Print Page | Close Window

Possible Nominations for Last Airbender

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=4509
Printed Date: November 28 2014 at 4:25am


Topic: Possible Nominations for Last Airbender
Posted By: Mraspiringactor
Subject: Possible Nominations for Last Airbender
Date Posted: July 29 2010 at 8:37pm
Here's what mine would be:  

Worst Picture 
Worst Director-M. Night Shyamalan 
Worst Supporting Actor-Jackson Rathbone 
Worst Supporting Actress-Nicola Peltz 
Worst Remake or Sequel 


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



Replies:
Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 29 2010 at 9:01pm
I say, go for the full sweep -- a nod in every category! Worst Picture, Director, Screenplay, all Acting, Remake/Sequel, etc.

-------------
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 29 2010 at 9:28pm
We might even consider a new category: Worst Film by M. Nut Shamalamadingdong LOL

-------------
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: GTAHater767
Date Posted: July 29 2010 at 10:05pm
I only want one: Worst Director for M. Night Shyamalan.

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


Posted By: TaRaN-RoD
Date Posted: July 31 2010 at 8:06pm
This movie is SO bad??:s The poster looks promising...


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: July 31 2010 at 8:48pm
Originally posted by TaRaN-RoD

This movie is SO bad??:s The poster looks promising...
Really? Judging the quality of a movie based solely on the poster? Wow, the marketing department has you wrapped around their finger if you fall for that.

-------------
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 31 2010 at 9:31pm
To ignore Dev Patel would be criminal.  He started as a slumdog and hasn't risen from that.


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

Dev Patel for WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR in The Last Fartbender


Posted By: TaRaN-RoD
Date Posted: July 31 2010 at 9:54pm
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Originally posted by TaRaN-RoD

This movie is SO bad??:s The poster looks promising...

Really? Judging the quality of a movie based solely on the poster? Wow, the marketing department has you wrapped around their finger if you fall for that.


I didn't mean that I just wanted to say that the movie doesn't look awful like an Uwe Boll
movie that's all...


Posted By: Julianstark
Date Posted: July 31 2010 at 11:13pm
Not sure if I said this already, but I went to go see The Last Airbender with someone. I had a kick out of the unintentionally hilariousness of it all, but the person I was with couldn't enjoy it even from an unintentional comedy standpoint. So, roughly fifteen minutes into it, we left.

That being said, I'd support the following nominations:

Worst Picture
Worst Director (I think it will probably win here, if not for Picture as well)
Worst Screenplay
Worst Actor (Noah Ringer)
Worst Remake, Prequel, Rip-off, or Sequel

I probably wouldn't mind a Worst Supporting Actor nomination for Dev Patel, simply for the fact that he went from a great film that came out of nowhere to win eight Oscars (Slumdog Millionaire)... to an M. Night Shyamalan-helmed disaster!

-------------
For Your 2010 Razzie Consideration: The Bounty Hunter and Leap Year --
Check out my blog! http://julianstark-moviesandotherthings.blogspot.com - Movies and Other Things


Posted By: Mraspiringactor
Date Posted: August 01 2010 at 7:06am
I probably wouldn't mind a Worst Supporting Actor nomination for Dev Patel, simply for the fact that he went from a great film that came out of nowhere to win eight Oscars (Slumdog Millionaire)... to an M. Night Shyamalan-helmed disaster!

So you'd nominate him for that rather than whether or not he actually did a good job in the movie? I mean he wasn't great but there were many actors FAR worse than him. I also used to think of Noah Ringer as worst actor too but, while he is indeed wooden and bland, there were worse actors in the film.


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


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 01 2010 at 10:38am
Originally posted by Julianstark

Not sure if I said this already, but I went to go see The Last Airbender with someone. I had a kick out of the unintentionally hilariousness of it all, but the person I was with couldn't enjoy it even from an unintentional comedy standpoint. So, roughly fifteen minutes into it, we left.

That being said, I'd support the following nominations:

Worst Picture
Worst Director (I think it will probably win here, if not for Picture as well)
Worst Screenplay
Worst Actor (Noah Ringer)
Worst Remake, Prequel, Rip-off, or Sequel

Ok. So you're telling me you saw 15 minutes and that's OK for you to judge the entire film? Are you kidding me?

