Reviewing The Golden Raspberry Awards 2024

March is here and so are the Razzies awards for this year! As soon as the nominees lineup was announced on the 22nd January, I got to work on writing this blog post, only making further extreme edits once the "winners" were announced.

This was one of the more surprising lineups I've encountered in the history of this awards show. There were the nominees I expected to be on the list, but then there were some surprises as well. Some made sense and some I feel were being given too much flack. And then there were the ones that I expected to make the list but didn't.

Real life issues such as a boiler problem at home and getting distracted by my newfound mood board obsession meant that I wasn't able to finish this blog post earlier on. However, I feel April Fool's Day is a good time to release it, as the Razzies did host their award ceremony on that day in 2012, before deciding to stick with Oscar's Eve.

Anyway, here are the categories for this year, where I will discuss the nominations and winners, as well as my thoughts on some of the choices made and films or roles I feel could have made the lists as well. I'll even mention some of the predictions that I had for who would take the "wins" in each category.

Alright, here are the categories!

Worst Picture - Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey.

Three films nominated for this category were ones that I expected. The Exorcist: Believer was a remake nobody asked for and I remember being completed flabbergasted when I first saw the poster for it on a bus somewhere. Expend4bles (that stupid title pun reminds me too much of the equally appalling Fant4stic) was a sequel that was doomed to fail anyway, especially considering that The Expendables 3 was a critical flop and Sylvester Stallone is a Razzie veteran anyway. And practically EVERYBODY expected Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey (the Razzies wonders whether it should have been spelled "Hunny") to be nominated - some people were initially fascinated by the concept of a beloved children's character becoming a serial killer, but the film ultimately turned out to be more exploitative horror than anything interesting.

I was a bit surprised by the nomination of Shazam! Fury of the Gods, though to be fair, it shouldn't be that much of a surprise. It was a disappointing sequel to an otherwise fantastic movie from 2019, and it was ultimately between this and Ant-Man: Quantumania with regard to being the suckiest superhero movie of 2023. The lead actors trying to defend it after the film failed actually made matters worse in my mind, as it was as if they truly couldn't understand what went wrong with it (similar to Jason Derulo being completely ignorant as to how bad the Cats film truly was). Sure, there are many fans out there who have defended it too, but the fact is that the whole production behind it was a mess, especially with the whole Black Adam debacle linked with it.

What was more of a surprise for me was the nomination of Meg 2: The Trench, because honestly it isn't that bad. Okay, it's kind of stupid, but in a fun way and at least it seems to know how silly it is. Also they claimed that it "flopped across all seven seas", but clearly they're only talking critically as it did really well at the box office otherwise and reviews were more mixed than outright negative. Honestly, there were worst movies that could have been nominated instead like Ghosted and You People (which many people were banking on to be nominated in this category).

I highly expected (and hoped) this award would go to either the Exorcist remake, Expend4bles or Blood and Honey. In fact, I placed most of my bets on Blood and Honey because of how notable the bad press it received was. To my delight, and definitely NOT surprise, that was the film that took the win. It's not even "so bad it's good", it's just incredibly dumb. It's one of those films that you cannot believe exists in the first place and you wish that it never existed at all. Please...just don't watch it at all.

Worst Actor - Jon Voight as Patrick Quinn in Mercy. 

I said that Ghosted should have been nominated for Worst Picture, but fortunately it has its first nomination here, with Chris Evans being nominated for his role as Cole Turner. Other nominees include Oscar winners Russell Crowe and Jon Voight for their respective roles as Father Gabriele Amorth in The Pope's Exorcist and Patrick Quinn in Mercy, and famed action stars Vin Diesel and Jason Statham for their respective roles as Dominic Toretto in Fast X and Jonas Taylor in Meg 2: The Trench.

My initial prediction was that Chris Evans would take the "win" here for Ghosted. However, much to my surprise, it was Voight who took it instead for what the Razzies described as a "Lucky Charm Leprechaun" Irish accent. Interesting that this was the only nomination the film received, as it received a whopping 0% on Rotten Tomatoes - they really should have nominated this film for Worst Picture as well.

