Print Page | Close Window

An Ill Wind BLOWS...

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: 31st Annual RAZZIE® Award Nominees & "WINNERS"
Forum Name: THE LAST AIR-BENDER
Forum Discription: "WINNER" of 5 RAZZIES® including WORST PICTURE (Nominated for 9)
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4398
Printed Date: September 19 2014 at 11:18pm


Topic: An Ill Wind BLOWS...
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: An Ill Wind BLOWS...
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 7:37am
BEFORE IT OPENED, WE WERE KINDA SECRETLY HOPING THAT THIS WOULD NOT BE the LAST NAIL in the CAREER COFFIN of http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=M.+Night+Shyamalan&btnG=Search+Razzies.com&domains=razzies.com&sitesearch=razzies.com -
TURNS OUT the STUDIO'S CLAIM of ADVANCE, FAVORABLE WORD-of-MOUTH (SUPPOSEDLY BASED on a SOLIDLY SUCCESSFUL PREVIEW SCREENING) for http://www.razzies.com/forum/the-last-airbender_forum446.html%20 -  COULDN'T SAVE THIS ONE from the FATE of ITS RAZZIE® NOMINATED PREDECESSORS http://www.razzies.com/forum/a-truly-drippy-thriller_topic1159.html - http://www.razzies.com/forum/the-vampire-albino-clown-vs-the-shirtless-werewolf_topic4372.html - http://www.razzies.com/forum/cgi-krakens-no-thanx_topic4217.html -
TAKEN in ALL, http://www.razzies.com/forum/cast-crew-for-last-airblender_topic4394.html -
OKAY FOLKS, TIME to SAY 'NIGHTY-NIGHT' to M. NIGHT's CAREER...



"That's right -- they DID call me 'Arrowhead' when I 
was in kindergarten, but I showed them all by mastering 
the ancient art of Air-Bending. FEAR ME -- For I have the 
power... to actually FART around corners!!"  



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



Replies:
Posted By: nyfilmfest
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 8:00am

We have a winner (and by "Winner", I mean Loser). 

The worst film of 2010 is here! 

BeerPartyBeerPartyBeerPartyBeerPartyBeerPartyBeerPartyBeerPartyBeerPartyBeerPartyBeerParty

IT'S A FARTY IN THE USA!!


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


Posted By: rburton
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 8:08am


Wacko "I'M NO LONGER THE POOPIEST THING OF 2010!" Dead


-------------
For Your Consideration

Dev Patel for WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR in The Last Fartbender


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 10:58am
Wow... Just... Wow... It's getting lower reviews than Grown-Ups? Really? I have a very hard time believing that it's that bad. I hadn't necessarily planned on seeing it, but I was guessing it would be high 50's, low 60's. Instead, it sounds like it's the kiddy version of Mortal Kombat: Annihilation... I dunno, I feel like I might have to give it a chance. I might wanna call shenanigans on this one.

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


Posted By: nyfilmfest
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 11:52am
I doubt your silly hunch is going to prove all of those reviewers combined wrong, but at least you will be performing your due diligence as a Razzie voter by seeing this  turd! 

Ying Yang

Sleepy


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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 1:27pm
I have a hard time believing the reviews' negativity as well. If I watch the film, it'll be to see how bad it is. Let's hope a reboot comes five years later.


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


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 2:15pm
M. Nut Shamalamadingdong tries to do something different...and it still sucks. Let's face it: This guy was a one hit wonder (and I still think The Sixth Sense was one of the most wildly overrated movies of the past 20 years). Quick...somebody post a tombstone for M. Nut's career over on that thread where we used to do that.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 2:28pm
Here is the "Ouch, that really stings! Award" winning remark for this film:
 

It is so bad that not only could Uwe Boll make a better movie than Shyamalan has done here, he already has.

 
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/author/author-8249/ - Peter Sobczynski
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/source-141/ - eFilmCritic.com


-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: Berrynoia
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 2:58pm
A claim of an "advance positive word of mouth" for what turns out to be a disaster?   http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CollectiveGroan - WHAT A TWIST!  

Also, HeadRAZZberry, you know how you complained that the Twilight films don't "win" Razzies?  This is a perfect example of why Twilight averts our spray-painted dis-Honors. 

And given the way things work in Hollywood, I wonder if Seltzerberg is going to "parody" Last Fartbender in Vampires Suck.  Given that Disaster movie had little to do with disasters, Vampires Suck just might, given the hopes people had for Fartbender.


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 5:42pm
Ah, MWG -- you gotta love this kid and his constant hoping for better movies in the future. Yeah, if they don't get it right the first time, they are not going to get it right the second time around either ... unless it's made by Chris Nolan, who can turn any piece of s*** into gold.

-------------
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: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 5:43pm
Not to come across as being immature, but yeah -- I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks the title "Airbender" is a way-too-easy set-up for fart jokes!

-------------
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: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 01 2010 at 5:46pm
Yeah, that sounds like an easy, immature joke that Seltzerberg would work into their "movie", so of course it's going to be in it.  

Originally posted by Berrynoia


And given the way things work in Hollywood, I wonder if Seltzerberg is going to "parody" Last Fartbender in Vampires Suck.


-------------
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: July 02 2010 at 8:34am
No-- They only parody movies that were already out at the time they wrote their script. I may be wrong, but I think their movie is already in post-production.  

