Print Page | Close Window

Rome: The City of Eternal...BOREDOM?!?

Printed From: Official RAZZIEŽ Forum
Category: DISCUSSIONS & POLLS on 2010 RELEASES
Forum Name: WHEN IN ROME
Forum Discription: ...Do As the Romans Would Do, and AVOID THIS MOVIE!
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4093
Printed Date: October 20 2014 at 2:10pm


Topic: Rome: The City of Eternal...BOREDOM?!?
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: Rome: The City of Eternal...BOREDOM?!?
Date Posted: January 26 2010 at 2:38pm
ROME IS ONE of the WORLD's MOST BEAUTIFUL CITIES. AND http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0068338/ - KRISTEN BELL IS ONE of HOLLYWOOD's PRETTIER (and ARGUABLY MORE TALENTED) YOUNG ACTRESSES. BUT the TWO of THEM in COMBO with a GONZO PLOT LIKE http://www.razzies.com/forum/when-in-rome_forum411&SID=d54d6759961z3beee5d393ffc6a31d28.html - WHEN IN ROME 's GOT DO NOT NECESSARILY MAKE for WORTHWHILE ENTERTAINMENT...
 
WHEN FOLLOWS the TRIALS and TRIBULATIONS of a YOUNG WOMAN in EUROPE to MEET HER MR. RIGHT WHO, AFTER SWIPING a HANDFUL of COINS from "THE FOUNTAIN of LOVE" DISCOVERS an ANCIENT CURSE THAT BEFALLS ALL WHO PILFER COINS from the FOUNTAIN: SHE FINDS HERSELF PURSUED, WOOED and UNGLUED by EVERY "LOVER" WHOSE HOPES for LOVE WERE ATTACHED to the COINS.
 
FAR-FETCHED? YES!  BUT FETCHING??  PROBABLY NOT.
 
TOO BAD THAT at the DAWN of the 21st CENTURY, the ART of CRAFTING the TRULY ROMANTIC (and TRULY COMEDIC) ROMANTIC COMEDY SEEMS to BE a LOST CRAFT...
 
http://razzies.com/join.asp">
BELL: "Gee, I wonder if this Half-Euro is less...or more than this film will eventually make?!?"


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



Replies:
Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 26 2010 at 3:03pm
This movie lost me the moment its plot requires us to believe that Kristen Bell needs to throw a coin into a magic fountain in order to have every man in a five miles radius fall madly in love with her at first sight. It's almost as bad as "Bride Wars" and its plot requiring the two lead characters never knowing about a certain thing called a "double wedding", in which the movie falls apart within the first ten minutes.


Posted By: CriticalFrank
Date Posted: January 26 2010 at 3:37pm
I have to agree with Michaels. Seriously, If Kristen Bell needs magic to get guys to fall for her, there is something seriously wrong with the guys around her. Perhaps she is living in some kind of home for the blind? Or perhaps she lives in a predominantly homosexual city? To make the plot even remotely believable they needed a less desireable lead... Perhaps Sarah Jessica Parker? I could easily believe that she needed magic to get someone to fall for her....
 
Movies like this, are one reason I am glad I am single... I'd have to leave my wife/girlfriend if she dragged me to see all of these awful "rom-coms."


-------------
Life's short and hard, like a body-building elf - Bloodhound Gang


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 26 2010 at 5:25pm
Ah, Frank, you're onto something with the casting of Sarah Jessica Parker. Because the movie would actually be funny if it was all about men falling madly in love with a horse-faced woman!   
 
Originally posted by CriticalFrank

I have to agree with Michaels. Seriously, If Kristen Bell needs magic to get guys to fall for her, there is something seriously wrong with the guys around her. Perhaps she is living in some kind of home for the blind? Or perhaps she lives in a predominantly homosexual city? To make the plot even remotely believable they needed a less desireable lead... Perhaps Sarah Jessica Parker? I could easily believe that she needed magic to get someone to fall for her....


-------------
"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: CriticalFrank
Date Posted: January 26 2010 at 9:49pm
LOL! I specifically avoided mentioning Parker's "horse-face" in my post -- good to see someone else making that remark for me! But that her face would make this horrifically inane plot actually work.
 
