Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > DISCUSSIONS & POLLS on 2010 RELEASES > POLL: POSSIBLE WORST SUPPORTING ACTORS for 2010
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR 2010 - POLL
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR 2010 - POLL

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Poll Question: Hooz YER Top/Bottom Pick??
Vote Poll Choice Poll Statistics
[0.73%]
[0.78%]
[15.69%]
[0.78%]
[1.01%]
[0.49%]
[0.91%]
[2.79%]
[0.41%]
[3.67%]
[0.70%]
[0.70%]
[0.72%]
[46.46%]
[16.07%]
[1.71%]
[0.73%]
[3.85%]
[0.64%]
[1.13%]

Author
Message
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7082
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR 2010 - POLL
    Posted: December 16 2010 at 4:54pm
Are you saying Patel's performance in SLUMDOG was Oscar worthy? 

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Yeah, it's because he was in TWO movies, but I think it should go to Dev because he should know better, coming off of an Oscar winning Best Picture.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 16 2010 at 4:56pm
Never watched Skins. Not saying he should be spared, just saying he shouldn't have gone with this movie.  

Originally posted by rburton

Before he was a slumdog, he was the worst thing on television's Skins
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.
Back to Top
AwesomelyBadCrap View Drop Down
Berry Good Friend
Berry Good Friend


Joined: December 19 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 22
Post Options Post Options   Quote AwesomelyBadCrap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2010 at 9:50am
I agree -- Can't say I care this way or that way about James Franco, but his consideration for Date Night is just downright silly. Where is Cam Gigandet for Burlesque? Phew did he stink. Or is he not considered because he isn't famous enough? Boooooo! 

:)  

Originally posted by Vits

 I have to say I'm very dissapointed with this list. Half the actors here were in bad movies, but the bad reviews didn't say they were bad. I think some listed here were evengood
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7082
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2010 at 11:05am
Welcome, AwesomelyBadCrap

Unknown actors can be nominated. Last year that was the case with Jorma Taccone. The main proof is that in most sites that had the nominations list they had to write what character he played. And Gigandet has already been Razzie-looked for THE TWILIGHT SAGA.

I dare to say that, just like the Golden Globes, the Razzies are desperate for attention (specially since they'll be on TV). And what gave them so much advertising was when last year Sandra Bullock won an Oscar and a Razzie. Maybe they think they can do that with James Franco. Two problems: Colin Firth and Jesse Eisenberg have more chances,and,a lot of people say Franco was more of a best supporting actor in DATE NIGHT.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
AwesomelyBadCrap View Drop Down
Berry Good Friend
Berry Good Friend


Joined: December 19 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 22
Post Options Post Options   Quote AwesomelyBadCrap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2010 at 12:20pm
Thanks, Vits1 Glad to be here. Smile Yup, totally agree with you on Franco. He was probably the best thing about Date Night!
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2010 at 1:32pm
The problem with studios and award shows is that they always wait for the end of the year to release their Oscar baiters, so they are fresh in the voters' minds. The problems being: 

#1. Movie goers don't have time to see the movies, so the TV viewers have no idea what these movies are even about. 

#2. It's hard to tell who had the best performance or best picture of the year when all the buzz is in the very last weeks of the year.
 
The agenda of Hollywood is like this: Jan-April: Filler, usually the worst movies of the year. May-August: Blockbusters (or at least blockbuster hopefuls), some are good, many are not. Sept-Nov: More filler, slightly better movies than Jan-April, some Oscar baiters here and there. Dec: All Oscar bait, some last minute wannabe blockbusters. And this agenda has only gotten more transparent in the past decade.
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.
Back to Top
AwesomelyBadCrap View Drop Down
Berry Good Friend
Berry Good Friend


Joined: December 19 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 22
Post Options Post Options   Quote AwesomelyBadCrap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2010 at 5:45pm
I know I'll be in the minority on this one, but I thought that Harrison Ford was absolutely horrible in Morning Glory. He has gone from low key performances to Al Pacino-mode with his completely hammy, over-the-top performances. In fact, I'd consider him a double nominee this year for Extraordinary Meausures where he was also horrible (but he may be considered lead for that one, though I'd consider it supporting....top billing or not)

Also Bradley Cooper in Case 39 would make my list for the bee scene alone! :-D
Back to Top
cvcjr13 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1190
Post Options Post Options   Quote cvcjr13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2010 at 5:56pm
What the hell are you talking about, Vits?  (see below)
 
"The Razzies are desperate for attention"?  Desperate?  We're mentioned worldwide, and the Foundation doesn't spend that much (if anything) on promotion.  
 
"And what gave them so much advertising. . .?"  I'm sorry, if you said "gave them a higher profile" I might let that one slide, but "advertising"?  If the awards show is on TV this year, there will be a sponsor,  but that's about the extent of any "advertising."  
 
