Print Page | Close Window

2005 "winners"How Berry Right (or WRONG)?

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: 2005 / 26th RAZZIES® POLLS
Forum Name: POLL: Did We Get 'Em Right This year...or NOT?!?!?
Forum Discription: Vote Your Opinion of This Year's RAZZIE
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=642
Printed Date: October 25 2014 at 9:35pm


Topic: 2005 "winners"How Berry Right (or WRONG)?
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: 2005 "winners"How Berry Right (or WRONG)?
Date Posted: March 03 2006 at 5:39am
Here's YOUR chance to express your opinion of this year's RAZZIE Choices. Can't believe we RAZZed Tom Cruise? Like Hayden Christensen (or just thought he was "cute") in STAR WARS: WHO GIVES A SITH??  Wish Burt Reynolds had "won" instead of Christensen? Think Jessica's just as obnoxious as Paris??? LET US KNOW — And if your gripes aren't covered by the poll, feel free to POST your thoughts below...



Replies:
Posted By: Bookworm
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 3:05pm
I may not agree completely with one or two winners, but that's okay.  How could I be upset with the results when Hayden Christensen, Paris Hilton, and Tom Cruise are winners?


Posted By: SManBeyond
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 3:16pm
All right, so Paris Hilton's no Nicole Kidman when it comes to acting, but Jessica Simpson TOTALLY deserved the "Worst Supporting Actress" category. Her "performance" takes bad acting to a whole new level.

And "Deuce Bigalow" or "Dukes of Hazzard" should have won for "Worst" Picture, if only for the reason that both of those films were released nationwide for our "enjoyment" and polluted our theaters, while "Dirty Love" was (wisely) strictly in limited release, preventing its poison from being promoted.

I'm fine with the rest of those choices...of those two complaints, I'd say the "Worst Picture" choice upsets me more...


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 3:25pm
Even though I voted that the votes came out as perfect...I was disappointed that there wasn't a tie for TomKat and Tom Cruise for Most Tiresome Tabloid Target...


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 5:16pm

I am a little upset about Hayden... Thanks  a lot, Razzie, for not making him Worst leading actor - I see that if you can't give him a break with you wooden sense of humour you have  at least enough brains to be not so bad for him    Thanks ALOT!



Posted By: messy-1
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 12:45am
Lars Von Trier didn't get even nominated for "Dear Wendy" which was clearly the worst script of the year. You guys should be ashamed.


Posted By: Starman
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 3:58am

I am still shocked and appalled that "Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy" didn't score a nomination for Worst Picture.  I haven't seen an audience so bored since Batman and Robin. 

More impressively, it pulled off the impossible feat of being incomprehensible to Douglas Adams neophytes (FAR too many in-jokes) while still changing so much from the spirit and humor of the books as to make the movie intolerable for Douglas Adams fans.



-------------
Starman


Posted By: Robertin
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 5:02am

The awards, in my humble opinion, were fairly given. Considering the sorry state of mainstream cinema in 2005, the choices were not easy.

While it´s true that "Dukes of Hazzard" deserved a greater share of awards, i must admit that something as ludicrous as "Dirty Love" must never go unnoticed.

 



Posted By: FlyersBabe
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 6:59am
Originally posted by Starman

I am still shocked and appalled that "Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy" didn't score a nomination for Worst Picture.  I haven't seen an audience so bored since Batman and Robin. 

More impressively, it pulled off the impossible feat of being incomprehensible to Douglas Adams neophytes (FAR too many in-jokes) while still changing so much from the spirit and humor of the books as to make the movie intolerable for Douglas Adams fans.

 

God bless you.....I *loved* HGTTG and I thought this "movie" was an absolute mess on toast. Ugh. I highly recommend anyone going out and either renting or buying the British TV versions. *Much* better adaptation.

And Adams was supposed to have endorsed that script before he died?!? I find that hard to believe. Deplorable.



-------------
"There isn't anything more exhilarating than pointing out the shortcomings of others, is there?"


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 7:17am
Why even give an Academy Award this year??? It seemed a garbage truck overturned and belched out the worst of it on us...movie-wise... And this year doesn't look like it's going to be much better...

I felt sorry for the Razzie nomination crew to limit themselves to just FIVE nominees this year... It REALLY had to be hard on them...