And I actually feel kinda bad for Kristen, getting stuck in a load of crap like this.


-------------
Life's short and hard, like a body-building elf - Bloodhound Gang


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 28 2010 at 6:23pm
Okay, I think I have found a much better leading lady for this movie, which would actually make it funny to watch men swoon over her ... the landlord's daugther from "Spider-Man 2 &3"!
 
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2267780864/nm1033193 - http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2267780864/nm1033193


Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: January 29 2010 at 7:02pm
Richard Roeper was upset after watching this one.  Here's why: http://www.richardroeper.com/ - LINK .


Posted By: Clayface9
Date Posted: February 01 2010 at 9:00pm
This movie isn't good, but it's not really bad enough for a Worst Picture nomination.  However, Dax Shepard's performance is Worst Supporting Actor worthy.


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: March 03 2010 at 11:30pm
Rom Com Bomb.  Rom Com Bomb.  Rom Com Bomb.  Rom Com Bomb. . . .
 
That's four this year. 


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: March 04 2010 at 1:01pm
You've been chanting those three syllables all winter! I, however, am under the impression that in February of 2001, the health of romantic comedies began to fail when Jennifer Lopez released The Wedding Planner.

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 04 2010 at 3:44pm
Originally posted by GTAHater767

You've been chanting those three syllables all winter! I, however, am under the impression that in February of 2001, the health of romantic comedies began to fail when Jennifer Lopez released The Wedding Planner.

I think the rom-com died after "When Harry Meet Sally". It was the end all, be all of rom-coms and no other rom-com has been able to top it since.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: March 04 2010 at 6:12pm
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn


I think the rom-com died after "When Harry Meet Sally". It was the end all, be all of rom-coms and no other rom-com has been able to top it since.

500 Days of Summer, Love Actually, Definitely Maybe, High Fidelity, 13 Going on 30, Waitress, any movie by Judd Apatow, Lars and the Real Girl, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, About a Boy, What Women Want, Juno, Amelie, Say Anything, Sideways, Punk Drunk Love, etc.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 04 2010 at 6:24pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy


500 Days of Summer, Love Actually, Definitely Maybe, High Fidelity, 13 Going on 30, Waitress, any movie by Judd Apatow, Lars and the Real Girl, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, About a Boy, What Women Want, Juno, Amelie, Say Anything, Sideways, Punk Drunk Love, etc.

Yeah, take a note, 90 percent of those movies are either indie films or European films. Hollywood can't make good rom-coms any more. Again, "WHMS" was the last great HOLLYWOOD made rom-com.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: March 04 2010 at 7:34pm
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Yeah, take a note, 90 percent of those movies are either indie films or European films. Hollywood can't make good rom-coms any more. Again, "WHMS" was the last great HOLLYWOOD made rom-com.

You never said Hollywood before.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 04 2010 at 10:21pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy

You never said Hollywood before.
Okay, sorry for not being clear.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: March 05 2010 at 7:35pm
Hey, GTAHater, I may wind up saying it a lot more this year.  This year seems packed with either rom com bombs or sequels, remakes and ripoffs.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 05 2010 at 9:24pm
Originally posted by cvcjr13

This year seems packed with either rom com bombs or sequels, remakes and ripoffs.
And then people wonder why I hate Hollywood so much and have no faith in it.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: March 06 2010 at 2:45pm

Do those bad-looking sequels include Jacka** 3D and Saw VII 3D in October?



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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 06 2010 at 4:21pm
Originally posted by GTAHater767

Do those bad-looking sequels include Jacka** 3D and Saw VII 3D in October?


Or any of the other dozen movies coming out this year that end with the words "3-D" in the title so that Hollywood can surcharge the hell out of ticket prices? YEP!


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 12 2010 at 12:07pm
Don't worry on writin'"Spoiler alert".Let me guess...the two leads end up together.

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 12 2010 at 12:51pm
Originally posted by Vits

Don't worry on writin'"Spoiler alert".Let me guess...the two leads end up together.
No, Kristen Bell marries a lesbian! As M. Night would say, "WHAT A TWIST!".