Originally posted by Berrynoia

And given the way things work in Hollywood, I wonder if Seltzerberg is going to "parody" Last Fartbender in Vampires Suck.  Given that Disaster movie had little to do with disasters, Vampires Suck just might, given the hopes people had for Fartbender.


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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 10:30am
Here's a good review for the film: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/1849-The-Last-Airbender - http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/1849-The-Last-Airbender
Maybe I should watch it?


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 11:05am
There you go again, MWG, with your "ONE guy liked it, so I should overlook the other TWO HUNDRED negative reviews*" theory.  

Here's another review from an actual fan of the cartoon series, and he's none too happy about what he saw. (Warning: f-bombs are dropped, and dropped often).
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoiZbwDClc4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoiZbwDClc4
 
(*Or if you want the actual numbers, 9 "good" reviews and 90 negative reviews, at the time of this posting)  


-------------
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: rburton
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 2:12pm
When you vote for Dev Patel for Worst Supporting Actor, remember those kids diving into a pile of poop in Slumdog Millionaire.  Patel clearly only signs onto projects that are loaded with fecal matter.


-------------
For Your Consideration

Dev Patel for WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR in The Last Fartbender


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 2:12pm
Ok, MWG, I'm going to try to put this into some sort of perspective for you. Suppose there is a major earthquake somewhere, and a building collapses. When it happens, there are 100 people in the building; 91 of them are seriously injured, while 9 of them somehow miraculously escape injury. Who's word are you more likely to take as to how terrible the experience really was? One of the 90 people who were badly hurt, or one of the 9 that escaped injury?

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 2:23pm
As much as your comparison makes sense, Saturnwatcher, I think MWG is the kind of person who, when he has his mind set on doing something, is going to do it no matter how many people suggest he shouldn't. If the kid wants to be caught in the middle of an earthquake, he's going to go out of his way to get caught in the middle of the earthquake ... and then say what a great experience it was!

-------------
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: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 7:02pm
Okay...this should be the Razzie nomination clinching review line:
 

"Battlefield Earth" has a new rival for the title of "worst-film-of-the-last-20-years."

http://beta.rottentomatoes.com/author/author-3041/ - Cole Smithey
http://beta.rottentomatoes.com/source-1702/ - ColeSmithey.com


-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 7:12pm
And yet, MWG will STILL go to see it, and STILL give it 6 out 10 stars because he so desperately wants to like this movie, and we all know he's willing to lower his movie standards as quickly as a goverment official will accept money from a bank lobbyist.  
 
Seriously, I know we're not expecting much from "Expendables", but I'm starting to doubt that even it will get reviews WORSE than this! 


-------------
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: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 7:14pm
Sly Stallone should already be filling out "Thank You" cards and sending them to M. Nut Shamalamadingdong and Adam Sandler.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 7:17pm
Yeah, Sly's probably reading the reviews on this even as we speak, and thinking "Damn, could I have timed the release of my movie any more perfectly?!".

-------------
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: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 7:36pm
Well, we'll see how that works out for him...last in time, first in memory.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 7:39pm
Don't forget ... first movie to go out on DVD or PPV around voting time = easier access to Razzie voters who don't want to pay theater prices, or who just need a little reminder.

-------------
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: July 02 2010 at 8:20pm
BHB -- Maybe you should watch the review I posted the link to -- It was negative!


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:23pm
Yeah, I know, that's why I showed it to you! If that's a die-hard fan's opinion, do you still think you need to run out and pay money to see this s*** ... or is that ONE "good" review really THAT convincing?


-------------
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: July 02 2010 at 8:26pm
Ok. You guys are real assholes! Maybe give the review a watch before you assume such idiotic things. The review I posted said the film was BAD. Jesus, if you guys can take the time to WATCH the freaking review, then you wouldn't have to waste your time making up a metaphor about a majority opinion and say that this reviewer liked the movie when it's exactly the opposite! This is beyond ridiculous!  

OMG! I'm tearing my hair out of my head! NEWS FLASH: The review I posted WAS NEGATIVE!!!!!!!! HOW MUCH CLEARER CAN I NOT GET?!

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Yo, MWG -- Please refrain from using terms like "assholes" -- That's not going to convince anyone of anything, and only makes you look more foolish than the people you think you're insulting. Your input and opinions are of course welcome here, but some degree of civility needs to be maintained...  


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


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:32pm
YOUR post...n'est pas?  

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Here's a good review for the film: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/1849-The-Last-Airbender - http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/1849-The-Last-Airbender
Maybe I should watch it?


-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:34pm
If you just watch the freaking video review, it'll make a LOT of sense of why I said, "Maybe I should watch it?" Just really, watch the video. It's about 6 minutes long...  


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:36pm
Yeah, not a very clear post if you ask me. "Here's a GOOD review for "it", Maybe I should watch "it". Yeah, I agree with your last statment: "how much more clear can I NOT be"?
 
Careful, everyone, moviewizguy's angry! moviewizguy SMASH PUNY CRITICS!