Posted By: Starman
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 8:50am
Originally posted by FlyersBabe

God bless you.....I *loved* HGTTG and I thought this "movie" was an absolute mess on toast. Ugh. I highly recommend anyone going out and either renting or buying the British TV versions. *Much* better adaptation.

And Adams was supposed to have endorsed that script before he died?!? I find that hard to believe. Deplorable.

Actually, Adams was working on A script when he died.  Someone else completed it based off of his alleged notes, but great play was made about how he was supposed to have written MOST of it and how all the touches most of the DA enthusiasts hated (the new material with John Malkovich and the Arthur/Trillian romance) were his ideas.

Of course only the most incorigible DA fan will not say he never had bad ideas or wrote bad things.  Or if they do, they ignore Mostly Harmless...



-------------
Starman


Posted By: bobw
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 9:19am
I thought son of the mask was far worse...

-------------
It takes millions to make a good movie, it costs millions to make a bad one!


Posted By: Cinefreak
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 2:16pm
The problem with giving worst sequel or remake to son of the mask is its
neither. It's not a remake and it's not a sequel or continuation of the first
movie. It's a new story with new characters. So it makes little sense to
judge it as if its a sequel, in addition to the total silliness of having adults
judge a kid's movie. We could have done better here, imho.


Posted By: GreenDiamond
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 3:50pm

Dukes of Hazzard... so many nominations... and NO wins!?!?!
It deserved all of them!

I voted that the worst re-make was wrongly awarded, as this Dukes "re-make" is terrible!

Even Ben Jones, The ORIGINAL Cooter, just read the script at one point and hasn't even bothered watching it! He said:

(quote) "It was a miserable movie" (unquote)



Posted By: Ender Wiggin
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 4:38pm
So I can't say for certain that Dirty Love was the worst film of the year as I haven't seen it (sorry, not on any must see lists).  I do, however, know that the worst film of last year was 'The Fog'.  Normally, I don't post on any sites but I think this is something people have to realize.  It is a horrible, brain-stealing monstrosity that is certainly the worst film I have ever seen (right over 'I Spy').  How this movie was completely overlooked is beyond me.  I have seen better Sci Fi Channel Original Pictures then 'The Fog'  (OK, maybe that's not true, but it sure feels like it!)

-------------
"They speak English in What?"


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 7:24pm
Originally posted by GreenDiamond

Dukes of Hazzard... so many nominations... and NO wins!?!?!It deserved all of them!




I know Burt Reynolds didn't deserve his nomination...as he was perhaps the ONLY one (besides the General Lee) that did any good acting in the movie...

I thought Willie Nelson as Uncle Jesse was pushing it though...but should have stuck just with the Balladeer role...


Posted By: Kikyo
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 1:34am

PUKES OF HAZZARD SHOULD HAVE WON THEM ALL....TOM CRUISE AND KAITE HOLMES NEED A NOMINATION FOR WORST COUPLE EVER IN THE HISTORY OF COUPLES!! They make my bad relationships look like Will and Jada...



-------------
Did I shave my legs for this??


Posted By: Kendan
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 2:45am
The only trouble with Dirty Love is that it bombed soooooo bad, noone got to see it!  As for Paris...yes, I think she deserved worst supporting actress, it's just ashame that the decision was between 2 air-headed talentless blondes!!


Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 3:30am

I'm pretty upset Tom Crui$e didn't win as worst actor. Not only for "war of the worlds" but also for his leading role in "TomKat".
This man imposed his private life upon the whole world (Kitten Holmes, $cientology...) like he was suffering from some  brain-dysentery... Maybe you guys could have stopped him from insulting his colleagues or journalists or from his brain-farting in general for some time and make him spend his time taking acting lessons for a change...



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 4:02am
Originally posted by Queen_of_Toad

I'm pretty upset Tom Cruise didn't win as worst actor. Not only for "war of the worlds" but also for his leading role in "TomKat".
...

Fear not. I'd say the odds are pretty good that Tom will make another run this time next year, with the release of Mission Impossible III looming like a threatening storm cloud over the horizon.

All and all, I was pleased with the ultimate slate of winners. In fact, I voted for the winners in all but one category. There were no undeserving winners, no undeserving nominees, and yes, 2005 produced a galaxy of stars and films that easily COULD have been nominated, but there are a limited number of spots on the ballot.

