DISCUSSION of 2008 RAZZIE® "WINNERS"

HERE'S WHERE to JOIN the LIVELY DISCUSSION of OUR 2008 "WINNERS"...

...and HERE's the LINK to SEE WHAT "WON" for 2008...  

Originally posted by Vits I guess it's too late to continue bashing you for awarding INDIANA JONES 4 a Razzie. Anyway, here are my ratings(0-10)for the INDY saga:  1)6 for RAIDERS. 2)5 for TEMPLE OF DOOM. 3)4 for LAST CRUSADE. 4)8 for CRYSTAL SKULL.

Okay, you REALLY need to switch your ratings around, because "Raiders" OWNED all the other movies and "Crystal Skull" doesn't even come close. Yeah, "Skull" might be the most fresh in your mind nad has the most current sfx, but "Raiders" tears it apart when it comes to story, dialog, characters, etc.

Originally posted by Vits I mispoke.Whenever I bash you for awarding INDY 4 it's not just me talking.It's also audiences and critics.As for the ratings...yeah,I have a history like that.

Critics and audiences only liked "Indy 4" because it was a throw back to their childhoods, but once the childhood memories pass, you realize the movies sucks compared to the original 3. I don't care if people don't like that choice, but it was the right choice because the movie was a big let down. Take a note from How It Should Have Ended:

It is a tradition with sequels that they pay homage to the original movies, but should also top them in their quality and grand scale. "Indy 4" did pay homages here and there, but in terms of quality, it was nowhere as good as the past 3 movies and was just bloated with bad adventure movie cliches. But that's how I judge sequels, I guess others just like that they have childhood memories come washing over them from watching the movie (although, if that is the case, then why not just watch the original movie on DVD?).

Then what do you think should have won? I can't think a sequel that has come along since  that was as disappointing as "Indy 4" (not counting "Transformers 2", because it I knew it was going to suck from day one).

Originally posted by Vits Any of the other nominees.Is unlikely for a sequel or remake to be better than the original one,but the others were bad on their own,while INDY 4 was good standing alone.Once again,that's not me talking,it's the world,based on reviews and box office.

"Indy 4" is not a good stand-alone movie, in fact, fi you haven't seen the past three movies, you are not going to have a clue what's going on (who Marion is, Indy's fear of snakes, etc.). As I said before, Indiana Jones is a beloved character whom many people consider to be a role model and hero from their childhood. After nearly 20 years, those same fans would go running into the theaters to see any movie with Indy's name attached to it, even if the movie was 2 hours of Indy drinking soda and belching the alphabet. Sure enough, that's exactly what happened. They made a crappy movie and everyone run to it, only to realize late that it was crap, much like what happened to the "Star Wars" prequels. Once the fond childhood memories go away after the first 20 minutes, you realize, this movie sucks.

Originally posted by Vits No offense,but like I said my comments are also the ones from critics and audiences.You're the only I hear saying those things about the movie.

Well, you can like it all you want. The votes were casted and counting and in the end, the paying members voiced their opinions. It's in the past and can't be undone.