying much or anything at all.


No, just say it. Say it loud. Say that "HoW was better than I thought. It was pretty entertaining and as the film picks up the pace, the movie is pretty entertaining, especially the ending sequence with the burning museum. Now that part was above average."


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 2:49pm
I gave it what I'll give it. It wasn't The Godfather.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 25 2009 at 3:20pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

I gave it what I'll give it. It wasn't The Godfather.

It was better than The Godfather!


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 7:34am

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Originally posted by dEd Grimley

I gave it what I'll give it. It wasn't The Godfather.

It was better than The Godfather!

Oh boy, here was go again.



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 8:13am
... So... How about that local sports team?

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 3:11pm
My review of ORPHAN:   

The tragic loss of their unborn child has devastated Kate and John, taking a toll on both their marriage and Kate’s fragile psyche as she is plagued by nightmares and haunted by demons from her past. Struggling to regain some semblance of normalcy in their lives, the couple decides to adopt another child. At the local orphanage, both John and Kate find themselves strangely drawn to a young girl named Esther. Almost as soon as they welcome Esther into their home, however, an alarming series of events begins to unfold, leading Kate to believe that there’s something wrong with Esther—this seemingly angelic little girl is not what she appears to be.

I just literally came back from a screening of ORPHAN and forgive me, I'm still soaking in what was in the film. Wow. This was a messed up movie. Really, some of the things in here are just flat out wrong and the fact that the filmmakers had the gumption to do what they did, from the twist to the taboos, I applaud them. ORPHAN has what usually most horror movies have, from the music cue waiting to have people jump out of their seats to the character who is clueless from what's going on. I believe the movie is self aware of itself and other horror films and uses that to its advantage to have fun with the cliches. However, what sets this apart from other films is that it pushed the boundaries. After the movie ends, you can't help but have an uncomfortable feeling lingering as you drive home.

But I won't say anymore about what boundaries the film pushed, because that ruins the fun. The film has a running time of barely over two hours, which is longer than most films these days, let alone horror films. Fortunately, this isn't a bad thing because the first half of the film was like a great character study. There is more character development in the first ten minutes of this film compared to all of most other horror movies. I was taken off guard. I appreciated that, making most of the characters people who you would root for.

Surprisingly, there is a lot of dark humor. I laughed out loud more than I thought I would and I'm sure the audience I was with was surprised too. When the film started, the audience was quiet, because they weren't sure how the film will play out. By the end, everyone seemed to have the time of their lives. I know I did. With its shares of dark humor, the film also produces some tense and unsettling scenes. This is mostly due to Jaume Collet-Serra, who directed the remake of HOUSE OF WAX, one of my favorite slashers. He sets everything up nicely, while using sound to make the audience uncomfortable. Be on the look out for him in the future. He has a big career in front of him. I know it.

The film has its strong performances...and I mean from everyone. Even the kids have strong performances, which is saying a lot. I didn't feel annoyed by them. A film like this must be carried well by the evil kid herself, and she absolutely rises to the task. Isabelle Fuhrman does such a fantastic job playing the evil Esther. After saying that, it still feels like an understatement. Remember Damien? You know, the Devil's child? Well, he seems like a nice kid now. The film is also supported by two great leads, played by Vera Farmiga and Peter Sarsgaard. Farmiga plays well as the sympathetic mother that nobody but herself believes while Sarsgaard feels like a clueless father and a great one at that.

The film also has a great score composed by John Ottman, along with some nice production values, which give the film a slick look. Overall, if you want to see an evil kid causing havoc, here's the movie. The film mixes the dark humor and tense scenes really well. There's also a twist in the movie towards the end which sets itself apart from other evil kid movies. The twist is not improbable at all, which is a great thing. The film is pure entertainment from beginning to end. Finally, all I have to say is this: Esther is just an evil little kid. Pity, because she's such a great well-mannered artist who can play Tchaikovsky flawlessly. 8/10



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


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 3:55am

Originally posted by dEd Grimley

... So... How about that local sports team?

Hmm, what sport would have a team called "The Godfathers"? 



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 12:33pm
I'm sure Entertainment Tonight will have a job for MWG one day.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 1:08pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

I'm sure Entertainment Tonight will have a job for MWG one day.