So on to 2006, and it already looks like another promising year is at hand.



-------------
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: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 5:45pm

From SATURNWATCHER: "Fear not. I'd say the odds are pretty good that Tom will make another run this time next year, with the release of Mission Impossible III looming like a threatening storm cloud over the horizon".

Thank you for your consoling words. Crui$e should name all his movies "Mission Impossible" since his mission most impossible seems to be good acting. I think, Crui$e is a terrible actor. He deserved so many razzies, I believe, he should be given a life-time-non-achieving razzie. Just remember, how he ruined "Eyes Wide Shut". In case you thought he had done well in "Eyes Wide Shut": Imagine Malkovich or Irons or Nicholson in that role... So sad...



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: FlyersBabe
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 1:03am
Originally posted by Queen_of_Toad

 He deserved so many razzies, I believe he should be given a life-time-non-achieving razzie. Just remember how he ruined "Eyes Wide Shut". In case you thought he had done well in "Eyes Wide Shut": Imagine Malkovich or Irons or Nicholson in that role... So sad...

Amen to that! I still haven't figured out why everyone seems to think his "Born on the Fourth of July" performance was great acting. Ugh. It was essentially a bad, bad remake/ripoff of "Coming Home"....only much more ably acted and directed. Tom Cruise is a joke.



-------------
"There isn't anything more exhilarating than pointing out the shortcomings of others, is there?"


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 10:55am

Eyes Wide Shut was a truly awful movie, and Cruise's performance in it certainly didn't help matters. But I think it might be going a step too far to blame him for ruining it. EWS would have been a terrible movie regardless of who starred.



-------------
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: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 11:16am
Originally posted by saturnwatcher

Eyes Wide Shut was a truly awful movie, and Cruise's performance in it certainly didn't help matters. But I think it might be going a step too far to blame him for ruining it. EWS would have been a terrible movie regardless of who starred.


I fear, I must disagree with you. I think EWS was a deep story. I also loved the camera work and photography.

-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: wendyschili7
Date Posted: March 16 2006 at 6:28pm
well christiansan wasn't as bad as episode 2. I thought he deserved a
nomination. However the critics even gave him generally positive reviews. I
just dont think he was razzie worthy


Posted By: Norma
Date Posted: March 17 2006 at 9:34am
Tom Cruise is a great actor; watch is movies or shut up.
He also doesn't deserve any nom here: more tiresome target: the bitchy Alba on the beach, the 'we call photographers' Pitt and Jolie also commercials puppets who loves money

Cruise still respect himself and does not troll his ass like the bitches Kidman Pitt Clooney Jolie Zeta Jones : whores.

I can't wait Tom make more movies and make commercials as you can see him on magazines, wallpapers TV spot.

You are douches. He barely get out this here. Leave him alone, he is an awesome actor (especially in EWS, cinephiles love him in this masterpiece-not comprehensible for virgin fat boy of course)

Go Tom, you're the king, f**k them all, they just talk about You.

ps: yet sorry for my language. Though


Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 19 2006 at 1:48pm

"If I had a tumour I'd name it..."  Tom Crui$e.



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: haydensucks
Date Posted: March 23 2006 at 3:27pm
HC deserve his Razzie. HC is the worst actor in film history. HC completely ruined Star Wars.
Originally posted by wendyschili7

well christiansan wasn't as bad as episode 2. I thought he deserved a
nomination. However the critics even gave him generally positive reviews. I
just dont think he was razzie worthy


Posted By: haydensucks
Date Posted: March 23 2006 at 3:28pm
I wish HC many more Razzies in the future.


Posted By: jb razz
Date Posted: December 29 2006 at 5:11am

How did House of Wax get nominated for worst picture and not Alone in the Dark?

House of Wax looks cheesy bad (maybe even a little creepy), but Alone in the Dark is bad, bad, bad, bad.

I have not seen Paris Hilton in House of Wax but she must be really bad if she beat Jessica Simpson in The Dukes of Hazzard. 



Posted By: whennow
Date Posted: December 29 2006 at 6:41am
The art direction was so impressive in House of Wax that it should not have received a worst picture nomination. It wasn't that bad overall either. I think it was all about the producers putting Paris Hilton in a movie that led to the nomination.



Print Page | Close Window