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 12 2010 at 12:59pm

Come on,man!I didn't want to know.

And I don't think Night actually says that.


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 12 2010 at 2:01pm
Originally posted by Vits

Come on,man!I didn't want to know.
And I don't think Night actually says that.

I was kidding! And the M. Night saying "what a twist" is from "Robot Chicken".


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Mrs. Magnatech
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 12:26pm
I rented this, because I'm a masochist.
 
 
 
Personally, I think this is one of the worst movies I've seen that wasn't directed by Ed Wood. I didn't laugh a single time, and it's supposed to be a comedy. This is definite "Worst Picture" material, and I wholeheartedly disagree that Kristen Bell is one of Hollywood's prettiest and most talented actresses! She looks beady-eyed and anorexic, and isn't even talented to pull off a nothing role that requires zero acting ability. Worst actress, here she comes!


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 1:55pm
Originally posted by Mrs. Magnatech

Personally, I think this is one of the worst movies I've seen that wasn't directed by Ed Wood. I didn't laugh a single time, and it's supposed to be a comedy. This is definite "Worst Picture" material, and I wholeheartedly disagree that Kristen Bell is one of Hollywood's prettiest and most talented actresses! She looks beady-eyed and anorexic, and isn't even talented to pull off a nothing role that requires zero acting ability. Worst actress, here she comes!
Wow, and people say I'm too hard on Hollywood's s*** products as of late. But yeah, the movie falls apart with the idea that somehow Bell can't attract men. Had the movie starred the horse-faced Sarah Jessica Parker, it would have made more sense. However, SJP was too busy trying to milk "Sex And The City" for all it's worth.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: lastmoviecritic
Date Posted: July 20 2010 at 8:20pm
This is the worst film of the year so far! I saw Jonah Hex & Airbender, but this lands belows them. I keep a list of films, out of the 110 I've seen, this is #110! We'll see if anything is worse, but I doubt it.

The script is so corny with awful dialogue. I literally didn't laugh once at this. During the whole pitch-black restaurant scene, I was thinking, "Who the hell gave this the green flag!?"

I thought All About Steve was the worst rom-com ever made...then I saw this!

-------------
Ryan Walter Blair, lastmoviecritic.com, LLC


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 20 2010 at 8:49pm
Originally posted by lastmoviecritic

This is the worst film of the year so far! I saw Jonah Hex & Airbender, but this lands belows them. I keep a list of films, out of the 110 I've seen, this is #110! We'll see if anything is worse, but I doubt it.

The script is so corny with awful dialogue. I literally didn't laugh once at this. During the whole pitch-black restaurant scene, I was thinking, "Who the hell gave this the green flag!?"

I thought All About Steve was the worst rom-com ever made...then I saw this!
Worst than "Fartbender"?! Talk about hitting below the belt with a biting insult!

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: July 20 2010 at 11:59pm
Usually, I count up the tallies as I prepare my Worst Of lists, but find out I need more movies. Should that happen this year, When In Rome will be next on my bad list.

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 21 2010 at 3:26pm
Originally posted by GTAHater767

Usually, I count up the tallies as I prepare my Worst Of lists, but find out I need more movies. Should that happen this year, When In Rome will be next on my bad list.
You should also watch the actual movies rather than just list them in order. I don't want you to be like certain other posters here who just list movies for the fun of it.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: July 21 2010 at 4:17pm
I see bits and pieces of many of the Worst movies, but the main focus is the Best of lists. Those are what I have in my Netflix queue. All in all, you and The Other Awards often call out the correct bad and good movies. If I should see one Worst Picture bottom-five movie in its entirety, which two would you recommend next? (One from 2000 or after, and one from 1999 and before)

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 21 2010 at 5:54pm
Originally posted by GTAHater767

I see bits and pieces of many of the Worst movies, but the main focus is the Best of lists. Those are what I have in my Netflix queue. All in all, you and The Other Awards often call out the correct bad and good movies. If I should see one Worst Picture bottom-five movie in its entirety, which two would you recommend next? (One from 2000 or after, and one from 1999 and before)
Watch a Razzie movie in it's entirety? Boy, that's a tough one, not just to choose, but to watch. Personally, I think "Battlefield Earth" is the worst from 2000, with "Catwoman" being among the worst after 2000. For 1999, the worst would have to be "Wild, Wild West", with "Batman & Robin" being the worst from before 1999. Was that what you were asking of me?