I don't get it. I watch the show and they sometimes talk negatively about a movie. Also, dEd, she's not a robot nor is she a ghost. What did you think the twist was? This is a crowd pleasing movie and my audience seemed to have a lot of fun with it. You should see it. Esther is so evil.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 2:12am
The people on ET wouldn't get it, either. I thought she had a growth disorder and was actually older than she looked. From what I'm hearing now it sounds more like she's in her 30s. Again, though... Just as lame as being a ghost.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 2:42am
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

The people on ET wouldn't get it, either. I thought she had a growth disorder and was actually older than she looked. From what I'm hearing now it sounds more like she's in her 30s. Again, though... Just as lame as being a ghost.

Ok. Nevermind. You know. However, you should see it in context with the movie. Many people called the twist lame but it's disturbing if you see it with the rest of the movie. It's not as lame as a ghost because I don't think it has ever been done before and that's why people liked it so much. It's realistic and not improbable. Many people expected that the film would end up being supernatural. Don't judge a movie by its twist, even though many people and critics alike, do find the twist shocking and one of the best twists since The Sixth Sense.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 10:33am
A strong word of mouth seems to be helping this movie. It has the second smallest drop from Sunday to Monday in the top 10. I really hope this continues because this is a really good film.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 2:41pm
Considering the nature of the "disease" or "disorder" that this girl seems to suffer from, I think it's fair to call it supernatural.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 2:33am
Again with the small drops = great movie theory.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 7:30am
Originally posted by Michaels

Again with the small drops = great movie theory.

So you think movies with larger drops are better movies? I never said anything about this theory. If Orphan had drop like 60% from Sunday to Monday, you would agree with this theory.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 9:04am

Originally posted by moviewizguy

So you think movies with larger drops are better movies? I never said anything about this theory. If Orphan had drop like 60% from Sunday to Monday, you would agree with this theory.

No, I don't consider drops to have anything to do with the quality of the movie, just movie goers getting bored with it and looking for the new flavor of the week. Considering "G-Force" and "Trannies 2" are doing so well right now, movie goers' tastes are highly in question this year.

Also, just because a movie is getting "word of mouth" on IMDb, that doesn't mean it getting word of mouth EVERYWHERE.



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 10:20am
Originally posted by Michaels

No, I don't consider drops to have anything to do with the quality of the movie, just movie goers getting bored with it and looking for the new flavor of the week. Considering "G-Force" and "Trannies 2" are doing so well right now, movie goers' tastes are highly in question this year.

Also, just because a movie is getting "word of mouth" on IMDb, that doesn't mean it getting word of mouth EVERYWHERE.


I wasn't talking about IMDb, but, yes, it's a positive tone there compared to here. There are positive things in other sites too.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 12:43am
I've seriously seen like ONE person have a positive opinion about this outside of this site. Other than that, it's mostly people who share my opinion of the twist... It might as well have been a ghost.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 3:17am

But they also haven't seen the movie. And anyway, you liked the twist in The Uninvited, which involved ghosts. And why did you say "it might as well be ghosts"? First of all, this twist has NEVER been done before, which is why most of the critics and audiences alike found it surprising (read some reviews in RT; even critics who didn't like the movie found the twist surprising). And second, it fits with the rest of the movie (if one has actually seen it). Really, see the movie. It fits with the rest of the movie.

Some sites with positive reactions of this movie with audiences:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1148204/ - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1148204/ (just to show the rating; jumped up 0.1 yesterday)

http://www.everyonesacritic.net/movie.asp?movieid=169349 - http://www.everyonesacritic.net/movie.asp?movieid=169349

http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?t=131332 - http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?t=131332 (read the actual reviews)

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20%20090722/REVIEWS/907229993 - http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20 090722/REVIEWS/907229993 (the rating seems to be creeping up after that 1 star we saw before the film was released)

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810046253/info%3C/p%20target=" target=_blank _blank=" -

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810046253/info%3C/p%20target=" target=_blank _blank=" - http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10010658-orphan/reviews_user s.php">http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810046253/info

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810046253/info%3C/p%20target=" target=_blank _blank=" - http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10010658-orphan/reviews_user s.php