-------------
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: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:38pm
How about this: NO. I'm probably going to have to watch this crummy movie sooner or later anyway, because the OVERWHELMING consensus of the critics is that it is not only a piece of crap, it may just be a bad enough piece of crap to drive a stake through the heart of M. Nut's career. That means it is probably bad enough to garner lots of nominations here, too....so...no thank you.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:39pm
Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to judge. When I said, "Here's a good review," I can tell you're assuming that it's a positive one. However, when I said "good," I meant, "Look how well written (or, in this case, well spoken) this review is!" And when I said, "Maybe I should watch this," then you should probably see the video to fully understand my response.  


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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:42pm
So why did you make a whole analogy for me about telling me to not see the film when you are (eventually) going to see it? It's not fair, now is it? The video review said the movie is bad, filled with too many characters, locations, sets, etc but then it also tells the viewers to go see the film, which is difficult to explain to you why unless you watch the video. 

But, then again, you aren't willing to watch the video so I see us standing at a dead end right now unless you make a move. You need to meet me halfway here.


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:45pm
MWG -- Maybe, just maybe, what you should written was "this is a well written review." And in the end, it's STILL ONE good (if you can even call that "good") review vs. nearly 100 bad reviews.  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: BHB, methinks you're carping on a point MWG has repeatedly tried to clarify -- apparently with little or no success -- that he never even made. MWG was not defending the movie, but rather the specific review of it, which he has endlessly pointed out is not a positive review...  


-------------
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: July 02 2010 at 8:48pm
Or maybe, just maybe, you should finally see the video I posted. And no, in the end, it's still a negative review. It's a really negative review if you watch it (but I know you won't for some odd reason). It even went so far as to say M. Night's previous three films were some of the worst films of the decade. Yes. It IS negative -- There's no debate on that... 


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:49pm
Not that I speak on saturnwatcher's behalf, but we (Razzies voters) and you (armchair critic) are going to watch this movie for VERY different reasons. We (Razzies voters) are going to watch it for a good laugh and see if it really is the worst movie of the year, so that we can vote for it in as many catagories as possible. You (armchair critic) will watch it because it was made by your hero and role model and you are trying your hardest to convince yourself that it is a good movie, even though hundreds of professional critics are saying otherwise. 

Have we met you halfway yet?


-------------
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: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:51pm
OK, I watched it --and it said funny, negative things about the movie ... but ended on a good note. That's not a negative review to me. Now, if he said it was on par with "Battlefield Earth" and that it will mark the end of M. Night's career, like other reviews have, then yes, it would indeed be a very negative review ... but it isn't.

-------------
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: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:51pm
Actually as a matter of "membership integrity," I don't think it is fair to vote for movies or performances I haven't seen. The difference between myself and MWG being that I am not going out of my way to see it simply as a fan of Shyamalan. And for that matter, I won't actually put much effort into seeing it...I'll just pull it up on PPV when the time comes.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 8:53pm
Have you met me halfway yet? Actually, no -- because I wanted you guys to watch the review in order to meet me halfway. And you're wrong by saying we have different reasons for watching the film. Really, it wasn't that long ago when I posted this: "I have a hard time believing the reviews' negativity as well. If I watch the film, it'll be to see how bad it is. Let's hope a reboot comes five years later."


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 02 2010 at 9:56pm
Yeah, we're still not meeting you halfway. We're only planning to see it just to laugh at it and consider it for Worst Picture (among other awards). 

And no, we're not hoping for a "reboot" ... EVER.


-------------
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: July 03 2010 at 2:53pm
The concensus has been made: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtaFsT0O_zY 

And here's something extra: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyGlA0le_cw


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


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: July 03 2010 at 6:24pm
I believe the penalty for Worst Picture is going to be much more dubious this year than usual (an exception is 2008, where I correctly guessed 4 out of 6 finalists). If The Expendables and Vampires Suck, and a few others get negative reviews this steep, it'll make up for all the previous films that got from 30%-59% at Rotten Tomatoes.

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 03 2010 at 6:36pm
Well, "Grown-Ups" is currently at 10% on RT, "Killers" is at 12%, and "Fartbender" is at 8%. I'm hoping "Vampire Suck" will put all of those numbers to shame! Come on, critics: 0%!  0%!!!  

-------------
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: rburton
Date Posted: July 04 2010 at 12:56am
All this Vampires Suck pre-hatred is so bizarre to me.  I did a Razzie crash course a few weeks back and watched a few dozen former nominees and "winners."  The stupidest use of nominations (and there were quite a few squandered selections) went to Meet the Spartans and Disaster Movie.  Yeah, those movies are totally, absolutely horrible.  But their references are instantly dated.  A decade from now, even people who saw them in their initial release won't get the jokes.  Future Razzie completists will understand why Xanadu or Battlefield Earth were considered rotten.  But they'll watch a 60-minute feature like Meet the Spartans, scratch their heads, and wonder why Razzie voters phoned it in that year.  Vampires Suck is designed to be awful.  Why not find something meant to be good that went awry?


-------------
For Your Consideration

Dev Patel for WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR in The Last Fartbender


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 04 2010 at 10:02am
I don't know, I always thought the Razzies were for the worst of the worst. "Seltzerberg" movies are are just epic failure on every level of filmmaking -- The kind of movies that after watching them, you're left in total shock and awe as you wonder "how the f*** did that piece of s*** get greenlit?". Anything Seltzerberg makes fits perfectly with that description.