Where do you get this nonsense?  The Razzies caught on by the news media and by word of mouth.  I mean, where were you when Halle Berry gave that wonderful acceptance speech for her Razzie for Catwoman?  Where were you when Bill Cosby accepted his Razzie for Leonard Part 6 in a separate presentation after he paid for the trophy to be specially made?  The Razzies have long since become part of the movie award seasons.  

For crying out loud, before the Writer's Guild settled, it looked like the Razzies would be the ONLY awards show to go on as planned back in 2008 without requiring a waiver.  Of course, that was because everyone was fairly sure Lindsay Lohan and Eddie Murphy were not going to show up. . . .
 
I can't speak for the Foundation, but from what I've seen the Razzies are not attention whores or moneygrubbers like you implied.  We seriously want to lampoon Hollywood for shilling out cinematic dreck and we want to have a lot of fun doing it.  That last, mischeivous part may have been a factor in voting for Sandra Bullock (although I assert again I felt she deserved it anyway).  That, and, the fact that we love films and we love the stars despite all appearances to the contrary.  But NOT because we were "desperate for attention".  

Originally posted by Vits

 Welcome, AwesomelyBadCrap

I dare to say that, just like the Golden Globes, the Razzies are desperate for attention (specially since they'll be on TV). And what gave them so much advertising was when last year Sandra Bullock won an Oscar and a Razzie. 
 
 
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2010 at 9:53pm
I think Vits is just pissed by the idea that the Razzies MIGHT razz Franco just for a PR stunt so they get the same attention as they did with Sandra Bullock, because he believes Franco doesn't deserve it. According to the poll above, Franco is not the front-runner for a razzing, so Vits is jumping the gun with their theory.
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.
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7082
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 20 2010 at 12:02pm
I don't know what "jumping the gun" means. I knew Franco wasn't going to be a front-runner, but I'm mad he's in the poll in the first place. 

I apologize for my wrong choice of words. By "advertising" I meant "profile". I also meant that it was going to look like a PR stunt. And I'm not saying that's a bad thing. That doesn't make them attention whores (your words). The Razzies are known, but not in the same way as other awards. And since it's going to be on TV it needs more word of mouth. There are a lot of ways of doing that, and awarding the wrong movies and people (like the Oscars have sometimes done and the Golden Globes will probably do this year) is one of them. 

When Cosby accepted his Razzies, I hadn't even been born yet. 

I don't see, what does that have to do what happened in '08 with the WGA Strike, or with this. 

Also, you said you can't speak for the Foundation, yet you refer to it as "we"?? 

You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 20 2010 at 12:18pm
"Jumping the gun" is a way of saying that you were jumping to conclusions without having any real reason to make that conclusion. In other words, just because Franco's name is on the poll list, you're jumping to conclusions that the Razzies want to razz him so they get the same attention that they did with Sandra Bullock winning an Oscar and Razzie on the same weekend.
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.
Back to Top
cvcjr13 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1190
Post Options Post Options   Quote cvcjr13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 20 2010 at 7:49pm
I can't speak for the Foundation.  Really, only HeadRAZZ can speak for the Foundation.  However, I'm a Razzie member who is active on this website and have met a small number of the other members.  By "we", I mean the people I've met both here and in person.
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 20 2010 at 8:42pm
True, there are something like a total of 600+ voting members, and I only count maybe 30 regulars here at the forum. So the opinions of this forum are like 1/16th of the opinions that will decide who will win.  

Originally posted by cvcjr13

I can't speak for the Foundation.  Really, only HeadRAZZ can speak for the Foundation.  However, I'm a Razzie member who is active on this website and have met a small number of the other members.  By "we", I mean the people I've met both here and in person.
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.
Back to Top
Mayhem5185 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: October 10 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 259
Post Options Post Options   Quote Mayhem5185 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 1:49am
Thats a good point, I don't have a right to speak for the razzies, in fact i don't think none of us can no matter how many posts we put on here, if anything i feel that the people here on the forum, like me, are more like the employee's at the record store in "High Fidelity" rather than an consensus on who's going to win the razzies.

The only thing i'll agree with vits is the fact that it's puzzling that James Franco is on the list at all, in the past he was a potential razzie target, but he has really turned his career around in a way that most razzie actors have not, his name being up there is a complete waste of space if nothing else, and for that matter so is Mickey Rourke... seriously wtf?!?!  


I don't have pet peeves, I have major psychotic f**king hatreds! George Carlin
Back to Top
cvcjr13 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1190
Post Options Post Options   Quote cvcjr13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 6:57am
Can you imagine what this place would be like if all 600 or so members were logged into this site?  I'm guessing two-thirds would lurk while the other third would post like crazy, but still, that would be 200 people posting around here at the same time.
Back to Top
Vheid View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: December 10 2010
Location: Utrecht
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1192
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vheid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 9:08am
Yet it still seems that 600+ people are voting on these polls that has to mean something (doesn't it?)

Originally posted by cvcjr13

Can you imagine what this place would be like if all 600 or so members were logged into this site?  I'm guessing two-thirds would lurk while the other third would post like crazy, but still, that would be 200 people posting around here at the same time.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down