Can't wait for the Razzies!!!! - Page 2

Edwin Pereyra · 08-23-2004, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Just because some people didn't like the politics doesn't mean it wasn't generally well reviewed (go look at Rotten Tomatoes) and well recieved by the public.

Just out of curiosity, what is your basis that F911 was, as you put it, "well received by the public"? Because I know a lot of people who just flat out refuse to see the film.

~Edwin

MatthewLouwrens · 08-23-2004, 02:50 AM

Quote:

*The villains bike (and this is a plot point) is suddenly chain-driven. Of course this bike is not a chain-driven model and makes as much sense as James Bond getting in a car chase and escapes because the bad guy's car's propeller broke.

Mental note: watch Torque. That sounds funny.

Scott Weinberg · 08-23-2004, 02:59 AM

I'd agree that Torque is a fairly bad movie, but it's knowingly bad and more than a little self-satirizing. That's why I gave it 2.5!

Lew Crippen · 08-23-2004, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Just out of curiosity, what is your basis that F911 was, as you put it, "well received by the public"? Because I know a lot of people who just flat out refuse to see the film.

While I don’t know what Pete meant, I think that the over $100M box office gross speaks for itself. The all-time second place documentary has not hit a quarter of that total.

Of course any film that is so polemic is also extremely polarizing, so it is pretty easy to find very large numbers of people who have not (and will not under any circumstances) seen the film.

But then, since they have not seen the film, they can hardly be reacting to the film as a film, but to the filmmaker, his reputation and the subject matter.

Edwin Pereyra · 08-23-2004, 11:31 AM

Quote:

While I don’t know what Pete meant, I think that the over $100M box office gross speaks for itself. The all-time second place documentary has not hit a quarter of that total.

Box office gross does not equate to a film being "well-received by the public". It just tells me that a lot of people saw it. If box office gross is your basis for a film being well received then you can also argue that The Village, which has made over $105M is also well received by the public but we all know it isn't.

And from those who saw F911, a lot didn't even like it. So, how can something be well received when a good portion of the public don't even want to see it in the first place and those who have seen it, some didn't even like it?

I think a more appropriate wording would be that F911 was well-received by its target audience. But to say that it is well-received by the public is a generalization that is just not true.

~Edwin

Michael Reuben · 08-23-2004, 11:44 AM

An even more appropriate wording in this thread on the subject of Fahrenheit 9/11 would be what Robert Crawford suggested on the first page: silence.

M.

Edwin Pereyra · 08-23-2004, 11:50 AM

~Edwin

Seth Paxton · 08-23-2004, 05:50 PM

Just to be clear, the only reason I even mentioned it is that it is a great example of non-Razzie material. Lots of quality films have people that hate the story, characters, etc. That doesn't make the film a "bad" film. In fact its probably just the opposite.

Razzie films usually don't even inspire such emotional reactions because they are so utterly dull due to lack of quality/coherency (see House of the Dead).

However, as I said they do like to cherry pick from a group of moderate quality bad films because they are more well-known.

Say what you will about the Oscars, but the Razzies are far worse about ignoring the implied goal of the award (picking the worst films made), instead going for choices that will be more popular. That's why I mentioned that a film has to be the butt of jokes in the mainstream, or at least it helps.

But films of controversial topics such as PotC or F911 are nowhere near this area. Few, if any, jokes are made about the poor quality of such films. You might find worse films than Catwoman this year, but it has to be a Razzie front-runner because its so well-known and it gives them a chance to run out names like Halle Berry and Sharon Stone as nominees. You know they'd love to tag onto an Oscar winner.

Matt Leigh · 08-24-2004, 12:21 AM

Does the lack of reality actually change the over the top stylish message of Torque? I'd actually argue that it improves it.

This is a movie where 2 people are racing motorcycles down a crowded downtown street at what looks like 300 miles an hour! So fast that windows are being blown out on parked cars and the air displacement is blowing up womens skirts!

Spoiler:

Sure, that was silly and completely unecessary. But so was everything that came before, starting from the very first shot with the turtle. There are just so many gratuitously stylish shots in the film for the sake of them being stylish that we are supposed to laugh with them. For example, the speeding bike's reflection in the knife in the dirt or Ice Cube's introduction in a reflection in the same knife.

In The Quick and the Dead the bullets went clean through a person leaving a perfect hole where a lightbeam could even shine through.

In the Evil Dead 2 Ash chops his own hand off willingly while laughing at himself, among about 50 other things in that film that were totally silly. We accept it in those films as they are designed around the style over substance and I think this film is expecting no different from the audience.

Scott Weinberg · 09-03-2004, 05:25 PM

I bet Ben Kingsley earns an award for the whole year.