-------------
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: thomsonmg2000
Date Posted: July 04 2010 at 5:33pm
Ahhh, another film I was counting on (the other was Jonah Hex) to redeem a struggling movie star (or director in this case) that ends up bombing with critics.

Damn you stylized trailers for bringing my hopes up!


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

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 04 2010 at 6:26pm
If they didn't get your hopes up, then they wouldn't be trailers, now would they?

-------------
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: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 04 2010 at 8:55pm
I've been making that case here for quite some time in campaigning against those sorts of movies whenever they are nominated. Further, I think that the attention they would get by "winning" Razzies only tends to inspire more of them. I think you are exactly correct...we should be going after well intentioned movies that are serious blowouts...not movies specifically designed to be bad.  

Originally posted by rburton

All this Vampires Suck pre-hatred is so bizarre to me.  I did a Razzie crash course a few weeks back and watched a few dozen former nominees and "winners."  The stupidest use of nominations (and there were quite a few squandered selections) went to Meet the Spartans and Disaster Movie.  Yeah, those movies are totally, absolutely horrible.  But their references are instantly dated.  A decade from now, even people who saw them in their initial release won't get the jokes.  Future Razzie completists will understand why Xanadu or Battlefield Earth were considered rotten.  But they'll watch a 60-minute feature like Meet the Spartans, scratch their heads, and wonder why Razzie voters phoned it in that year.  Vampires Suck is designed to be awful.  Why not find something meant to be good that went awry?


-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 05 2010 at 5:21am
And yet, "Meet The Spartans" and "Disaster Movie" got away scott-free, when they should have swept, but here we are two years later with another one of their "Movie Movies". So it's pretty much a damned if you do, damned if you don't when it comes to Seltzerberg.  

Originally posted by saturnwatcher

I've been making that case here for quite some time in campaigning againstthose sorts of movies whenever they are nominated. Further, I think that the attention they would get by "winning" Razzies only tends to inspire more of them.


-------------
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: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: July 05 2010 at 9:01am
Vampires Suck is indeed the big favorite to win Worst Picture because its makers (Seltzerberg) rely on flatulence and plagiarism for comedy.  Don't count The Last Airbender out though.  Two of the last three Worst Picture winners suffered from their own hype and The Last Airbender is suffering from its own hype as well.


Posted By: rburton
Date Posted: July 05 2010 at 12:04pm
I'm so glad to hear this argument (see below).  The best Razzie winners and nominees, by far, are Oscar bait gone wrong like 1992's Shining Through or 1995's The Scarlet Letter.  There's nothing funnier than that kind of epic misfire.  Rather than just being intentionally stupid and capitalizing on fads like Vampires Suck, those movies aimed to be timeless classics and ended up making critics and audiences sick.  I'm all for well-intentioned comedies getting their just desserts, but I think it's getting a tad lazy going after ones that were never intended to be good.

The Last Airbender is the sort of deserving production, having been adapted from a well-received TV show, directed by former prodigy and Oscar nominee M. Night Shymalan, and starring Dev Patel of 2008's Best Picture winner.  

Originally posted by saturnwatcher

I've been making that case here for quite some time in campaigning against those sorts of movies whenever they are nominated. Further, I think that the attention they would get by "winning" Razzies only tends to inspire more of them. I think you are exactly correct...we should be going after well intentioned movies that have serious blowouts...not movies specifically designed to be bad.


-------------
For Your Consideration

Dev Patel for WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR in The Last Fartbender


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 05 2010 at 2:33pm
Yes, it might be fun to kick a movie when it's down when its intentions were good. But the movies that MUST be punished are the ones that give the movie business a bad name. The ones that scream "this was just a quick cash grab, done by a bunch of people with no talent whatsoever, while there are much more talented artists out there who can't get their feet in the door just because they don't know the right people". Yes, it might be considered "too easy" to poke fun at "Vampires Suck", but of the movies that will most likely get nods, it's the best example of what to show to a film class as what NOT to do once you're working in the business.

-------------
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 05 2010 at 5:12pm

I agree. A RAZZIE classic should serve as a big counterexample for prospective film cast & crew members. It all boils down to: BurnHollywoodBurn believes the studios think of RAZZIES as a bad thing flat-out, while rburton thinks that RAZZIES should be given to penalize good intentions instead; you cannot say that without saying RAZZIES have even the slightest hint of honor to them. If you said RAZZIE awards had absolutely no honor to them, why would the worst-intended filmmakers take them as any honor?



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


Posted By: Natendowii
Date Posted: July 07 2010 at 8:58am
I've gone through all the pages of this thread, and yet...no talk of the Horrendous casting of this film? C'mon, that was the ultimate sign to show us that this movie was going to suck! How many movies have we seen where the story takes place in an asian setting, yet the lead actors are white? We saw it in Street Fighter: Legend of Chun-li, and Dragonball Evolution. Frankly if anything, the casting director deserves as much blame as M. Night Shamalamadingdong.

-------------
"In every Age,
In Every Place,
The Deeds of Man,
Remain the same."-Yoshiki Tanaka


Posted By: rburton
Date Posted: July 07 2010 at 9:26am
Natendowii -- Your post above confirms my fear that my Dev Patel For Your Consideratrion posting may have gone unnoticed.  I will share it here...

