My approach to the annual awards show put on by The Golden Raspberry Foundation has been with trepidation for years. I am someone with an affection for “sewer cinema,” and I co-host a bad movie podcast with another film writer, Paul Young, called “Disasters In the Making.” It is with interest that I approach this sub-genre of Hollywood.
But as an aficionado of forlorn films, I have a mixed reaction to The Razzies. Too often, the lineup of nominations seems more geared toward hitting marks or aiming at specific actors to generate PR hype. There are the groan-inducing nominations with the cornball descriptions, such as most of the “Worst Screen Couple” picks in any given year, and then there is the tendency of The Razzies to inject politics into the mix.
For deeply distracting reasons, the organizers often have felt the need to get political, and always, their targets are purely those on the right. In past years, they have awarded “winners” to George Bush, as “Worst Actor,” for being portrayed as himself in documentary footage. Likewise, Donald Trump was recognized at the 39th Razzies for portraying himself as he was, again, displayed in two documentaries. The problem here is not with the barbs being flung at conservatives, but the need to go political is a deflating aspect; it takes away from the frivolity intended, as well as robbing proper recognition of badness.
They even had to inject some of this in this year’s announced nominees. In announcing one of the films selected, there was this commentary: “Another installment of a franchise that’s fading faster than Razzie ‘winner’ Donald Trump’s mental acuity.”
The unrecognized irony in these decisions is that the organizers end up pandering to and currying favor from the very studios and media they are supposedly taking to task with these awards. They seek approval from the very industry they are allegedly mocking.
But overall, apart from the occasional jabs, this year, we see a good mixture of poor titles. A notable inclusion is the nominations for the “Ant-Man & The Wasp” sequel, a first for the Marvel Cinematic Universe – although how “The Marvels” escaped recognition is a complete mystery. Also noteworthy is that as “The Expend4bles” was tabbed, the force behind the film, Sylvester Stallone, is properly seen as a “Worst Supporting Actor,” since this entry in the franchise was a hoped-for passing of the torch.
“Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey” is a worthy inclusion, as this low-budget alleged horror film was made as a result of the licensing of the characters falling into the public domain. The rebooted attempt at “The Exorcist” franchise is a good choice, as the famed bargain producer Jason Blum worked against type and was thrown into a $400 million franchise by the studio and failed remarkably.
On the negative side, once again, the organizers truncate things with repetitions in the “Worst Film” and “Worst Remake” categories. Possibly done to mount the nomination count, if they segregated these picks, more titles could be included in the affair. There were plenty of worthy titles, as I noted at the end of the year in my compilations of the Bombs of 2023. I could cite ten sequels alone, and how about some (tough) love for others like “65” and “Freelance”?!
All said, this year is a decently satisfactory list of films, so I’ll cut the Golden Raspberry Foundation a bit of slack. This year’s slate of picks works, although it could have been better. (Worse?) Here are the nominations, with the ceremony being held on Saturday, March 9, the evening before the Academy Awards.
44th GOLDEN RASPBERRY AWARD NOMINATIONS
WORST PICTURE
WORST ACTOR
WORST ACTRESS
WORST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR
WORST SCREEN COUPLE
for Remake Rights to "The Exorcist"
"Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey"
WORST PREQUEL, REMAKE, RIP-OFF or SEQUEL
WORST DIRECTOR
WORST SCREENPLAY