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=orphan09.htm - http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=orphan09.htm

http://apps.metacritic.com/film/titles/orphan - http://apps.metacritic.com/film/titles/orphan (user rating)

http://www.amazon.com/Orphan-Theatrical-Release/dp/B0021L8UPI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1248976712&sr=1-1 - http://www.amazon.com/Orphan-Theatrical-Release/dp/B0021L8UP I/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1248976712&sr=1-1

http://www.flixster.com/movie/orphan - http://www.flixster.com/movie/orphan

http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/atm/index.html - http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/atm/index.html (at least one of them liked it)

http://www.criticker.com/film/Orphan/ - http://www.criticker.com/film/Orphan/



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


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 9:55am
Seems like people are split down the middle, not many love it or hate it, most are just indifferent about it...

-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 4:35pm
First of all - No... People who've seen the movie.
Second of all - No... I haven't seen The Uninvited, and have never commented on the content of it.
Third of all - No... well, I don't know. It feels like I've seen it before. If not, it's still so ridiculously implausible that a person could age at 20% the rate of a normal person that that's not a good "twist," unless you go down the supernatural route.
Fourth of all - I don't know that I really care if it fits.

You can quote positive reviews, but there are more that didn't. And I've skimmed through enough that I don't really need to be pointed to them. I'm still not sure why you assume I'm not researching these things.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 2:43am
Well, see with MWG, whenever he discovers a movie that he really, really, REALLY likes, he feels he has to promote it like it's the greatest work of art since the motion picture was invented. And if most movie goers and critics disagree with him, he takes it upon himself to become a one-man marketing campaign: "the lead actress should got an Oscar", "the word of mouth is pretty good", "the movie didn't drop too badly at the box office", "here's a small handfull of good reviews, it's not that bad". I don't know who he is trying to convince, himself or us?


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 4:04am

Whoops. Wrong person. Ok, you didn't see that movie.    

Originally posted by dEd Grimley

First of all - No... People who've seen the movie.
Second of all - No... I haven't seen The Uninvited, and have never commented on the content of it.
Third of all - No... well, I don't know. It feels like I've seen it before. If not, it's still so ridiculously implausible that a person could age at 20% the rate of a normal person that that's not a good "twist," unless you go down the supernatural route.
Fourth of all - I don't know that I really care if it fits.

You can quote positive reviews, but there are more that didn't. And I've skimmed through enough that I don't really need to be pointed to them. I'm still not sure why you assume I'm not researching these things.




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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 9:38am
Very good post on IMDb. He makes a good point:

Very polished, exceedingly well-made film with terrific cinematography, score, performances and lots of life breathed back into a familiar story.

The twist at the end of the film is far from "stupid" or "laughable" as the geek fanboy superior above-it-all jerks would like to believe (they haven't seen it). That is good screenwriting, folks, very shocking and exactly what is required in the genre -- and the most inventive story turn since The Sixth Sense.

Even if you didn't like the narrative, you'd be a fool to dismiss the production values and top-notch professionalism of the film. The wintry locale, the handsome sets, the conviction of Farmiga and Sarsgaard and the performance of Fuhrman are all aces.

So go on hating, yep. But there's worlds of difference between a gorgeously crafted film like this and dreck like The Unborn, Friday the 13th (the remake), etc., etc.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 10:03am
The first half of that post is entirely opinion. The other things are stuff people weren't complaining about in the first place.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 01 2009 at 2:56am

Also it doesn't go against my point: Just because a movie is well liked at IMDb, that doesn't mean it universally liked by the rest of the movie-going public. That and at no point did I compare it to "The Unborn." This is no different than when MWG was overhyping "Knowing" earlier this year. He seems to have this idea that if he really likes a movie, then everyone else must agree it's a masterpiece, too.



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 01 2009 at 5:28am
I'm sorry. that's just what I'm like as a person... 


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


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 01 2009 at 7:32am

Ah... Now there's a reasonable response, perhaps under too much fire for what he said in the first place.


Much better, MWG. Not a single "idiot" thrown out in quite some time!  



-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 02 2009 at 1:17am

Yes, MWG's replies are improving.

Now if we could just work on his movie choices!