Oh man, I'm relishing these reviews of Dev Patel or, as every reviewer in America is calling him, "that guy from Slumdog."  He's been terrible since he was a mere TV actor (where he belonged), but he's finally getting his just desserts.  Worst Supporting Actor is right up his alley. 

Here are some choice quotes: 

"Patel, who was passable at best in Slumdog Millionaire, is by far the worst, numbly making his way through one repetitive monologue after another..." 
- Todd Gilchrist, Cinematical 

"Dev Patel of Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire sleepwalks through the part of Ozai's prodigal son, Prince Zuko..." 
- Sean O’Connell, FilmCritic.com 

"...the acting overall is stilted - Patel in particular evidently can't play angry in convincing fashion..." 
Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic 



Jai ho, loser!!!


-------------
For Your Consideration

Dev Patel for WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR in The Last Fartbender


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 07 2010 at 11:55am
Given the fact that Shama-lama-ding-dong is of Indian decent, no doubt it was HIS idea to make the fire tribe Indian, when in the cartoon, they are also Asian (Chinese or Japanese). It's not really the casting director's fault if he's just following orders. I read these choices in casting caused boycotts among movie goers in some states.  
 
And yeah, "Dragonball" was dumb as hell for having only two Asians in a movie based on a cartoon from Japan. Bruce Lee was Asian, yet that didn't stop people from loving his movies. Funny, for Oscar bait like "Memoires of a Geisha", they were able to have an all Asian cast, but they can't do the same for a half-assed adaptation of a Japanese anime. Go figure! 
 
Oh yeah, and we also have Keanu Reeves as Spike in his raping of "Cowboy Bebop" to look forward to. Come on, you stupid studio heads, the role of Spike is custom made for Sam Rockwell!


-------------
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: Mayhem5185
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 5:38pm
"I've been making that case here for quite some time in campaigning againstthose sorts of movies whenever they are nominated. Further, I think that the attention they would get by "winning" Razzies only tends to inspire more of them."

I've never been a fan of this argument because when you boil it all down, it comes down to not voting for it based on a MAYBE, a might have been. I would also make the counter-argument against the claim that by giving them a razzie it would inspire more bad movies, by saying that these movies are going to be made over and over anyways regardless of what they "Win". The only way it will stop is if people stop seeing them.

I can't think of an actual ligament reason why the movie movies shouldn't be razzed, these movies are lazy, made for a cheap buck, and lest we forget are some of the most skull-f**kingly piles of sh*t ever made. The "humor" in the trailer Vampie Sucks movie alone is so bad i don't think i could cringe any harder unless i saw my Mom in a bukake video. (Thank Greg Giraldo for that one)


Posted By: Mayhem5185
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 6:47pm
And BTW as far as this movie goes, i think this sums it up best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Goto10T3rrA -


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: July 09 2010 at 6:50pm
Not only do people have to stop seeing the "Movie" Movies, but everyone has to stop bankrolling Seltzer and Friedberg!  

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


Posted By: Mraspiringactor
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 8:24am
In my opinion while Dev overracts I'd rather see Jackson Rathbone and/or Nicola Peltz get the razzie.

-------------
Kevin Higgins.


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 2:53pm
The fact that the "Movie movies" are essentially made to be bad is precisely the point. It is one thing to celebrate legitimate attempts gone bad. It is quite another to reward an effort that is deliberately lousy. My suspicion is that if we ever do reward one of these movies, the celebrated co-directors are going to come out with a statement like, "Finally, someone got the point!"

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 4:59pm
Well, we need to keep in mind that this forum is like 1% of the voting Razzie members. A handful may agree that Razzing Seltzerberg is a mistake, however, for all we know, the other 650 members may think they are long overdue. We can guess all we want about who will be Razzed, but in the end, the final tally of the votes is what will decide the final outcome ... or HeadRazz will, since his is the final vote.

-------------
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: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 5:17pm
It's always impossible to predict how the full body of Razzie voters will swing, but if the past is any indication, most of them would rather vote for a well intentioned movie that went bad than a movie that is pretty much intended to be bad from the outset, as these "movie movies" seem to be. The guess here is that we'll all have the opportunity to cast a similar vote this year.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 5:28pm
Originally posted by saturnwatcher

It's always impossible to predict how the full body of Razzie voters will swing, but if the past is any indication, most of them would rather vote for a well intentioned movie that went bad than a movie that is pretty much intended to be bad from the outset, as these "movie movies" seem to be. The guess here is that we'll all have the opportunity to cast a similar vote this year.
If that's true, then "Fart-Bender" right here is a shoe-in!

-------------
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: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 5:48pm
Air Bender certainly has to be a strong contender, but Grown Ups is probably going to get some support and we still have The Expendables looming out there as well. There is also the possibility that something else is out there that hasn't caught our attention yet, so it's probably a bit early to make predictions

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: thomsonmg2000
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 7:09pm
While I think a Razzing of Seltzerberg is way long overdue, I actually wouldn't mind too much if Fartbender gets Razzed to death, even if it "wins" at the expense of a Seltzerberg film. This review really makes it sound as bad as Battlefield Earth:

http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/bt/aj/ajsreview/25242-the-last-airbender-angry-review

Plus, Shyamalan is also long overdue, he has been making dookie since Lady in the Water, released back in 2006.




