Print Page | Close Window

Sure, The RAZZIES® will REMEMBER You...

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: 31st Annual RAZZIE® Award Nominees & "WINNERS"
Forum Name: REMEMBER ME
Forum Discription: Nominated for WORST ACTOR / Robert Pattinson
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4197
Printed Date: April 19 2014 at 10:56pm


Topic: Sure, The RAZZIES® will REMEMBER You...
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: Sure, The RAZZIES® will REMEMBER You...
Date Posted: March 16 2010 at 8:56am
THE http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=rememberme.htm -
1)  IT'S NOT ROBERT PATTINSON WHO'S a BIG BOX OFFICE DRAW, IT's the CHARACTER HE PLAYS in THOSE TWITTY TWILIGHT MOVIES WHO IS... 

2)  21st CENTURY TEEN-AGERS (EVEN MOONING FEMALES) MAY NO LONGER CARE ABOUT TEEN-ANGST ROMANCES... 

3)  PITCHING SOMEONE LIKE PATTINSON as a "MODERN JAMES DEAN" (COMPARE the  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CvLZ1Oq6l4 - ME APART" MONOLOGUE in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E1QdvCC0Eg -
4)  2008 RAZZIE® "WINNER" PIERCE BROSNAN NEEDS a NEW AGENT (or a NEW PAIR of GLASSES!) to READ the SCRIPTS OFFERED to HIM... 

5)  BOTH PATTINSON and BROSNAN ARE LIKELY to "RANK" AMONG THOSE LISTED on THIS YEAR's http://razzies.com/join.asp - http://razzies.com/join.asp - http://razzies.com/join.asp - BROSNAN for SUPPORTING ACTOR)...  

NOW IT's YOUR TURN to PROVIDE OTHER POINTS REMEMBER ME (WHICH IS LIKELY to BE REMEMBERED ONLY by http://razzies.com/join.asp - http://razzies.com/join.asp - http://razzies.com/join.asp -
PATTINSON: "WOW! These reviews are even worse 
than the ones I got for NEW MOON, and I got a RAZZIE® 
Nomination for that..."  



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



Replies:
Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 16 2010 at 10:48am
Comparing Robert Patterson to James Dean is a crime against movie-dom and should be punishable by death!

-------------
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 16 2010 at 3:38pm
So,what's this movie about?I know I can just google it,but I prefer you "tellin'" me so I can also "hear" your opinions.All I know is the name of the 3 leads,and that R-Patz showers with Emilie DeRavin(yeah!)with their clothes on(no!).

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


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: March 16 2010 at 4:23pm

I'd love to say "rom com bomb" on this one, but it's just a "rom bomb" this time.

SPOILER (EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE TO LIVE IN A CAVE FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS NOT TO KNOW THIS)
 
Well, Vits, as to what this movie is about, according to the reviews I read on Rotten Tomatoes, it's a teenage angst movie with 9/11 for the ending.  That should be enough to tell you why everybody won't forget Remember Me when it comes time to nominate movies.
 


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 16 2010 at 4:41pm
Whoa!Did you just spoil the endin'?Why?

I just read Chris Cooper and Lena Olin are also in the movie.


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 16 2010 at 7:19pm
Ah, a love story that ends with 9/11. Yeah, that'll get people to throw down their $10.

-------------
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: JoeBoyden
Date Posted: March 16 2010 at 8:25pm
Originally posted by HeadRAZZBerry

5)  BOTH PATTINSON and BROSNAN ARE LIKELY to "RANK" AMONG THOSE LISTED on THIS YEAR's 31st ANNUAL RAZZIES® NOMINATING BALLOT (PATTINSON in WORST ACTOR and BROSNAN for SUPPORTING ACTOR)...

 
 
Seems very likely.
 
Emilie de Ravin also looks a little awkward in her role.


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: March 17 2010 at 12:18am
I feel Chris Cooper and Lena Olin are tremendous actors whose talents are squandered in this film.  I can only hope that they were paid very well for their efforts.
 
As for why did I "just spoil the endin'", well, a couple of the reviewers on Rotten Tomatoes have already done that, most of the rest of them have strongly implied what happens, and, if you're friends with people who go see movies in the theatres when they first come out (must be rich), then you've read the tweets.  Besides, I have no problem spoiling a spoiled movie.  This is a terrible plot device.  The movie would have been better served if what happened in the beginning happened in the end, giving it a predictable ending that works, which apparently is a step up from the rest of the movie.  So, what happened in the beginning?  There, I didn't spoil something for you,  http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1211619-remember_me/ - but only because you can read it for yourself in all the reviews .
 
However, since the bulk of the reviewers have exerted self-control above and beyond the call of duty (although in this case, I feel they've done their readers a disservice by sticking to the normal standards), I have added a heavily modified "SPOILER" alert on my previous post, just because you brought it up.
 