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 02 2009 at 9:36am
Those may be getting worse.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 04 2009 at 4:11pm
Wow. It's great to see this movie having some legs. With a 43% drop for the second weekend and making $600,000 less (-37%) than last Monday, I'm quite happy. It might even hold up better than The Uninvited, which held up pretty well with a low opening weekend as well.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 05 2009 at 3:49am
I wonder if studios live by MWG's "drop theory". My guess is yes, because like MWG, it helps to convince them the movie is actually doing good.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 05 2009 at 7:09am
I would say that you could probably consider Orphan a fiscal sucess. I'm sure it performed at least to expectations in terms of the amount of money they'd hope it pulled in.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 07 2009 at 6:27am
Wow! It just jumped from 46% to 52% in a day! I guess the movie is starting to open up in the international markets. It's about time more than half of the critics liked this movie.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 07 2009 at 7:08am
That's all good, but under 60% is still considered "rotten" on RT.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 07 2009 at 11:10am
... Did we really need the same ratings boost post in two topics?

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 07 2009 at 1:23pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

... Did we really need the same ratings boost post in two topics?

Well, sure. One thread was on a RT thread and another in an ORPHAN thread.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 07 2009 at 1:27pm

Originally posted by dEd Grimley

... Did we really need the same ratings boost post in two topics?

Of course we did, I mean come on, it's MWG we're talking about here. Logic need not apply.



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 07 2009 at 1:57pm
An argument I've found about this movie is that it provided cheap scares. Ok. I've just seen The Orphanage and I read that American critics liked it because it doesn't have cheap scares (Wikipedia). I'm sorry, but The Orphanage had as many SUBTLE cheap scares as Orphan. American critics need to start loving some horror movies made from their own country.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 07 2009 at 11:52pm

Originally posted by moviewizguy

American critics need to start loving some horror movies made from their own country.

Or American horror movie makers should learn how to make good movies. Just a thought.



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 08 2009 at 1:17am
Originally posted by Michaels

Originally posted by dEd Grimley

... Did we really need the same ratings boost post in two topics?


Of course we did, I mean come on, it's MWG we're talking about here. Logic need not apply.


I think we're going on the offensive here again... Just point out the fallacies, let's not get into name calling again.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 08 2009 at 7:37am

Originally posted by dEd Grimley


I think we're going on the offensive here again... Just point out the fallacies, let's not get into name calling again.

Yeah, you're right. But come on, there are movies I wished did better with critics' reviews and the box office, but I don't go around trying to proclaim that any slight increase in RT ratings or the grossings from week to week remaining steady as a sign the movie is a hit.



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 08 2009 at 7:41am
Originally posted by Michaels


Yeah, you're right. But come on, there are movies I wished did better with critics' reviews and the box office, but I don't go around trying to proclaim that any slight increase in RT ratings or the grossings from week to week remaining steady as a sign the movie is a hit.



Very true. I do wish he'd quit trying to talk Orphan up to everyone.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 08 2009 at 11:27am
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

Originally posted by Michaels


Yeah, you're right. But come on, there are movies I wished did better with critics' reviews and the box office, but I don't go around trying to proclaim that any slight increase in RT ratings or the grossings from week to week remaining steady as a sign the movie is a hit.



Very true. I do wish he'd quit trying to talk Orphan up to everyone.

But I never said it was a hit...


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 08 2009 at 2:25pm
*Eye Roll*

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 09 2009 at 3:17am

Well, you might not have used the word "hit", but you're trying entirely too hard to make it come across as a big success even though critics' reviews and box office draws were average at best.

And don't get started on that comparing Esther to Jason and Freddy, because if you went outside the bubble of IMDb and asked people if you think she's a horror movie icon on par with those two, I'm willing to bet money more than half the people you ask will reply "Esther Who?".



Posted By: wolfee37
Date Posted: August 09 2009 at 11:39am

Ugh, you cant compare Esther with Freddy and Jason because Orphan is about a month old and Jason and Freddy are over twenty years old with a dozen films for each, maybe in ten years Esther will join the ranks of good villans, cause i have heard pretty good thigns about this movie

 

Oh and PS, it doesnt make you smart to hate on every film to come out btw guys, get your head otu of your asses and stop tearing apart every film to get released, save this trash talking for C Me Dance or The Unborn



Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 09 2009 at 1:36pm

Originally posted by wolfee37

Oh and PS, it doesnt make you smart to hate on every film to come out btw guys, get your head otu of your asses and stop tearing apart every film to get released, save this trash talking for C Me Dance or The Unborn

Oh no, I'm don't care about this movie at all. I'm not trash talking it, just seriously questioning MWG's blind loyality to it. As for my actual trash talk, that's all point in one direction ... that of Michael Bay and "Trannies 2"!