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

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 11 2010 at 7:43pm
Shyamalan has already been razzed in the past for "LitW" as Worst Supporting Actor and I think Worst Director. The only reason why he didn't win anything for "The Happening" is because "Love Guru" was released that same year and apparently, Razzie voters thought "LG" was much worse by comparison. And that is hard to choose from -- a comedy that wasn't funny, or a drama that became one of the funniest accidental comedies ever. Not to mention TWO Uwe Boll movies and TWO Seltzerberg movies! Now that was an award race that probably came down to a photo finish!


-------------
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: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 12 2010 at 3:38pm
But looking back, as I explained in another section, how does this explain "Freddy Got Fingered"? This was clearly a bad movie that was never going to be funny, made for and by a man who was never funny, whose 15 minutes of fame lasted a year longer than it should have because he was dating Drew Berrymore. it took the top dishonors and the man himself showed up to accept the award, making even more of an @$$ of himself. Or is it this event that has triggered Razzie voters to vote in the way that you described ... for the movie with good intentions, but failed in evrey way? 
 
Originally posted by saturnwatcher

It's always impossible to predict how the full body of Razzie voters will swing, but if the past is any indication, most of them would rather vote for a well intentioned movie that went bad than a movie that is pretty much intended to be bad from the outset, as these "movie movies" seem to be. The guess here is that we'll all have the opportunity to cast a similar vote this year.


-------------
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: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 13 2010 at 3:17pm

Burn, my skin was just set crawling. I always think about a very young Drew Barrymore in the film E.T. asking, "Is it a boy or a girl?" Evidently that sort of curiousity remained with her well past her childhood, and that is the only explanation I've ever been able to offer myself whenever I think about her in situ with Tom Green. 

In any event, I don't think the phenomenon of FGF is that difficult to explain. Somebody out there thought the guy was funny, and that piece of crap managed to get bankrolled. I can't be too hard on the guilty parties considering some of the trash that continues to hit the screen these days.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 13 2010 at 5:21pm
LOL True, Drew Barrymore's taste in men is quite questionable.


-------------
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 13 2010 at 5:40pm
I only feel somewhat sorry for Drew Barrymore; Why would she date a man known for that kind of humor? A man who wrote a song that includes "grotch grotch grotch grotch grotch..." I mean *enunciates* come on!

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 24 2010 at 8:50pm
Here's an interesting little note, according to many news reports, M. Night has fallen out of favor with movie goers so badly that when his name appears in the trailers for "Devil", the audiences either laugh or groan! It's true, it happened at my own local movie theater.

-------------
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: July 25 2010 at 5:30pm
Yeah, I've heard about that...like everywhere. I feel sorry for him -- He doesn't deserve this much hate. It's not like he assassinated the president!  

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Here's an interesting little note, according to many news reports, M. Night has fallen out of favor with movie goers so badly that when his name appears in the trailers for "Devil", the audiences either laugh or groan! It's true, it happened at my own local movie theater.


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


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 25 2010 at 5:41pm
A classic example of the Peter Principle by my way of thinking...everyone rises (or descends?) to their level of incompetence.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 25 2010 at 7:18pm
You're right, MWG, "it's not like he assassinated the president." But M. Night did assassinate his own promising career by being a one trick pony with his twist endings, then his ego getting too big for his own good, and finally, losing his storytelling ability all together. I can already see the bio-pic: "The Rise And Fall Of M. Night Shamalama-ding-dong!"

-------------
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: oiram
Date Posted: July 26 2010 at 11:09am

I'm surprised that this didn't get a sub-form when the year started. It had to wait until it got released. It's surprising cause he made three bad movies, the latter two being nominated for Razzies, yet you didn't put a sub-form for this BEFORE it was released just like other movies almost like you're giving him one more chance. Well, I'm for waiting until a movie comes out to see if it's bad, but again, Shymalan made three bad movies, the latter two being nominated for Razzies.



Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: July 26 2010 at 12:50pm

Didn't you guys read that article saying that years ago Night was considered the new Spielberg? That's what makes me angry.Not that you hate him for having 3 bad movies in a row,but for forgetting that he also made 4 good movies in a row. A lot of people who hated THE 6TH SENSE,UNBREAKABLE,SIGNS and THE VILLAGE have taken advantage of the situation to call him the worst filmmaker ever. I understand that the hate comes from him using a twist ending many times and that makes you all wonder if the first movies were in fact good. He only used it twice: In THE 6TH SENSE and THE VILLAGE. The twists of UNBREAKABLE and SIGNS didn't make you realize everything you saw was a lie. The latter movies didn't have twist endings. Have you all even seen a good horror movie without twists (at the end or not)? Most bad reviews of his movies(including this one)say the movie's bad, which is a shot at him as a producer,and then they either insult the directing or the writing,but not both.  




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


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 26 2010 at 2:42pm
A couple of points here: 

1. I don't think anyone here hates Shamalama. "Hate" is a strong word, one that is reserved for very rare cases. If M. Nut goes on a shooting spree in a kindergarten tomorrow and kills 30 little kids, my feelings toward him might justifyably be swayed in that direction. But I lack personal feelings for him whatsoever at this moment.  I simply don't admire or respect much of his work, especially his recent efforts. 