I probably wouldn't mind a Worst Supporting Actor nomination for Dev Patel, simply for the fact that he went from a great film that came out of nowhere to win eight Oscars (Slumdog Millionaire)... to an M. Night Shyamalan-helmed disaster!

Read the reviews. Dev Patel was one of the few actors that were good in the film.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: August 01 2010 at 10:40am
It's not that bad. It's that Shyamalan's name is attached to it. Had it been anyone else, the film would have gotten a much better reception. I've seen worse adaptations, including The Golden Compass, Inkheart, Eragon, and The Seeker, just to name a few and surprise, surprise, those aren't under 10% in RT. I wonder why.

A common complaint for TLA is that it's joyless and dull. The movies I've mentioned before are also joyless and even more dull! I really don't get it at all. I'll admit it, TLA isn't up there with Harry Potter and LOTR, but at least the story interested me the whole way through, which is something I can't say about the other movies. Another complaint about the film is Noah Ringer's performance. So it's okay for Daniel Radcliffe to take three movies to better his performance but it's not okay for Ringer, on top of the fact that it is his first film? I call BS on that.  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Sorry, MWG, but this is one time your defense of the indefensible cannot be allowed to stand. I saw LAST AIRBENDER opening weekend in 3-D, acompanied by my 14-year-old son, who was familiar with the anime' series on which the films is based. Neither one of us could follow what was going on, where we were (or, for that matter, why we should care) for most of the film. I think its biggest problem was that, rather than trust this first entry to be compelling enough to set up a franchise, Shyamalan tried to cram plot points from several seasons of the TV series into a single 100 minute film -- and it simply did not work. Both critical response and word-of-mouth on the movie show widespread support for this contention, and continuing to argue the point only makes you seem desperate and almost pitifully obsessed with defending a film-maker who has clearly lost his way...


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


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: August 01 2010 at 10:59am
Here re my reasons why LAB sucks: 

1. Shyamalan doesn't know how to film action. 

2. The dialog is nothing but explaining the entire backstory of the show's mythology. 

3. Shyamalan is trying to cram the entire first season of the TV series into 90 minutes. 

4. The movie is not loyal to the source material, example: most of the actors are either white or Indian, in the show, they are all Asian. 

In other words, it IS that bad, and it angered fans of the series.
 
And again, no you can't judge the quality of a movie based on a poster. This is just marketing, a hook to trick you into seeing a movie. How do you judge if I movie is any good? By REVIEWS, done by critics who know what a good movie is (including MWG's beloved Ebert). And if the movie is under 10%, that's proof enough for me that it sucks.


-------------
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: August 01 2010 at 11:25am
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

No, it's that 1. Shyamalan doesn't know how to film action.

I think the action scenes are one of the few good things in the film. I love how it's all one take and not shaky like what Paul Haggis did with the Bourne films.

2. The dialog is nothing but explaining the entire backstory of the show's mythology.

But it's to be expected. Inception does the same thing. Yes, I just compared Inception to TLA. Inception takes a lot of its time to explain the rules of the dreams and explains them a whole second time and sometimes, the film ignores the rules established just for the convenience of the characters.

4. The movie is not loyal to the source material, example: most of the actors are either white or Indian, in the show, they are all Asian. In other words, it IS that bad, and it angered fans of the series.

The film contains almost every ethnicity known to man. It's diverse and every character in the tv show wasn't Asian.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: August 01 2010 at 12:12pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy


1. I think the action scenes are one of the few good things in the film. I love how it's all one take and not shaky like what Paul Haggis did with the Bourne films.

2. But it's to be expected. Inception does the same thing. Yes, I just compared Inception to TLA. Inception takes a lot of its time to explain the rules of the dreams and explains them a whole second time and sometimes, the film ignores the rules established just for the convenience of the characters.