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 09 2009 at 11:36pm
Just consider the fact that when movies are discussed on the website of an institution that gives awards to the WORST movies of the year, you're typically not supposed to expect that people are going to defend the movies that are given a forum to discuss and determine whether or not that particular movie is worthy of an award.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 9:39am
Up to 53% on RT. It's getting higher.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 11:03am

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Up to 53% on RT. It's getting higher.

Dude, seriously, please stop obsessing about this movie. You can give weekly updates about it's rating at RT all you want, it's not going to get any higher than the mid 60s, if that. Just face it, it's not a great movie in the eyes of most people, just an average one at best. It's not going to win any major awards, and it's probably going to be forgotten by this time next year. The most that will come out from this is maybe a straight to DVD sequel or two that will be utter crap. That's it. Please stop trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 11:35am
Don't you have like a blog or something where you can log the progess of the RT rating? As long as it's in the top 10 of the week, I'm gonna see the score once a day on my own...

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 12:25pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

Don't you have like a blog or something where you can log the progess of the RT rating? As long as it's in the top 10 of the week, I'm gonna see the score once a day on my own...

No....what are you talking about?


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 12:26pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Up to 53% on RT. It's getting higher.

Dude, seriously, please stop obsessing about this movie. You can give weekly updates about it's rating at RT all you want, it's not going to get any higher than the mid 60s, if that. Just face it, it's not a great movie in the eyes of most people, just an average one at best. It's not going to win any major awards, and it's probably going to be forgotten by this time next year. The most that will come out from this is maybe a straight to DVD sequel or two that will be utter crap. That's it. Please stop trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.


Mostly every movie is forgettable after a while until you rewatch the movie. That's not saying much.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 12:34pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Oh no, I'm don't care about this movie at all. I'm not trash talking it, just seriously questioning MWG's blind loyality to it. As for my actual trash talk, that's all point in one direction ... that of Michael Bay and "Trannies 2"!


Blind loyalty? I have seen the movie and you haven't. I'm questioning your blind aversion.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 12:36pm
I never said it was a hit. You're assuming that the other things I'm saying is like saying the movie is a hit, even though I was just saying that I was happy it wasn't a complete disaster.


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


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 1:09pm

I may see the movie ... someday ... in the distant future, but I just don't care for how you're trying to make it out as something it's clearly not: an instant classic. It's going to be nothing more than a minor cult classic, if that.



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 10 2009 at 3:10pm
It may seem to you that I make this film sound like a classic but you know that I don't consider it a classic. A classic is like a 4/4 or A+ rating. I didn't give this film those kind of ratings.


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


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 11 2009 at 6:41am
Still, 8/10 is pretty high for a film that's being considered average by most. And then there was the "she deserves an Oscar" and "Esther will be an icon like Freddie and Jason" talk. Those are solely your opinions, not those of the general public.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 11 2009 at 11:13am
As Michaels just said, you've put it up there on the top tier. You seem to be backing off at this point, rather that putting things into perspective.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 11 2009 at 11:57am
54%


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: August 11 2009 at 4:27pm
... I think I'm going to have to start giving you the silent treatment again, and perhaps have others join in this time.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 12 2009 at 3:29pm
Originally posted by dEd Grimley

As Michaels just said, you've put it up there on the top tier. You seem to be backing off at this point, rather that putting things into perspective.

As a horror movie, it's one of the best I've seen in a long time. I mean, of course, compared to the remakes, sequels, etc. that had come out the past several months, at least credit ORPHAN for its originality and its exceptional cast.

Also, I just wanted to add this not to annoy you but I just feel the need to update every time for this movie: It's now up to 55% on RT.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 13 2009 at 3:01am

Dude, I understand that you think this is the greatest horror movie in recent memory, but let's keep it real around here: no one is going to call Esther a horror movie icon 20 years from, and no one is going to get an Oscar nod for this flick.

