File this under "Why we created The Inner Dorkdom."
Many of you are no doubt familiar with the Razzies. If not, then all you need to know for the purposes of this article is that they are a group of awards given to ostensibly the "worst" in film and within a given year. So, you might say, the opposite of the Oscars. Tuesday the Razzie nominees for 2012 were revealed. As I read about the announcement on IGN, I felt compelled to share with you these two observations.
1. I just don't get the idea of the Razzies. I mean, I understand the concept. But I don't understand the point. Taking pleasure in demeaning the work of others? Don't get me wrong, people are entitled to their likes and dislikes (ID Primary Directive #3). And they are entitled to express their dislikes. But being all snarky about it, acting like what the voters don't like is indeed the worst (as though there is some objective standard with art), and taking the effort (minimal as it may be) to have awards for them... Well, it's like Jetfire said: "Who wants to live a life filled with hate?"
2. If you're nevertheless going to have awards for the "worst," why don't you at least try to seriously follow through with it.
This year Breaking Dawn Pt 2 has more nominations (11) than any other film. It's been nominated for worst film, worst director, wost actress, worst actor, worst supporting actress, worst supporting actor, worst ensemble, worst screenplay, worst remake rip-off or sequel, worst screen couple, worst screen couple (yes, it has two nominations in the same category). There are only 10 categories in the Razzies. Now, I've actually seen Breaking Dawn Pt 2. It isn't my favorite film ever. But it is a very competent movie. People may not care for the story. Love, teenagers, and vampires may not be something some people want to see mixed. That's their prerogative. But if you do like such things, and especially if you care about the characters of the Twilight series, I can assure you this film was made well enough to elicit all the emotions the production crew intended. I saw it happen with my own eyes.
Yet it has been nominated for all those Razzies. I'm sorry, but if there were such a thing as an objectively worst movie, Breaking Dawn Pt 2 wouldn't be it for 2012. Same can be said for the film's actors, actresses, and their chemistry. So why all the nominations? Of course I can't be certain about how these decisions or made, but it certainly gives off the impression, to me anyway, that often times it boils down to the same old chestnut: it's cool to hate on certain things.
In an attempt to explore this notion, I took a look at the past nominees and winners of the worst film of the year. Waterworld was nominated in 1995. If you recall, that's the year it started to become cool to hate on Kevin Costner. Two years later the movement was in full swing, and lo and behold The Postman won worst picture that year. The three most recent Twilight films were each nominated, and yet the first one, which even some Twilight fans believe had tons of room for improvement, wasn't. (Did it just take some time for Twilight hate to catch on, or have the films really gotten progressively worse?) Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen won in 2009, and Transformers: Dark of the Moon was nominated in 2011, and of course we know how cool it is to hate on Michael Bay. And then there's this man named George Lucas, who, I think, might also be on the "cool to hate" list. Two of the three Star Wars prequels were nominated (the fact that Episode III wasn't suggests there must be some bare minimum standard of integrity).
Looking at the Worst Prequel, Sequel, Remake, or Rip-off category, we find that Kingdom of the Crystal Skull won in 2008, beating out another Lucasfilm production that was also nominated, that being The Clone Wars film. The Santa Clause 3 was nominated in 2006, around the time it was cool to hate on Tim Allen. And, yes, all Twilight sequels have been nominated.
A few more quick notes. In directors, Costner was nominated for Waterworld and won for The Postman, Lucas was nominated in both 1999 (Ep 1) and 2002 (Ep 2), M. Night Shyamalan won in 2006 for Lady In the Water (beating out Uwe Boll), and Michael Bay won for Revenge of the Fallen and was nominated for Dark of the Moon. In screenplays, The Postman won in 1997, and Lucas was nominated for worst screenplay with Ep I, and won (along with Jonathan Hales) for Ep II. What about worst actor? Shocker, Costner was nominated for Waterworld and won for The Postman. And last but not least, in worst film score, which was discontinued after 1985, the winner that final year was Vince DiCola. That's just stupid.
Again, I can't be certain about why some films get nominated or win. But when Crystal Skull beats out Disaster Movie, or The Postman beats Anaconda, or Kevin Costner beats out Joel Schumacher, one can't help but be dubious.
Ah well, the hates can have their fun getting together and hating. Meanwhile, we'll continue to spotlight what we enjoy, as well as pointing out the silliness of the hater.
Until next time, I remain,
- Nic
p.s. - They also hated Howard the Duck.
END OF LINE
You didn't like the original Anaconda?
ReplyDelete-Mr. X