QuoteReplyTopic: Special Category for 2010 Posted: December 10 2010 at 12:29pm
Hi, new here and kind of saying hello.
I was wondering if you ever thought of starting a Worst Movie Not Showing in a Theatre Near You-category. This category would "honour" the worst films released through another medium than the cinema (tv films, straight-to-dvd/blu-ray films and films released directly on the interenet)? Please respond to this question (and give me feedback on the idea if you don't like it)
I was also wondering if i could register as a voter if i am not a U.S.-resident (or if it is U.S. only)?
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: First off, a Berry Warm WELCOME to our Forum.
The idea of a "Not Showing" RAZZIE category is an interesting one, but among the problems would be keeping track of all the dreck that appears on Direct-to-Video, as well as ensuring that the titles were readily available to our Voting Members.
On the question of whether non-US residents can be Voting Members, the answer is an emphatic YES -- We currently have Voting Members in nearly two dozen foreign territories -- many of whom cast their ballots via the Net. Here's the LINK to sign up, if you're interested...
Well, Worst Direct To DVD Movie would be a good category, considering the large amount of straight to DVD sequels that are being made these days. Only problem is that voters would have to go and rent or stream these movies as well in order to know about them better.
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.
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: You have become a Voting Member in plenty of time to receive a Nominating Ballot for this year's 31st Annual RAZZIES® -- They don't go in the mail until Dec. 29.
FYI: Here's a LINK to see the entire 2011 sked for both Our Awards and Those Other Ones (aka The Giving Out of the Little Gold Naked Men®)...
I'm confused.Most votes have gone to "Worst Romantic Comedy".Yet,in most of the other poll forums it has been sort of established that "Worst 3D Movie" and "Worst Ensemble" are a sure thing.
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Scroll up and check the current results -- Worst Eye-Gouging Mis-Use of 3-D has now pulled ahead of the Worst Excuse for a Rom/Com -- and Worst Screen Ensemble was never on any of our Forum polls, though it may end up being combined with Screen Couple into a single more-than-one-obnoxious-performer category...
While 2010 was full of bad rom-coms, it was also THE year that Hollywood was banking almost entirely on making money through gimmicks like adding 3-D surcharges or having a cast of 10 to 20 known celebrities. And the Razzies love sticking it to Hollywood for their cheap attempts to make money while trying to fix an open wound with a tiny band-aid.
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.
Is there still a chance of separating "Remake","Sequel" and "Rip-Off" into 3?Because I can tell "Horror Movie" won't happen with so many good horror movies this year.
Really no point, there have been so many this year, all three categories would be bloated. Shrinking the category down to five choices as it is is a hard enough task.
Originally posted by Vits
Is there still a chance of separating "Remake","Sequel" and "Rip-Off" into 3?
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.
I highly doubt it. The Razzies have been around for 3 decades now, but based on the amount of sequels and remakes this year, Hollywood hasn't learned a damn thing from our awards. They would rather just stick their heads in the sand and pretend we're not here.
Originally posted by Vits
So? That would mean more sequels,remakes and rip-offs will get nominated. Maybe that will teach Hollywood.
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.
I highly doubt it. The Razzies have been around for 3 decades now, but based on the amount of sequels and remakes this year, Hollywood hasn't learned a damn thing from our awards. They would rather just stick their heads in the sand and pretend we're not here.
Probably because the main prize (Worst Picture) rarely goes to a remake or sequels.
In it's entire 30-year run it just went to 4 sequels (Rambo 2, Star Trek 5, Basic Instinct 2, Transformers 2), 1 remake (Wild Wild West) and 1 spin-off (Catwoman). Correct me if i am wrong but it seems that original screenplays and book adaptations have a better track record there.
Not judging the Razzies, I love these awards (that's the reason i signed in). I mean, why reward a sequel when you can reward a film that is craptastic at it's first try.
You know what?Your're right.They shouldn't be separated,because then voters will say "I'm voting for that original movie for "Worst Picture" because even though I hated that remake/sequel the most it will be awarded anyway
Vits, I think that there is a big chance that both honours will go to "Airbender" this year. I will probably be voting for Vampires Suck because i consider it the worst picture made this year. That and The Last Airbender has become some sort of guilty pleasure-movie of mine (don't judge me)
Not judging the Razzies, I love these awards (that's the reason i signed in). I mean, why reward a sequel when you can reward a film that is craptastic at it's first try.
Because we bash sequels for #1. Being nothing more than a cash grab, which is all sequels really are. The first movie was successful, so let's milk it for all it's worth. #2. Being inferior to the original movie. A rule with sequels, they should at least try to top the original, ie. "Godfather Part 2", "Aliens", "X-Men 2", "Dark Knight", 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.
Right but they are rarely memorably bad, often just mediocre. There just one of many that gets lost in the crowd, and will be forgotten by the end of the year. These films are released but not remembered by the general public (if you were to ask them about this movie 5 years from now). Most of them have no stayingpower. Why'll films with an awfull reputation like Bolero, Showgirls, Leonard part 6, Howard The Duck and Battlefield Earth wil be remembered as examples of the worst films ever made. I believe a Razzie-winner shouldn't be a film that is forgotten because it lives in the shadow of it's much better predecessor.
I hope that my message came across well. I know that the above text is kind of messy. English isn't my native language (as you may have guessed).
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn
Because we bash sequels for #1. Being nothing more than a cash grab, which is all sequels really are. The first movie was successful, so let's milk it for all it's worth. #2. Being inferior to the original movie. A rule with sequels, they should at least try to top the original, ie. "Godfather Part 2", "Aliens", "X-Men 2", "Dark Knight", etc.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum
Share Topic
Printable Version
Delicious
Digg
Facebook
Furl
Google Boomarks
Google Buzz
MySpace
Newsvine
reddit
StumbleUpon
Twitter
Windows Live
Yahoo Bookmarks
Topic Search 
Topic Options
Post Options
Quote 
Topic: Special Category for 2010