Secondly, it is VERY annoying to have a freakin' day by day accouncement of the RT rating. Personally, I think "Transformers 2" is the worst movie fo the year so far and is a shoe-in to win Worst Picture, if not sweep all the major categories like "Gigli" before it, but I don't make weekly accouncements about how its RT rating is dropping. Why? Because that is annoying and the fact the movie sucks is well known already.

So please, I'm asking nicely, stop it with this movie, okay? We know you like it, but stop putting it on a pedestal because no one here agrees with you. If you want to post daily RT updates, do it on IMDb where people might care, because we don't care here. Thank you!



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 13 2009 at 6:05am
Originally posted by Michaels

Dude, I understand that you think this is the greatest horror movie in recent memory, but let's keep it real around here: no one is going to call Esther a horror movie icon 20 years from, and no one is going to get an Oscar nod for this flick.

But Haley Joel got nominated for The Sixth Sense, and Linda Blair got nominated for her role in The Exorcist, so it's possible. And ok, I might have gone a bit too far saying she's the new horror icon. Happy?

Secondly, it is VERY annoying to have a freakin' day by day accouncement of the RT rating. Personally, I think "Transformers 2" is the worst movie fo the year so far and is a shoe-in to win Worst Picture, if not sweep all the major categories like "Gigli" before it, but I don't make weekly accouncements about how its RT rating is dropping. Why? Because that is annoying and the fact the movie sucks is well known already.

Ok. How about weekly updates? What if the film finally reaches 60%? Now, it's up at 56% and it's possible.

So please, I'm asking nicely, stop it with this movie, okay? We know you like it, but stop putting it on a pedestal because no one here agrees with you. If you want to post daily RT updates, do it on IMDb where people might care, because we don't care here. Thank you!

Wow. Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning!


 



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


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: August 13 2009 at 2:52pm

Originally posted by moviewizguy

But Haley Joel got nominated for The Sixth Sense, and Linda Blair got nominated for her role in The Exorcist, so it's possible. And ok, I might have gone a bit too far saying she's the new horror icon. Happy?

Both of those movies were BIG box office smash hits. This movie is not.

Ok. How about weekly updates? What if the film finally reaches 60%? Now, it's up at 56% and it's possible.

You really don't get it, do you? We don't care about this movie at all. Giving updates about its RT rating will just make you further lose creditablity as you cling to a movie no one cares about. Besides, a 60% is still an D- grade.

Wow. Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning!

Oh no, I slept quiet well last night. What upsets me is that we try time and time again to explain why we disagree with you and yet it all goes in one of your ears and out the other. We might as well be talking to a brick wall. And because of that, I give up and I'm following dEd's example. This thread is dead to me. Have fun overhyping a mediocre movie.



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 13 2009 at 3:58pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Both of those movies were BIG box office smash hits. This movie is not.

Uh, yeah, I clearly remember most Oscar nominated movies not doing that well in the box office. Rarely are they box office smashes. You remember Memento? You know, the movie everyone loves? It has only made $25 million in the US.

You really don't get it, do you? We don't care about this movie at all. Giving updates about its RT rating will just make you further lose creditablity as you cling to a movie no one cares about. Besides, a 60% is still an D- grade.

YOU don't care. I do. Obviously, if you cared about a movie, you'd post on that board. If you don't care what I have to say, even though my points are valid, DON'T READ THEM. NOBODY is FORCING you to read them. Also, that just shows that you're a person who hates people who don't agree with you. Just because you don't care what someone has to say, you don't tell them to shut up. And that last sentence of yours is completely false. D- is a 10% movie. A 60% movie is a B or a B- or a C+.

Oh no, I slept quiet well last night. What upsets me is that we try time and time again to explain why we disagree with you and yet it all goes in one of your ears and out the other. We might as well be talking to a brick wall. And because of that, I give up and I'm following dEd's example. This thread is dead to me. Have fun overhyping a mediocre movie.


And I don't care. I gave MY explanations but it's like me talking to a brick wall with YOU.