Originally posted by Vits

Whoa!Did you just spoil the endin'?Why?

I just read Chris Cooper and Lena Olin are also in the movie.
 


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 17 2010 at 8:24am
Thanks,but it doesn't matter now,'cuz they will still say that there is in fact a twist endin',and I'll spend the entire movie tryin'to figure out what it is,even if I don't want to.Of all of Shyamalan's movies, http://www.razzies.com/forum/lady-in-the-water_forum129.html - LADY IN THE WATER is the only one I guessed the twist.

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


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: March 17 2010 at 10:53am
But you already know the so-called twist ending.  It's what makes this movie suck.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 17 2010 at 11:11am
The twist ending has had its time in the spotlight, it's time for movies to move on. Now, adding surcharges for 3-D to the already bloated ticket prices, that's all the rage now!

-------------
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 17 2010 at 11:50am
No I don't.If you posted earlier,don'tell me. 

Originally posted by cvcjr13

But you already know the so-called twist ending.  It's what makes this movie suck.
 

I'm guessing you don't watch Miss DeRavin's show LOST.  

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

The twist ending has had its time in the spotlight, it's time for movies to move on. Now, adding surcharges for 3-D to the already bloated ticket prices, that's all the rage now!


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 17 2010 at 11:59am
I don't watch Miss DeRavin's show because from what I hear, if you didn't start watching it since the very first episode, "Lost" is what you will be.

-------------
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 17 2010 at 12:04pm
I said that'cuz most episodes of "Lost" have twist endings -- and they rock!

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


Posted By: dracy
Date Posted: April 29 2010 at 11:04am
The Twist ending is that you just sat through over 2 hours of Robert Patterson trying to act --  

WHAT A TWIST!!!!

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: April 29 2010 at 2:40pm
Originally posted by dracy

The Twist ending is that you just sat through over 2 hours of Robert Patterson trying to act --  

WHAT A TWIST!!!!
Nice one! Clap

-------------
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: TaRaN-RoD
Date Posted: July 20 2010 at 11:50am
What an awful movie, and Rob is so awful! Brosnan is terrible too! Honnestly, just a movie good for teenager-girls!  

I'm sure Hollywood will be tired of doing this kind of movie when they notice that nobody is interested in this kind of crap anymore!  


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 20 2010 at 1:31pm
Remember Me is a "success" because of the same reason "Titantic" was such a success ... because teenage girls flocked to it in groups on a daily basis so they could gaze at the male lead, in this case, the stick-thin, deadpan, bed-head that is "Edward." Oh yeah, and the shirtless werewolf guy, too. 

So unless you can find a way to keep teenager girls from being all horny over ugly, brooding guys, these movies will still be made... 


-------------
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: ziesha
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 1:41am
Hey, this is a nice Forum, and I wanted to add that, being a teenage girl, I also really liked "Twilight Saga: New Moon"...  



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


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: November 12 2010 at 5:34pm
Robert Pattinson was nominated for a People's Choice Award for "Favorite Movie Actor" for this film... 

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


Posted By: Web Design Company
Date Posted: December 02 2010 at 12:14pm
This is not such a good movie...it is pretty obvious...except for the twist ending, which is typical of many episodes of Lost (but from the latest episodes, not the first ones, which rocked!)... 

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




Posted By: baby_jane_2012
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 10:35am
I think it's a wonderful movie...and I'm not a teenager.


Posted By: gabi
Date Posted: January 08 2011 at 3:26pm
Remember Me left me with this feeling of wanting to go home and hug my family, because tomorrow it can be to late. The Movie was heartfelt and the Actors were all convincing in their parts. That this Movie is even acknowledged  is only because of Rob..otherwise it would have slipped under the Radar like many others. There were over 500 Movies released in 2010 and the one where Rob has a leading Role is the one you critics and Haters discuss and slam..give me a break!

The Worst Actor Razzie should go to Johnny Depp in "the Tourist" -- that really sucked!  


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


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 08 2011 at 8:17pm
I'm sorry, but any creaky romantic movie that relies on 9/11 as a major plot point to bring the whole story full circle automatically deserves Razzie scrutiny, Robert Pattinson or no Robert Pattinson.  The same went for last year's What Goes Up using the space shuttle Challenger disaster.  These events are still too sore for many (if not most) of us to deal with, and should not be cheapened by some knothead who can't think (emphasis on can't) of an appropriate bookend to a story that starts with the mother getting shot (How about the boyfriend getting shot?  Oh, wow, such inspiration!).


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


Posted By: kat
Date Posted: January 24 2011 at 9:52am

Actually what brings the plot around full circle is Ally getting back on the train for what may be the first time after her mother's murder.