3. The film contains almost every ethnicity known to man. It's diverse and every character in the tv show wasn't Asian.
1. Really, you enjoy action scenes that are shot almost entirely in super slow-motion, regardless if it's called for or not? Nah, not surprised by that.
2. Yes, "Inception" did, BUT they could SHOWED the rules as well as explaining them out loud. Show, not tell, something M. Night USED to know, but no longer does. And no, "Inception" didn't break at the rules, you die in the normal dream, you wake up. You die in the dream while under the drug, you go to limbo. You die in limbo, you wake up. You get a kick in a normal dream, you wake up. If you're in multi-level dreams, you need a kick to wake up from each dream. Where's the cheating?
3. Yes, but they are the WRONG ethnicities based on what the ethnicities of the characters in the cartoon were. In the cartoon, the fire tribe was clearly Asian, in the movie, they are all Indian. Not loyal to the series.
 
Still want to defend your hero who falling from grace faster than a penny off the Empire State Building?


-------------
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: August 01 2010 at 2:06pm
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

2. Yes, "Inception" did, BUT they could SHOWED the rules as well as explaining them out loud. Show, not tell, something M. Night USED to know, but no longer does. And no, "Inception" didn't break at the rules, you die in the normal dream, you wake up. You die in the dream while under the drug, you go to limbo. You die in limbo, you wake up. You get a kick in a normal dream, you wake up. If you're in multi-level dreams, you need a kick to wake up from each dream. Where's the cheating?

They never said that when you die in limbo, you wake up. The film made it sound crucial that being in limbo is the worst thing that could ever happen and when Cobb finally get to limbo in the end of the film to take out Satio, it's as easy as pie.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: August 01 2010 at 2:36pm
Originally posted by moviewizguy

They never said that when you die in limbo, you wake up. The film made it sound crucial that being in limbo is the worst thing that could ever happen and when Cobb finally get to limbo in the end of the film to take out Satio, it's as easy as pie.
Okay folks, SPOILER ALERT. Haven't seen the movie, don't read this.
 
When Cobb and Mal were first trapped in limbo, they didn't want to leave, they grew old together in the world and they eventually forgot that they were in limbo in the first place. Cobb finally realized they were trapped there and together, they got out by "killing" themseleves in limbo. Now, when Cobb goes back for Saito, both of them had to remember and realize that they were in limbo (realizing you're in limbo is important). Then IF they did shoot each other to escape limbo, boom, that's how they got back into the real world. No cheating. And there's always the "IF" because at the end, we don't see Cobb's spinning top fall over to prove he isn't dreaming any more, the outcome is up for the viewer to decide.
 
This is all just a case of the viewers not playing close enough attention to the movie. They clearly explained you CAN escape from limbo IF you realize you're in limbo and "kill" yourself to get out, which is what Cobb did the first time when trapped there with Mal.


-------------
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: RandAlThor
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 2:53am
For this viewer, Inception really didn't do anything to warrant being anywhere on this site. While I get that you  are trying to make a point this is a forum for The Last Airbender. That being said:

The ethnicities are not as important or offensive to the series as the entire movie itself.
Spoiler alert
What was MNS thinking changing the pronunciation of names?

In the series, the past lives of the avatar killed to protect world which is really important in the 3rd book. Ang struggles with offensive (vs. defensive, which he sees as self-defense) violence against the fire lord as it conflicts with his monk upbringing.

As a HUGE NERD fan of the series it completely missed the mark. I think that is what pissed the fans off to no end. Avatar was really a mini masterpiece in its own right. A lovely, complex story with deep characters and equally complex relationships (which if you've read the Harry Potter books you know exactly what I mean... I mean really, Harry and Dumbledore; could you over simplify that relationship more?) 
More apt name would have been Avatar: The Last Airbender... only Watered down


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 9:21am
Originally posted by RandAlThor

For this viewer, Inception really didn't do anything to warrant being anywhere on this site. 
Yeah, don't worry about that post. It was just MWG being jealous of another writer/director's success, while the career of his favorite writer/director, Mr. M Nut, continues to go down the toilet.


-------------
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: dcheng
Date Posted: July 07 2011 at 8:45am
Last Airbender was an epic fail. It was a highly anticipated movie that ended up an utter disappointment.


-------------
Learn more about the http://www.newastrologicalsigns.net - new astrological signs . I found this page and it gave me light on what this new sign was about.



Print Page | Close Window