The Razzies 2012: why were so many bad movies snubbed?
Mark bemoans a lack of risk-taking from this year's Razzie nominations, and argues that they should be subjected to the same scrutiny as the Oscars
It's become trendy for the online film press to write about the Academy Awards in a certain way: full of anticipation on the way to the nominations, critical and annoyed once the nominations overlook some of our pet favourites, and then completely dismissive once the ceremony itself has passed. That's why I've avoided writing about the Oscars this year, but I do have a bone to pick, with the Golden Raspberries.
The big news over the weekend was that Adam Sandler garnered a record-breaking 11 Razzie nominations, which denigrate the worst of the worst in the last cinematic year. Or at least that's what they're supposed to do, anyway. Sandler, in the last few years, has become the critical equivalent of the broad side of a barn, and they found an excuse to nominate him in every single category.
A common complaint about the Oscars is that the Academy tend to nominate films that “nobody saw”, because of limited distribution or slim mainstream appeal, which has been part of the reason why television ratings for the ceremony have declined over the last few years. By contrast, I haven't seen Sandler's Jack & Jill, because I simply don't need that pain in my life.
That's not to say that I was able to avoid every goddamn awful movie that was released in the last 12 months. If only that were true. If we lived in a world where Breaking Dawn Part 1 (nominated eight times) was even in the bottom 10 of 2011, I'd be much happier, but instead, I think we need to subject the Golden Raspberries to the same scrutiny as the Oscars, or, more importantly, the Golden Globes.
Undoubtedly the most memorable moment in Razzie history was Sandra Bullock's acceptance of the 2010 gong for Worst Actress in All About Steve, the day before she picked up the Oscar for Best Actress in The Blind Side. Bullock was a great sport, and incidentally, All About Steve wasn't the worst film of its year, either.
But not everyone is Sandra Bullock, and attendance of the Razzies ceremony is far less star-studded than its more congratulatory counterparts. The Golden Globes has often been seen as a joke, with nominations being dished out to people that the Hollywood Foreign Press Association want to come to their party, rather than the most deserving candidates.
Inversely, I'm beginning to think that the Golden Raspberry Award Foundation are nominating people who they don't want at the party. Happy Madison's output keeps Adam Sandler's coffers full, and the relative failure of Funny People, in which Sandler showed such self-awareness that his return to the lowest common denominator is completely unforgiveable, means that I can't picture him embracing the ignominy of being the GRAF's most nominated this year.
Some of the usual suspects appear in the nominations, which include awards for Worst Screen Couple and Worst Prequel, Remake, Sequel Or Rip-Off- Nicolas Cage has a blanket Worst Screen Couple nomination for everything he did in 2011, and Transformers: Dark of the Moon deserves its eight nominations far more than Twilight does. But what of the proper disappointments?
I like Ryan Reynolds a lot, but he had a shitty year, between the lifeless mediocrity of Green Lantern and the howling misogyny of The Change-Up, and I'm sure he could take a nod for Worst Actor on the chin. There's not a single mention of the absolute worst American film of last year, either: Something Borrowed. If a Golden Raspberry is meant to be given to the worst of film in any given year, I'd like to see that Kate Hudson-starring monstrosity brought to people's attention as a true stinker.
The Razzies aren't televised, and this year, they aren't even in their previous position of the night before the Oscars. Instead, they take place on April 1st, perhaps an obvious date for a show that looks set to take shots at the obvious targets. While I'm happy that the GRAF aren't actively chasing another Sandra Bullock moment, I'd hate for them to take fewer risks, and become as predictable and uninteresting as their back-slapping competitors.
By Mark Harrison
Comments
Post a Comment