This isn't the first time that Voight has been nominated, as he was nominated for Anaconda in 1998, Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2 in 2005 and Bratz: The Movie in 2009 (oh god, these latter two films DO exist, burn them from my memory), but it is his first win. Also, the Stinker Awards (a long gone award ceremony that also honoured bad films like the Razzies do) put him up for nominations and awards for his terrible fake accents in two of these movies, so I guess he was bound to fail with his Irish accent in this recent film anyway. Which is a pity, because he started out really well with Midnight Cowboy and has been in some other successful roles such as in Coming Home.

Worst Actress - Megan Fox as Alana Hart in Johnny & Clyde.

Previously, the Razzies themselves took the win here for their absolute cock-up with regard to putting a child actress up for nomination. Fortunately for them this year, they have not repeated the same mistake as all of the nominations here are grown women.

Last year was not the first time that Ana de Armas starred in a terrible movie (you'll remember that she started in Razzie-winner Blonde right before that), but she has gained her first Razzie nomination for her role as Sadie Rhodes in Ghosted. It's a pity really, because before Blonde she was in some really good films such as Blade Runner 2049 and No Time to Die, with my favourite role of hers being Marta in Knives Out.

Other nominations include Razzie veterans Megan Fox as Alana Hart in Johnny & Clyde and Jennifer Lopez as the Mother in...The Mother. Salma Hayek, who has been nominated a few times before but never "won" has also been nominated for her role as Maxandra Mendoza in Magic Mike's Last Dance. In a very shocking swerve, Oscar-winning star Dame Helen Mirren of all people has been nominated for her role as Hespera in Shazam! Fury of the Gods, in a rare blunder for her. Even she admits that she still had no idea what the script was about during an interview meant to promote the movie.

Possibly to nobody's surprise, Megan Fox won this award. Though she has been nominated for this category several times in the past, this is the first time she has won this particular award. Her fall into Razzie "stardom" has been an interesting one - the Transformers movies that made her famous were never a hit with critics, but Jennifer's Body was her first major fumble, and it seems that she hasn't been able to recover since then.

Worst Supporting Actor - Sylvester Stallone as Barney Ross in Expend4bles.

Two Razzie veterans have made the list here - Mel Gibson for his role as Kevin Hickey in Confidential Informant and Sylvester Stallone for his role as Barney Ross in Expend4bles. Franco Nero has also been nominated for his role as the Pope in The Pope's Exorcist. And two actors from Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania have made the list too - Bill Murray for his role as Lord Krylar and Oscar-winner Michael Douglas of all people for his role as Hank Pym. The latter actor is a particularly sad case, as he was in the previous Ant-Man films in the same role and really good in it.

My main guess for the "win" in this category was Stallone, given his abysmal track record with the Razzies in the past. Ultimately, I was proven correct, as he did take the "award". This now makes it his twelfth "win" overall, with the majority being for his acting roles but some being for directing and screenwriting. It's likely going to be some time before any other actor overtakes him as the most decorated Razzie nominee and winner, considering the staggering amount of nominations and wins he's had over the decades.

Worst Supporting Actress - Megan Fox as Gina in Expend4bles.

Megan Fox receives another nomination this year, this time for her role as Gina in Expend4bles. Johnny & Clyde and Shazam! Fury of the Gods, already mentioned in the Worst Leader Actress section, have received nominations here as well, with Bai Ling being nominated for her role as Zhang in the former movie and Lucy Liu for her role as Kalypso in the latter movie. The other two nominations are Kim Cattrall for her role as Tigger in About My Father and Mary Stuart Masterson for her role as Aunt Jane in Five Nights at Freddy's (in the film's only nomination for the night, surprisingly enough).

Once again, Megan Fox wins an "award" at this year's Razzies, making it her second win in this category - her first "win" (and first win overall) was as April O'Neil in the hideous-looking 2015 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles animation/live-action hybrid film. Overall, she's been nominated a total of nine times for different awards, ultimately winning three. Fortunately for her though, the actual woman to be nominated most times for the Razzies is Madonna for a whopping sixteen, ultimately winning eight, so at least Fox gets a one-up over Stallone in that regard.