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: July 21 2010 at 9:57pm
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Originally posted by GTAHater767

I see bits and pieces of many of the Worst movies, but the main focus is the Best of lists. Those are what I have in my Netflix queue. All in all, you and The Other Awards often call out the correct bad and good movies. If I should see one Worst Picture bottom-five movie in its entirety, which two would you recommend next? (One from 2000 or after, and one from 1999 and before)
Watch a Razzie movie in it's entirety? Boy, that's a tough one, not just to choose, but to watch. Personally, I think "Battlefield Earth" is the worst from 2000, with "Catwoman" being among the worst after 2000. For 1999, the worst would have to be "Wild, Wild West", with "Batman & Robin" being the worst from before 1999. Was that what you were asking of me?
 
I worded my question wrong. I should've said... one movie from before January 1, 2000, and one from after that date.


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


Posted By: lastmoviecritic
Date Posted: July 21 2010 at 11:06pm
It was worse than Airbender, only by a little of course. There were two films worse than Shyamalan's family-friendly flop. Jonah Hex & this one, but that's it.

-------------
Ryan Walter Blair, lastmoviecritic.com, LLC


Posted By: lastmoviecritic
Date Posted: August 23 2010 at 8:21pm
Um, BurnHollywoodBurn, are you saying that I just list movies for the fun of it?! Because I am dedicated to my list and I see everything on the list through their entirety, no matter how awful they are!

-------------
Ryan Walter Blair, lastmoviecritic.com, LLC


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: August 23 2010 at 8:39pm
Originally posted by lastmoviecritic

Um, BurnHollywoodBurn, are you saying that I just list movies for the fun of it?! Because I am dedicated to my list and I see everything on the list through their entirety, no matter how awful they are!
Have I said such I thing to you? I don't recall. But it is good that you do see the movies you list as the worst, rather than just making lists up just for the sake of it.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 10:10pm
Let me address several posts at the beginning of this thread.  The plot isn't about Kristin Bell throwing a coin into a fountain in order for guys to fall in love with her.  No.
 
SPOILER ALERT
 
And I have no problem spoiling the spoiled. . .
 
The plot is about:
Beth, a New York art curator played by Kristin Bell, who is in love with her job, and who must find someone she loves more than her job before she would marry, going to Italy to be at her little sister's wedding when she should be working the kinks out of getting a rare artpiece to the Guggenheim for a fundraising exhibit, finding Nick Beamon, a handsome klutz of a sportswriter played by Josh Duhamel, and she falls in love with him and he with her, and they get separated, but she spots him and follows him outside where she sees him kissing a woman in a red dress, and instead of confronting him and sparing us any second more of this mostly unfunny movie (I confess, I did laugh four times), decides to hide the wine bottle, the wine glasses and herself from Nick's sight, and then goes to the fountain, and drinks half if not most of the bottle, and wades into the fountain completely snonkered, chews out the statue of Venus and picks up five coins - well, actually four coins and a poker chip - and voila, or whatever the expression is in Italian, the five guys fall in love with her and stalk her in every sense of the word as part of the curse of the fountain on anyone who takes its coins.
 
And yes, the rest of the movie is just as disjointed as that run-on sentence.
 
But, let's talk about what was good.  Now, despite Kristen Bell and Josh Duhamel being on the nominating ballot for worst actress and worst actor, they really did a fine job with the roles they were given and the disjointed script they had to smoothe out.  Of course, their respective agents should have taken that script and scribbled "REWRITE" on every page, but that opportunity is long gone.  And there was four times I did laugh, like when Beth tried to break the vase during her sister's wedding ceremony up until she bounced it into the groom's mother, or when the four stalkers drive Beth into an elevator in the Guggenheim in a small car and Beth asks the elevator operator to take them to the fifth floor.  It seemed well-filmed, too, so give a thumbs up to the cinematographer, and the studio didn't feel compelled to convert this movie into 3-D. . . .
 
