EXPENDABLES TRIVIA QUESTION ANSWER... - The Official RAZZIE® Forum

My guess was too high: 56 nominations and 15 wins.

Originally posted by GTAHater767

I think Sylvester Stallone is below average, but his films are much better than those of Nicolas Cage, M. Night Shyamalan, Uwe Boll, and Seltzerberg... until the tobacco product placement is factored in. That's what sealed the deal on me hating Sly.

As I said before, having to choose between those options is like having to choose which nut you'd rather be kicked in.

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.

Actually, newscctv, I was talkign about the other 2 or 3 STallone fans who declare ANYTHING he has a hand in is automatically an Oscar worthy classic. But hey, at least you're one of the few who doesn't proclaim "Expendables" to be on par with "Toy Story 3" and "Inception" ... because, well, it isn't.

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.

Meyer Wieners?

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

Sly Stallone should star in a biopic about Michael Moore. . . .

Originally posted by saturnwatcher

Maybe Stone should expend his energy on a worthwhile story...like George and Dick Take America On A REALLY Bogus Journey

Yeah, but that would be stealing Michael Moore's thunder (or gimmick, whatever).

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.

...and just because I can never resist the temptation to pile on somebody who really deserves it, like Stallone, let's proceed. Quite apart from the fact that Stallone was quick to take the real life role of Don Knott's Mr. Chicken on a couple of occasions when he was asked to do USO tours in Iraq and that whole steroid thing in Australia, here is another reason that the man deserves contempt:

These days, we can all go to movie theaters, sporting events, restaurants, plane rides and even work without having to deal with someone else's cigarette smoke. It wasn't always that way. Scientists working for the major tobacco companies discovered that second hand smoke was a serious health hazzard way back in the 60's, but mainstream science didn't really catch on for about another decade. As soon as the issue became public and the battle was on, the big tobacco companies led preemptive strikes against possible future bans. One of their weapons? By golly, his name was Sylvester Stallone! Brown and Williamson ponied up $500,000 to Stallone so that he would use their products onscreen in 5 of his films. Evidently, they figured that the site of Stallone lighting up would give their product an aura of power and strength, particularly in the eyes of impressionable young males. (Glantz et al, The Cigarette Papers 366)

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

Well, GREED 2 is a sequel to a movie from 20 years ago that no on asked for, and is only being made to capitalize on the current news stories about Wall Street being run by greedy motherf***ers who get huge bonuses regardless if they cause their companies to go out of business...

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Not to defend Oliver Stone (who's one of my least favorite current film-makers) but I think recent events make a better case for doing a sequel to WALL STREET than does anything currently in the news justify doing CATS & DOGS 2, WOLFMAN or most of the other creatively bankrupt sequels and remakes we've seen in 2010...

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.