Yikes. 2010 was a bad year for movies. This is probably the most competitive field for Worst Picture I've seen.
2010 Razzie Nominations for Worst Picture
The Bounty Hunter
The Last Airbender
Sex and the City 2
Twilight Saga: Eclipse
Vampires Suck
If you're not a 12 year old girl, you probably agree with me that the Twilight franchise is terrible. What you may not know, is that it is essentially a trilogy's worth of story. There was the first book and second book, but instead of making the last book, there's an extra book first of filler material. While the 4th book has vampire C-Sections and werewolves dating babies, this is the part of the saga where people just sit around and wait. So while the whole franchise is repugnant, this film has the added sin of being boring.
Then there's Vampires Suck, a "parody" of Twilight. It's brought to you by the folks who brought you such AWESOME pictures as Scary Movie 3, Date Movie, and Epic Movie. These "parody" films are basically the lowest, most obvious, form of humor. Their "parody" of Napoleon Dynamite, for example, had a character wearing a shirt that said "DON'T vote for Pedro". Get it? It's the opposite! Their filmmaking style has been described as "the cinematic equivalent of peeing and missing the toilet by a good three feet". While these people have a track record of taking good movies and making terrible versions of them, I shudder to think what would result when the source material is as horrendous as Twilight.
Also, there's The Last Airbender. I reviewed it here, but let me repeat the summary: this is the single worst movie I have ever seen. WORST EVER.
I suspect, however, that if I had seen Sex and the City 2 though, it might take the top spot. Everything that needs to be said about this film has been said in Lindy West's review: "SATC2 takes everything that I hold dear as a woman and as a human—working hard, contributing to society, not being an entitled cunt like it's my job—and rapes it to death with a stiletto that costs more than my car".
Any other year, any one of these would be a runaway winner (loser?) but this year, man, I just don't know. Too close to call!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Twilight may be terrible, but I don't think it stands up in this contest. Firstly it's so wildly popular that I'm not sure if people wanted to give it a bad name. Hell, it got 50% on Rottentomatoes. That means at least half of the reviewers either liked it or were too afraid to let their children down.
Now look at the other choices. Vampires Suck was not meant to be a serious movie, and since we know it's going to be bad (4% rating... that's pretty up there with Epic movie!), that narrows the choices down a bit more. All of the other movies were meant to be SERIOUS.
Avatar: TLB was horrendous. Sex and the City 2 was likened to be "the Transformer's movie for women." (That's gotta sting a little) and The Bounty Hunter kinda just went under the radar.
My bets are on Avatar, 'cause it's really hard to screw up that bad.
Yeah, twilight did what it set out to do, ad did it fairly well. I personally don't feel that "Two hours of pretty boys standing around looking angsty" is a good foundation for a movie, but plenty of people do, and paid money to see it.
I disagree with your assertion that attempting to be funny and failing is somehow less serious than attempting to be serious and failing. If anything, it's worse; plenty of movies have attempted to be serious and accidentally succeeded at being funny, the reverse has never happened.
If I had to choose between being kicked in the nuts or watching one of these movies, I'd choose to watch the Bounty Hunter, Twilight, and Vampires Suck, and take two shots in the balls.
It basically comes down to which one is worse, a decent(?) premise executed terribly or a horrible premise executed terribly. I'm honestly not sure.
Post a Comment