*I say, "This is a good movie. Some truly great performances."
*You say, "I don't care. It's a bad movie."
*I say, "You haven't seen the movie yet."
*You say, "It looks like The Good Son." (which is like a 22% on RT)
*I say, "Critics liked this movie. At least it's higher than most movies listed on here and most movies NOT listed on here." (like Ice Age 3 and Perfect Getaway)
*You say, "That's mediocre."
*I say, "It's getting higher on RT."
*You act like a 10% jump on RT is nothing. Then you threaten to not talk to me because you feel that I should shoot myself on the foot for actually watching the movie and praising it. You add on that I have little credibility.

You know, I also like GOOD MOVIES. I liked Up, Star Trek, Coraline, and Harry Potter 6, films listed on my top 5 of 2009 so far. Just because I liked this film, which you act is like a travesty/abomination of a film, that doesn't mean I have low credibility. Just a thought.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 13 2009 at 4:12pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Dude, seriously, please stop obsessing about this movie. You can give weekly updates about it's rating at RT all you want, it's not going to get any higher than the mid 60s, if that. Just face it, it's not a great movie in the eyes of most people, just an average one at best. It's not going to win any major awards, and it's probably going to be forgotten by this time next year. The most that will come out from this is maybe a straight to DVD sequel or two that will be utter crap. That's it. Please stop trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.


Also, to add on top of this ridiculous paragraph, why should people not liking the movie have anything to do with preventing me to continue to talk about the movie? If you tell a person to stop talking about a film they liked because "people find it average, it's not going to win any awards, and it's gonna be forgotten by next year," do you seriously think that will stop that person from continuing to talk about the film they liked? *gasp* People like talking about films they found to be good?! Why, I never seen such a disgraceful thing in my life!


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 19 2009 at 1:26pm
Cool article about what Leonardo DiCaprio has to say about this movie:

http://www.pep.ph/guide/4254/Theres-something-wrong-with-Orphan-girl,-Esther - http://www.pep.ph/guide/4254/Theres-something-wrong-with-Orp han-girl,-Esther

Leonardo DiCaprio, a producer on the film, states, "We were as excited as we were about the project because it felt like so much more than your typical genre film.  A lot of its appeal has to do with the fact that there is a complex psychological drama playing itself out alongside the typical genre scares."


Posted By: kelemenmarc
Date Posted: August 28 2009 at 6:49am
It's me again.
I'm sorry but WTF?

ORPHAN was not a bad movie, i'm not telling it was the best movie ever, but not was bad. Excellent performances, good story, some execiting moments. And the RT 56%, almost 60% - it's really a Razzie contender????? I think we should put down the contender list!!!! Somebody agree with me? Don't hurt this movie............................PLEASE DON'T!!

what's wrong with you razzie?


Just remember it's 56% and some this year contenders just 12%-13%-14%-15%.....It's not fair!!!.....

-------------
FYC:
Worst Movie: The Bounty Hunter
Worst Actor: Johnny Depp (Alice in Wonderland / The Tourist)


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 06 2009 at 2:41am
Thank you, kelemenmarc, someone who actually SAW the movie and, from that there on, decided it was a GOOD movie and NOT judging it was bad movie without even watching it!

But ANYWAY, here's some information about the DVD release date and art cover! http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/orphan2.html - http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/orphan2.html

As you can see, the comments in the bottom of the page are highly positive! Yeah, it seems like I'm the only one who liked the movie. Pshhhhh.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 06 2009 at 3:22am
Okay, so someone agree with you, can we now move on to a movie that is newly released rather than staying behind with a movie from four months ago?


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 06 2009 at 11:24am
Originally posted by Michaels

Okay, so someone agree with you, can we now move on to a movie that is newly released rather than staying behind with a movie from four months ago?

You're really bad at counting too. It's not just "one person." There's a whole lot of people across the Earth that liked this movie.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 06 2009 at 11:58am

Originally posted by moviewizguy


You're really bad at counting too. It's not just "one person." There's a whole lot of people across the Earth that liked this movie.

And you're pretty good at overhyping mediocre movies. This one will be forgotten by this time next year, the lead actress will not be called a horror movie icon, and no one will be getting Oscar nods for it.



Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: September 06 2009 at 5:23pm
I could be wrong here, but "so someone agrees with you" seems to imply that "someone on this board" agrees with you. And yes, time to let this movie die, because it's far past the point in which it could've made an impact.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: kelemenmarc
Date Posted: September 14 2009 at 2:55am
Ok. Everybody listen to me. It's one thing Michaels you don't like the movie, but it's unfair it's a razzie contender.