Image of Ally's mother as the film focuses in for the first shot.......ghostly image of her mother when Ally is on the subway car
Ally on the subway platform............Ally on the subway platform
Neil picks up Ally and carrys her down the stairs.......Neil and Ally hug after 9/11
 
And while I don't disagree that the subject may be sore for some people, you are way off base for stating it's many or all.  This film resonates with the common movie viewer.  Among the rankings is a 7.1 out of 10 on IMDb.  And that is pretty much constistant across age and gender demographics. 
 
Remember Me was not written from beginning to end.  The writer started with Tyler's death on 9/11 as a response to reading the Portraits of Grief.   So, you really can't tack on what you start with, can you.
 


 


Posted By: 27years
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 5:48am
I can not believe that people have the audacity to say that Robert Pattinson can not act after seeing this film. I would suggest that a lot of people had their minds made up even before seeing the movie that he was going to be awful because they don't like Twilight or the character he plays in it including you Headrazz. Is there room for improvement there? Yes, particularly in a few scenes but he is a million miles away from being awful and is improving. Overall he played his character well. 
Allow me to quote Mr. Roger Ebert (who is often quoted here when emphasising the bad...but ignored when he says something good.....interesting!). He said it was "well-acted".
He also said "The fact is, "Remember Me" is a well-made movie. I cared about the characters. I felt for them. "

For me it conveyed its message very nicely. I believed the characters stories and did feel invested in their outcomes.
To the people who are overly sensitive about the ending. I understand that it was an awful real event that affected a lot of people gravely but real people have similar stories in real life to the one at the end of the movie. Why not tell it?


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 10:57am
27Years, in the end, people saw this movie as "same old, same old" from Pattinson. Pout, brood, rinse, report. Just give it up and admit that a very large percentage of people just plain don't like Pattinson. I know you feel it's unjust, but much like Vits or MWG with their love of all things M. Night, you need to accept the fact that you are of a minority.

-------------
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: 27years
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 11:54am
Yes I'm very probably in a minority here Burn but I think there is no harm in trying to point out peoples prejudices and malevolence. He did so much more in this movie than a lot of people give him even the slightest bit of credit for and that kind of pisses me off. Even the people that do give him credit like Mr Ebert get ignored. I think if this role had been played the exact same way by someone like Ryan Gosling or James Franco there would be high praise for them. Yes it may be a bit pouty and broody but thats not the point. The point is he did it pretty well yet some people just refuse to see that. 


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 4:27pm
Well, I'm sorry about people's "prejudices and malevolence", but as I have stated before, people are critical by nature and if they strongly dislike something, they are not going to sit there with a fake smile and say "Oh, that was so good". That's just the way it is. If you don't want to be faced with negative movie reviews, then simply don't get into the movie business in the first place, because you can never avoid bad reviews.
 
Now, I know you think Pattinson has talent, and for all we know, he does. HOWEVER, judging from the six or so movies that he has appeared in here in America, he hasn't proven anything yet besides perfecting the art of playing the token brooding guy. Gosling and Franco have proven themseleves with great emotional and complex roles, and as a result have Oscar nods to their credits. I bet if either one of them had gotten the role, they would have played it DRAMATICALLY different than what Pattinson did. The day Pattinson stars in something groundbreaking and gives a performance that blows everyone away, I will be the first to admit he has talent. But until that day, he is just the go-to guy if your movie calls for a brooding prettyboy.


-------------
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: 27years
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 6:47pm
In my opinion what someone has done before shouldnt be what people judge on. They should go by what they actually see in this movie. If people were to just focus on his acting in this movie and not just complain that he has played a broody character before and is Edward Cullen, they might see that he did a good job in this movie. He played the character well, which actually required more than brooding, and did it convincingly showing me that he has talent. Some people are just too blinded by Twilight obsession to see it. Infact I think this was a smart role choice for him as it allowed him to be a bit comfortable in what he was doing while also pushing himself to go a bit further than before. 
As for if Gosling or Franco would bring something more to this particular character, maybe, given their experience, but I wouldnt think it would be all that different. It doesnt take from the fact that he did a good job with this. Like I said before there probably is room for improvement but I like to give credit where it is due and I think it is due here.
Even if people think the brooding role is what he has perfected for now, thats pretty commendable in itself (especially in this role),  and he really is just beginning to test the waters out there so who knows what he might perfect next. 


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 18 2011 at 9:33pm
Sorry, but saying that Gosling and Franco can't out-act Pattinson is like saying Marlon Brando couldn't out-act Keenu Reeves! Goslin and Franco have shown great range in both emotion and roles, something Pattinson has yet to do. Goslin has played everything from a Neo-Nazi to a school teacher with a drug addiction, to a socially awkward man who falls in love with a sex doll. Franco has played everything from a super villain, to a pot head, to a doomed mountain climber, to James Dean. And neither actor played those roles the same way.
 