Okay, I'm stretching things out.  That's about it for the good stuff.  When in Rome is a movie that lurches from one direction to another to another, and although there are certain times it tries to be a romantic rom, it fails with each lurch.  As for the comedic com, it is too few and far between, filled with many unfunny sequences such as the restaurant in the dark sequence where Nick takes Beth for dinner when the four stalkers show up with night vision glasses.  Or how about Beth's three so-called friends at the beginning of the movie, letting her ramble on about her ex when her ex is standing right there.  Or Nick, who as a teenage football player was struck by lightning, running through New York in a lightning storm trying to get back with Beth who forgot he was in love with her BEFORE she picked up the poker chip. . . .
 
The worst?  Danny DeVito.  I mean, he performed his character Al as written.  But that's the problem.  It was a horrible character.  All the guys who fell in love with Beth when she picked up those coins were horrible characters.
 
So, what, you're telling me that the characters were SUPPOSED to be horrible?  You're sounding like Sandra Bullock during her acceptance speech last year.  Let me tell you something about horrible characters.  In every horrible character, even in the villains, the audience wants to like them, to identify with them, if only to like them as horrible characters if not anything else.  If your character is so horrible that the audience doesn't like them, doesn't want to watch them, doesn't want anything to do with them, then why are you putting that character up on the screen.  Like I said earlier, "REWRITE!"
 
So, it was unnerving seeing Danny DeVito, with all his talent, portray a character that was beneath him.  Bless his heart, he did himself no favors doing this movie except to collect a paycheck.  Not to overdo the Get Shorty part, but DeVito is a great actor, and so I don't like it when he isn't in a great role.
 
And that whole bit about Beth's ex breaking up with her in Applebees.  Does it really matter that he did it in Applebees?  Is that supposed to be funny?  I guess so, because it kept coming up in the first 15 minutes.
 
And one last thing - stalking.  I've seen a lot of stalking portrayed in a number of films, such as Superman Returns or Good Luck Chuck or Management or When in Rome.  It doesn't matter that the character in question has x-ray vision or is under a fountain curse.  It's not good.  It certainly isn't funny.  It's creepy.  It's humiliating.  It's invasive.  Portray it for what it is.
 
Oh, and yes, there is a flashback.  Remember that Nick was struck in lightning at a football game.  The director felt compelled to show it to us. 
 
I gave it three out of ten stars.  I must be feeling generous.
 
Razzie noms.  Razzie noms.  I wish Danny DeVito, Dax Shepard, Will Arnett and Jon Heder were nominated in the Worst Couple/Ensemble category as the Four Stalkers of the Apocalypse.  Worst Screenplay.  Worst Director for Mark Steven Johnson (who is also responsible for Ghost Rider and Daredevil - well, at least he put down his comic books long enough to try something different). 
 


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 8:50am
I'm pretty sure if this(or any)movie gets nominated for "Worst Ensemble" it would have to include the whole main cast.That includes Kristen and Josh.Are you okay with that?

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


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 11:59am
I'm okay with that, but it is very difficult for anything not already on the ballot to garner enough write-in votes to make the main ballot in January.  When in Rome isn't on the preliminary ballot for worst couple/ensemble.  Duhamel and Bell are on the ballot for Worst Actor and Actress, though, Duhamel being on there for both When in Rome and Life as We Know It.  But I also know that if HeadRAZZ decided the four stalkers should be "honored" all by themselves, that it can be done in a very humorous way.
 
And, yes, they were that bad.
 


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: August 28 2011 at 1:16pm
I just saw it.

It wasn't funny and there were way too many moments that were beyond the suspension of disbelief to the point where it was just false,like the fact BETH never calls the cops on the stalkers or asks for restraining orders.Some of you mentioned that you thought it was impossible that someone as pretty as Kristen Bell couldn't get a guy any other way.Of course this happens in a lot of movies,but in those I actually buy it when the character has flaws.Here,BETH is a very normal person.

Sorry to say this,but Kristen gave the weakest performance of them all.Jon Heder wasn't anything to discuss but I liked that he left his comfort zone.

I give it 3/10.


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



Print Page | Close Window