The All-Time 100 BERRY Worst??

You'll find a list of my 100 "Favorite" Bad Movies of All Time in my current book, THE OFFICIAL RAZZIE MOVIE GUIDE. These are what I consider the hundred most entertaning turkies of all time. Here's a convenient LINK to check it out at Amazon.com...

The Razzie Guide book is actually a lot of fun.  Definitely better than the Rotten Tomatoes list!  Part of me wishes you ranked the movies, but then I thought how can you rank movies that are already rank? . . .

When you update your book, you might want to add a chapter for movies that came out after the first edition . . . 

HeadRazz...

How did you miss the Liberace cameo in The Loved One (as a casket salesman ) in the Sincerely Yours synopsis for the RAZZIE Guide???  This one was also done in 1965...and might have gotten lost in the shuffle...

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Actually, it was an oversight on my part. THE LOVED ONE has long been one of my favorite "deliberately tasteless movies." Here's a LINK to a discussion regarding LOVED ONE elsewhere on our Forum...

*sigh* At this moment I have become too depressed to even respond to this post.

Okay...I've recovered my wits enough to offer an observation about mwg's post above. You see, there is something just deeply, deeply troubling to me about an enthusiastic endorsement for the way a film handles death scenes. I'm really and truly appalled by seeing that anyone is capable of threading the words "fantastic" and "kills" into the same sentence.

Maybe it's just because I'm an old codger who is facing the bleak prospect of my own mortality and there is something personally troubling about anyone finding a measure of entertainment in the depiction of death. Maybe I just never found myself at a stage in life where that kind of thing was valued as entertainment. But I recognize that mwg isn't alone in that kind of value, and that really bothers me about where we are as a society.

I think that when we've reached a point where we've become that desensitized to suffering and death, it stops being completely bewildering to me that we can, as a society, step back and allow that a monster like Michael Vick has "paid his debt to society" and has the "right" to resume a lucrative career entertaining the masses by playing a children's game and becoming ridiculously wealthy and admired doing it.

I think that when we become that desensitized as a society, we are dangerously close to rounding up groups of people we don't like very much and staging televised contests in large stadiums involving hungry wild animals and poorly armed people for the sake of entertainment of the masses.

Okay, so I'm old and out of touch and I need to get off my soapbox...but sometimes I wonder if humanity is worth saving from itself.

I clearly remember, about 25 years ago, Gene Siskell and Roger Ebert expressed deep regrets about their enthusiastic endorsements for the original Halloween (which wasn't all that graphic) because they felt that they shared a degree of responsibility for launching the entire slasher film genre. I can't quote them exactly, but the words "sick" and "irresponsible" figured into the expressions of their remorse for the unintended consequence of helping to launch that genre.

IMHO, the very existance of slasher films not only exposes something deeply unhealthy in our society, but of considerably less important  consequence is  the fact that the slasher films have led to the wholesale destruction of the horror genre as legitimate film entertainment. There is simply no such thing as representing murder in a "glorious fashion." There is truly no such thing as dying in glorious fashion, as depicted by the ancient lie, "Dolce et decorum est Pro Patria mori."  Sorry, MWG, but to derive the kind of enjoyment you seem to receive from that kind of imagery is just plain sick.

Ummm....never. It's just my philosophy. The "Final Destination" movies keep making money because people love to see people die in OTT, imaginative ways.

I have seen the movie and no, the death scenes weren't ingenious. What are you talking about?
They were more brutal than fun.

Well, too bad. I'm obviously not the only person to think so. I've supported my side earlier: There's a difference between killing off people in glorious fashion, like the ones in "See No Evil," "Final Destination," and "300," and killing people off in realistic, brutal ways, like the first death scene in "Scream," anything in "Funny Games," anything in the "Saw" movies, and anything in "Cannibal Holocaust." You're making it as if saying having joy seeing people die in great ways is a bad thing. So why do people keep watching the Final Destination movies? They are hardly brutal and disturbing. They're just fun to watch.

Ok, first of all, you're comparing 2 completely different things. When people die in imaginative, unrealistic, over-the-top ways, they are fun to watch because you know they can't happen in real life. However, if a film shows people dying by getting stabbed by a knife over and over again, that's a different story. The kills in Zodiac was obviously meant to disturb people. I didn't enjoy seeing them at all. I even turned my head. The kills in the Final Destination films are meant to entertain people. That's why they call them dark comedies.

And I'm not one of them. There was one death scene in "Hostel 2" in which I almost walked out. That's the first time that "walking out" ever happened to me. That scene was sick, brutal, and mean-spirited.

Some people see the Saw movies for the story, not for the death scenes. You're making plain, unsupported generalizations on fans of the series. It's almost offensive when you say that.