2. Someone out there might well have compared his talents to Spielberg early on, but I don't recall seeing a lot of similar comments from any group of critics. It sounds to me like one overly enthusiastic admirer blowing off his mouth. As an apt analogy, there are a lot of hopeful fans here in Denver that are already crowning Tim Tebow as the new John Elway. From where I sit, the guy hasn't played a down in the NFL yet, and even if he has a couple of good games early on, it won't mean that his career won't tank quickly thereafter. One or two good games, or even one or two good seasons don't make you a Hall of Famer in the NFL, and a couple of good films don't make you a legend in the film industry, especially if you follow them up with lot of crap. 

3. I don't think anyone here has crowned M. Nut as the worst filmmaker ever. He will never be good enough to live in Spielberg's neighborhood, nor bad enough to move in next to the likes of Ed Wood or Uwe Boll. At best, he stands as a monument to mediocrity.


-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 26 2010 at 2:50pm

You make good points, Vits (see below). There's now a resurgence of the phrase "The Sixth Sense wasn't even good," which makes me angry. Are you kidding me? Those who didn't like his earlier films have taken advantage of the situation now that his recent films aren't liked as much as his first 3 films.  


Originally posted by Vits

Didn't you guys read that article saying that years ago Night was considered the new Spielberg?That's what makes me angry.Not that you hate him for having 3 bad movies in a row,but for forgetting that he also made 4 good movies in a row.A lot of people who hated THE 6TH SENSE,UNBREAKABLE,SIGNS and THE VILLAGE have taken advantage of the situation to call him the worst filmmaker ever.I understand that the hate comes from him using a twist ending many times and that makes you all wonder if the first movies were in fact good.He only used it twice:In THE 6TH SENSE and THE VILLAGE.The twists of UNBREAKABLE and SIGNS didn't make you realize everything you saw was a lie.The latter movies didn't have twist endings.Have you all even seen a good horror movie without twists(at the end or not)?Most bad reviews of his movies(including this one)say the movie's bad,which is a shot at him as a producer,and then they either insult the directing or the writing,but not both.



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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 26 2010 at 2:51pm
Are you sure about that? I read it everywhere: Youtube, Comingsoon, Joblo, etc.  

Originally posted by saturnwatcher

3. I don't think anyone here has crowned M. Nut as the worst filmmaker ever. He will never be good enough to live in Spielberg's neighborhood, nor bad enough to move in next to the likes of Ed Wood or Uwe Boll. At best, he stands as a monument to mediocrity.


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


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 26 2010 at 2:58pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy

Originally posted by saturnwatcher

3. I don't think anyone here has crowned M. Nut as the worst filmmaker ever. He will never be good enough to live in Spielberg's neighborhood, nor bad enough to move in next to the likes of Ed Wood or Uwe Boll. At best, he stands as a monumental mediocrity.

Are you sure about that? I read it everywhere: Youtube, Comingsoon, Joblo, etc.
Reread my post. I'm reasonably certain I have not seen anyone HERE refer to M. Nut as the worst filmmaker ever.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 26 2010 at 3:38pm
I don't hate M. Night, i simply doubt his filmmaking abilities now that he has had FOUR strikes in a row. At one point, I thought he had some talent. But then something went wrong, and he started shooting himself in the foot, time and time again. Now, with FOUR failures in a row, his career is on the rocks. He is by no means the next Spielberg. He had his chance, but turned out to be a one trick pony with his twist endings who developed a huge ego, and finally, totally forgot how to make a good movie. It's sad that it happened, but it did, and his street credit will never be the same again. 

Like I have said, you can watch his old movies for the fond memories, but his current movies leave much to be desired.


-------------
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: July 26 2010 at 4:35pm
I'll answer Burn with a rational comment and then a personal strike:
 
1)I'm still wondering why Spielberg.You do realize he executive-produced several Razzie nominees?
 
2) http://www.timeout.com/film/features/show-feature/10325/why-christopher-nolan-is-not-the-new-stanley-kubrick.html - http://www.timeout.com/film/features/show-feature/10325/why-christopher-nolan-is-not-the-new-stanley-kubrick.html


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


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 26 2010 at 4:44pm
To say that someone has been "the executive producer" of several Razzie nominees isn't saying much. Essentially, all it means is that he's one of the guys who's name is auto-penned on the paychecks at a studio that makes a lot of movies.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 26 2010 at 4:46pm
1. Yes, but he has directed many good, iconic, entertaining movies.
2. That critic has no idea what he is talking about. Yes, the supporting characters in "Inception" aren't all fleshed out, but Cobb certainly is. And "2001" was not living in the real world, so what is he talking about? Also, what is so damn overly-complex about "Inception", or is this critic's attention span too short? Nolan does have a sense of humor, it's just not over the top. And lastly, more than half of Kubrick's movies were novel adaptations, so how is he original? The guy's a hater, plain and simple. 

Originally posted by Vits

I'll answer Burn with a rational comment and then a personal strike:
 
1)I'm still wondering why Spielberg.You do realize he executive-produced several Razzie nominees?
 
2) http://www.timeout.com/film/features/show-feature/10325/why-christopher-nolan-is-not-the-new-stanley-kubrick.html -


Posted By: rburton
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 6:39am
At a Mexican press conference, a reporter asks M. Night about the loss of his supposed talent and reminds him he's a sell-out.  Like any loon, he freaks out and says that if he thought like the reporter he would kill himself.  Here's to hoping a mind control device falls into that reporter's hands between now and the start of his next project.