Worst Screen Couple.

Ah, the screen couple category, best category as always. Two "normal" nominations popped up this year, that being Ana de Armas and Chris Evans in Ghosted (not a surprise there) and Channing Tatum and Salma Hayek in Magic Mike's Last Dance. However, on the more tongue-and-cheek side, you have any two "merciless mercenaries" in Expend4bles and Pooh and Piglet as blood-thirsty slasher/killers(!) in Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey - BTW, the Razzies added that exclamation mark there. And then there's my favourite nomination of all - any two money-grubbing investors who donated to the $400 million for remake rights to The Exorcist. I mean seriously?! What greedy idiots thought it was a good idea to remake it in the first place?!

Given the amusement factor of that nomination, I highly hoped that the investors would take the "win" here, just so they could be punished for their sheer greed. The sad news was that they didn't, but the good news was that it went to Pooh and Piglet instead. It's not just bad enough that Pooh is a serial killer in the film - Piglet has to be one too. What's next? Serial killer versions of other A.A. Milne characters? Serial killer versions of the Wind in the Willows cast, since Milne also did a stage adaptation of that book? Bet they're also the type of scumbags who'd be willing to invest in the Exorcist remake.

Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-Off Or Sequel - Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey.

Three movies from the Worst Picture category are in this one - The Exorcist: Believer, Expend4bles and Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey. Actually, the fact that ALL of the movies nominated for Worst Picture could be placed here too says an awful lot about the saturation of sequels and remakes in the film market today. Ant Man & The Wasp: Quantumania takes Shazam! Fury of the Gods' place as the superhero dud in this category though.

Of course, like with the Worst Picture category, there had to be a surprise choice, and in this case it was Indiana Jones and The Dial of Destiny. Or, as the Razzies put it themselves, Indiana Jones and The Dial of...Still Beating a Dead Horse. To be fair, I agree the franchise is sort of beating a dead horse at this point, but it isn't actually a bad movie, just meh. Critics and audiences were more mixed than anything, and it was mainly the box office reception that was so negative. It's certainly better than Temple of Doom and Crystal Skull, I can tell you that. Out of all the remakes and sequels put out by Disney last year, I would have nominated The Haunted Mansion instead - the only positive thing I can say about it is that at least it's slightly more accurate to the original theme park ride than the Eddie Murphy version. "Slightly" being the key term here - for starters, why the hell did they make Razzie veteran Jared Leto's character the main bad guy rather than Constance the axe-wielding bride, the BEST Haunted Mansion character by far?!

Fortunately, the actual win went to Blood and Honey, which truly deserved this "award". The main reason this film exists is because Winnie the Pooh is now public-domain as of 2023. That said, maybe they should introduce some conditions to those rules so that we don't get anything poor quality like this again. The only good news is that it seems to be based more on the Disney films than the original book, but even that isn't much of a reassurance.

Worst Director -Rhys Frake-Waterfield for Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey.

We have a second switch-out scenario here. Nearly all the Worst Picture nominees have had their directors nominated for their output - Rhys Frake-Waterfield for Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey (no surprise there), David Gordon Green for The Exorcist: Believer, Scott Waugh for Expend4bles and Ben Wheatley for Meg 2: The Trench. Shazam! Fury of the Gods however has been swapped out with Ant Man & the Wasp: Quantumania, with its director Peyton Reed being up for the "award" instead. He's the name I recognise most on this list, as he worked on the previous Ant Man movies, a bunch of rom-coms and Bring it On (surprisingly enough). Looking at his Rotten Tomatoes scores, his films tend to vary in critical reception, with the first Ant Man movies receiving very positive reception and everything else receiving mixed or negative.