I remember that time when 17 Again was 58% and Orphan was 57% in RT.

Now 17 Again 58%, and Orphan 55% - but a question is this: 3% or (1%) choose who's a contender and who's not????

ORPHAN IS NOT  ABAD MOVIE. BRÜNO IS A BAD MOVIE: THAT'S IT.



-------------
FYC:
Worst Movie: The Bounty Hunter
Worst Actor: Johnny Depp (Alice in Wonderland / The Tourist)


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: September 14 2009 at 3:53am

Remember, just because a movie is listed in these forums, that doesn't automatically mean it will show up on the contenders voting list. What bothered me about this thread was how MWG was overhyping this movie into something it will NEVER be: a serious Oscar contender and a series that will be on par with "Friday the 13th" and "Nightmare on Elms Street". That is seriously overreaching. At most, this movie will spawn a straight to DVD sequel or two, that's it. The movie is no longer in threaters and whatever impact it would have on the movie going public is gone. Chances are we will forget about it by voting time, so let's just drop this thread already and focus on more current movies ... please.



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: September 14 2009 at 2:07pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Remember, just because a movie is listed in these forums, that doesn't automatically mean it will show up on the contenders voting list. What bothered me about this thread was how MWG was overhyping this movie into something it will NEVER be: a serious Oscar contender and a series that will be on par with "Friday the 13th" and "Nightmare on Elms Street". That is seriously overreaching. At most, this movie will spawn a straight to DVD sequel or two, that's it. The movie is no longer in threaters and whatever impact it would have on the movie going public is gone. Chances are we will forget about it by voting time, so let's just drop this thread already and focus on more current movies ... please.


Well, actually, you were already under-hyping the movie before it came out so essentially, I'm just over-hyping it for your expectations to come to a median.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: September 14 2009 at 2:51pm
Bruno isn't a bad movie.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: October 25 2009 at 2:40pm
DVD comes out this Tuesday! Who's going to buy it Monday midnight?!!!


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: October 25 2009 at 5:42pm

Originally posted by moviewizguy

DVD comes out this Tuesday! Who's going to buy it Monday midnight?!!!

You're not seriously asking this question, right? We all know the answer is YOU, you're just using this as an excuse to bump the topic up.

I think you should strongly consider a career in politics considering all the overhyping you like to do; many goverment campaigns could use someone like you.



Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: October 26 2009 at 11:08am

You would too if a movie you saw was great, but nobody had seen it. 

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I hardly think a film that grossed over $40 million can accurately be described as being seen by "nobody" ( http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=orphan09.htm - B.O. MoJo LINK ). Among 2009's crop of crappy horror movies,  http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=372 - ORPHAN ranks somewhere in mid-range, as far as ticket sales go -- Clearly dwarfed by the phenomenon that is http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=paranormalactivity.htm - PARANORMAL ACTIVITY , but still making more money than http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=lasthouseontheleft09.htm - LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=halloween209.htm - HALLOWEEN II or http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=jennifersbody.htm - JENNIFER'S BODY .

 



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


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: October 26 2009 at 1:24pm

Well, I watch alot of indie movies that I hear are good, but did next to nothing at the box office because they were indie movies, even though the major studios like to pretend they don't exist by giving them NO marketing what so ever. But I don't go  posting on forums saying they are as iconic as other more famous movies in their genre, or should get Oscars nods, because I know it's not true.

Speaking of studios and indie movies, rumor has it that Paramount wants to go the way of "Blair Witch 2: Book of Shadows" by making a sequel to "Paranormal Activity." Which reminds me of that joke about a writer and director both saying how great their soup is...until a studio head pisses into it, and claims that he "made it better."

 



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: October 27 2009 at 2:41pm

The fact that this got a Worst DVD of the Weak is just hilarious to me, considering MWG's rabid obsession with it. But when you start comparing Orphan with the other horror movies this year (other than PA) it stops looking all that bad. Jennifer's Body also may have had some originality to it, but it seemed to have failed, too.

And, by the way, I liked your joke, Michaels.



-------------
-Iron helps us play-



Print Page | Close Window