Pattinson has played the brooding prettyboy who is a vampire, the brooding prettyboy who needs a life coach, the brooding prettyboy during 9/11, etc. You call that range? Sorry, but this movie didn't prove ANYTHING about his acting talent, and if you think otherwise, wow, you're easily swayed.


-------------
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: 27years
Date Posted: February 19 2011 at 9:15am
The point I'm making is this. Just focusing on his acting in this movie and not taking anything else into consideration. He did a good job.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 19 2011 at 3:40pm
Originally posted by 27years

The point I'm making is this. Just focusing on his acting in this movie and not taking anything else into consideration. He did a good job.
Even by just this movie's standards, he didn't anything all that impressive, other than showing a facial expression besides pouting for the very first time.

-------------
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: 27years
Date Posted: February 19 2011 at 6:53pm
You're still bringing other things in to the equation when you say he showed a facial expression besides pouting for once. Looking at this movie alone, he did everything this character required of him and did it well. What would you have him do differently in this role?
I'm not looking for miracles here. I'm not saying it was the most amazing thing ever, just that it was good and most certainly not bad.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 19 2011 at 8:57pm
Originally posted by 27years

You're still bringing other things in to the equation when you say he showed a facial expression besides pouting for once. Looking at this movie alone, he did everything this character required of him and did it well. What would you have him do differently in this role?
I'm not looking for miracles here. I'm not saying it was the most amazing thing ever, just that it was good and most certainly not bad.
The fact being that you're defending him even though you admit that he didn't do anything all that impressive. He only "did what was required of him and did it well". That's all fine and dandy, but that's not going to get his critics off his case. This role wasn't going to change anyone's opinion of him. Perhaps his next non-Twilight movie will, but I wouldn't count on 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: 27years
Date Posted: February 20 2011 at 9:53am
Okay plain and simple do you think he did a bad job playing this character?


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 20 2011 at 11:42am
Originally posted by 27years

Okay plain and simple do you think he did a bad job playing this character?
"Okay, plain, and simple" would be how I would describe how he played his character. If his role in "Twilight" were taken away, and I was judging him on this performance alone, I wouldn't be thinking "Wow, now there's a future star right there". I would be thinking "Eh, nothing to get excited about, but not Paris Hilton bad either. He needs some work before getting a star making role". So an "okay" performance is nothing worthy of defending.

-------------
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: 27years
Date Posted: February 20 2011 at 1:00pm
The reason its worth defending is that a lot of people just jump on the anti-Rob bandwagon and describe his acting as awful when in fact it wasnt awful at all. 

I actually think your analysis in the last post is a much more objective and credible synopsis than some I've seen from people.
I still maintain he did exactly what was needed for the character but perhaps the character itself isnt strong enough for people to really take him seriously yet. But like I say its early days for him and I wouldnt write him off just yet.



Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 20 2011 at 9:14pm
Originally posted by 27years

The reason its worth defending is that a lot of people just jump on the anti-Rob bandwagon and describe his acting as awful when in fact it wasnt awful at all. 
I mean why bother defending him when his performance did nothing to prove his critics wrong? Now if he gave an amazing, unforgettable performance and critics are still ripping him apart, THEN you should be defending it. But giving an "okay, plain, or simple" performance is not going to silence his critics any time soon, and defending such a performance kinda makes you come across as defending him out of pity.


-------------
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: 27years
Date Posted: February 21 2011 at 8:53am
I defend him out of decency not pity. "Okay, plain or simple" are your words for describing his performance not mine. I have always maintained that he did a really good job with this. But at least you attempted to critique it in an unbiased manner (a few posts ago) and looked at his performance in this movie alone and agreed it wasnt bad. I believe a lot of people don't do that as they are clinging to their Edward feelings which is their error and in the case of actual critics unprofessional in my eyes.
I personally don't care that he may of had to be a bit broody in this movie too. I think if an actor wants to play a certain character thats up to them. Perhaps if this was still happening years later I might think, oh I wonder if he can play something else for a change. I think it is premature to put him in him a box, label it, and be reluctant and stubborn about taking him out of it. But thats just me. 
Out of curiosity, what do you think he could have done to give a better performance in this particular role? What would take it from okay to really good in your eyes?


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 21 2011 at 11:49am
Originally posted by 27years

Out of curiosity, what do you think he could have done to give a better performance in this particular role? What would take it from okay to really good in your eyes?
Frankly, I think he should have turned down this role all together. He needs to have a serious sit-down talk with his agent and say "Look, no more broody prettyboy roles, okay? I'll do that for "Twilight", but once I'm done with those, I'd like to do other things".

-------------
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: merisa
Date Posted: January 19 2012 at 7:13am
Yes, I remember ROBERT PATTINSON in his the best role: TWILIGHT!  I love him in it! = )  




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



Print Page | Close Window