[TUBE]_C76QBg2p78[/TUBE]


-------------
For Your Consideration

Dev Patel for WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR in The Last Fartbender


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 7:58am
But that reporter had it coming. If someone went up to you and said, "Hey. Your work sucks," how would you respond to that? You would obviously defend your works and justify them. And he doesn't freak out -- He remains calm and answers the question in a rational way. If you ask a strong question, expect a strong answer.


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


Posted By: nyfilmfest
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 8:58am
More accurately, though, the reporter was only stating the facts! Critically and commercially, M. Night''s been on a downward slope for years, culminating in the latest fiasco Fartbender.  

His many Razzies should be the cherry on top of his lackluster career.

Sick


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


Posted By: rburton
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 9:21am
Yeah, I, too, thought the reporter was pretty respectful.  Considering M. Night has unleashed The Village, Lady in the Water, The Happening, and now Fartbender on audiences, it's amazing more people haven't called him out for being a hack.  It's fashionable to bash Michael Bay, who at least isn't delusional enough to publicly declare his genius at every opportunity, yet M. Night deserves our respect...?

Reporters should report the facts, which is what happened here.  M. Night's incoherent response, arguing that his rotten movies are beloved in certain circles internationally, is a pathetic attempt to rationalize his failures as a director, writer...and human being.  


-------------
For Your Consideration

Dev Patel for WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR in The Last Fartbender


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 11:26am
Opinions  are not facts.  

In France, people loved The Happening, Lady in the Water, and The Village, along with Argentina. In Japan, people loved Lady in the Water. In fact, it was named one of the best films of the year (2006) by several highly-regarded film magazines. So yes, while people in the US just love to hate on Shyamalan, other countries around the world don't. People in the US need to stop acting like they're in the center of the world. And I find it funny how you use the word "unleashed," as if it was a plague.  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: The fact that the French appreciate Shyamalan is hardly an endorsement -- For years they've also been the only country on Earth who think Jerry Lewis is a comic genius...  
 



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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 12:08pm
Oh, M. Night's career doing down the toilet is almost as beautiful as it is funny. It's like watching Tom Cruise back in 2005 all over again. Yes, he might have fans in other countries, but here in America (you know, his BASE OF OPERATIONS, where he lives and works?) he's a joke!  



-------------
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: July 27 2010 at 1:00pm
I think he took it a little personally. The reporter was saying things as they are, but she didn't say he's a sell-out. That's probably why Jackson Rathbone stepped in, though no one asked him. What happened after he said that?  
 
Also, I didn't know he knew spanish. Cool! 
 
He said he rejected offers. There were rumors he was going to participate in INDIANA JONES 4??  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Till I read the above, I honestly didn't think http://kylesmithonline.com/?p=1260 -


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 1:54pm
LOL You beat me to that one Head Razz. Amazingly enough, every time someone in the U.S. is trying to defend some largely talentless hack, they always say, "Well  so and so is considered a genius in France!" I'm never really sure if that is true or not, but I wouldn't place much stock in anyone being respected in a country that built the Arch de Triumph just so Hitler's troops would have something cool to march under on the way into Paris.  

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Opinions  are not facts.  

In France, people loved The HappeningLady in the Water, and The Village, along with Argentina. In Japan, people loved Lady in the Water. In fact, it was named one of the best films of the year (2006) by several highly-regarded film magazines. So yes, while people in the US just love to hate on Shyamalan, other countries around the world don't. People in the US need to stop acting like they're in the center of the world. And I find it funny how you use the word "unleashed," as if it was a plague.  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: The fact that the French appreciate Shyamalan is hardly an endorsement -- For years they've also been the only country on Earth who think Jerry Lewis is a comic genius...  
 




-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 3:47pm
That was the base of the final joke in Woody Allen's HOLLYWOOD ENDING.It doesn't matter what one country thinks,it's what the majority thinks.

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 4:40pm
Touche, HeadRazz, touche! Clap  

Originally posted by moviewizguy

 
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: The fact that the French appreciate Shyamalan is hardly an endorsement -- For years they've also been the only country on Earth who think Jerry Lewis is a comic genius...  


-------------
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: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 4:50pm
Okay, so? France is just one country, and the rest of the world is the majority -- and the majority think M. Night is just a punchline for jokes about bad filmmaking!  

Originally posted by Vits

That was the base of the final joke in Woody Allen's HOLLYWOOD ENDING.It doesn't matter what one country thinks,it's what the majority thinks.


-------------
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: July 27 2010 at 5:04pm
That was my point.

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


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 5:05pm
Maybe, after he makes another one or two bad films, he should win the following Worst Career Achievement award. Save Michael Bay for later; he doesn't go around praising his own films after the critics pan them.

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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 27 2010 at 5:48pm
So, Vits, you're agreeing with the rest of the world who thinks M. Night is a joke, rather than siding with France who thinks he's a genius?  

Originally posted by Vits

That was my point.


-------------
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: July 27 2010 at 7:00pm
But the French helped us during WWII. I can name a few things that are liked by us Americans that the French might find highly idiotic.  

Originally posted by Head RAZZberry

The fact that the French appreciate Shyamalan is hardly an endorsement -- For years they've also been the only country on Earth who think Jerry Lewis is a comic genius...  


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



Print Page | Close Window