My top two predictions for the "win" in this category were Frake-Waterfield and Green, with Waugh being my third guess. Ultimately, Frake-Waterfield took the win here, which he truly deserved due to the abysmal direction his film took. The most tragic thing is that he still plans to make more exploitative slashers based on Disney properties such as Steamboat Willy, Peter Pan and even Bambi. REALLY? Despite all the backlash from audiences as well as critics? Then again, some creators can be outright trolls at times.

Worst Screenplay - Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey.

Another switch-out scenario. Every single film in the Worst Picture category has been nominated for this one, except for Meg 2: The Trench. This was replaced with Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, or as the Razzies put it, Indiana Jones and the Dial of...Can I got home now?. Again, as funny as the joke titles are, I'm surprised that it made the list as there were worst remakes and sequels this year. I guess the reason it got two nominations is because it is a fifth installment in a franchise that is losing steam anyway and its lead actor is getting a bit too old to be a convincing action hero anymore (the poor box office intakes don't help either).

Once again, Blood and Honey takes the win. This essentially means that it has won all of the Razzies it was nominated for, making it a clean sweep. I can only think of a few other films such as that horrendous Jack & Jill movie with Adam Sandler that have "achieved" anything similar. In fact, Jack & Jill won EVERY SINGLE RAZZIE that time round. At least Blood & Honey can boast about avoiding the same pitfall due to it not being nominated for the acting categories.

The Razzie Redeemer award - Fran Drescher, for her brilliant shepherding of the actors’ guild through a prolonged 2023 strike with a successful conclusion.

Now for the return of the only award in this ceremony that actually praises the winner rather than criticise them. This time, it went to The Nanny star Fran Drescher, previously nominated for Worst Actress in The Beautician and the Beast, for leading the SAG-AFRA strikes in 2023. I remember reading all of the articles about the strike while it was happening, and she was pretty much on fire when it came to rallying all the actors together. The way she called out Bill Iger for his ridiculous comments on actors being "unrealistic" when it comes to strikes was also downright epic. Ultimately, the strike succeeded, with only a few objectives not being met, and the fact that most of the general public were on the side of the actors throughout it all really says a lot about Drescher's leadership and what the actors were going through. As well as how corrupt the Hollywood system is in general.

That's it for the awards that were actually handed out this year. However, I have decided for the sake of this blog post to hand out two more awards.

The Barry L. Bumstead award - Walt Disney and the DCEU.

The first "award" I will mention is one that I genuinely thought was going to be handed out this year. The Razzies did a really good blog post in August last year on Disney's abysmal 100th birthday (you can find it here) and were concerned that if they continued on their downward spiral for the rest of the year, they would likely be the first studio to win the Barry L. Bumstead award for financial failure. The rest of the year proved to be even worse for Disney with their vanity project Wish flopping critically and financially and The Marvels becoming one of the biggest MCU flops of all time.

However, come the Razzies themselves and this award was not handed out to anyone at all. This was probably the only major disappointment I had from this year's ceremony, as I really felt that Disney deserved it. Only one of their films did not flop in 2023, with everything else failing to achieve box office success or outstanding critical praise. In fact, I plan to do a whole "Oh Disney!" retrospective of Disney's abysmal anniversary at some point, hopefully later this month. I'm still working on it, but I have a good idea of what I want to include.

However, I am also aware that the DCEU also had a horrible year, with ALL of its released films flopping. Blue Beetle was probably the most successful of the bunch, but even then it failed turn in a profit. As for The Flash, a film marred in controversy surrounding its lead actor Ezra Miller, it is currently the BIGGEST superhero flop of all time. Even moreso than The Marvels, which cancelled reports of its box office numbers after a while due to how poor they were. At least The MCU had some success last year with the stunning Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, a brilliant way to end what was already a great trilogy.

So ultimately, I feel that this should be a tie, with both Disney and the DCEU receiving this "prize" together. Hopefully the MCU's new strategy of only releasing one film a year should help to avoid problems like this again while the DCU that is set to replace the DCEU manages to avoid falling into the same pitfalls that its predecessor did throughout its ten year run. Of course, the first DCU film Superman: Legacy won't be released until next year, so who knows?

Worst Excuse for an Actual Movie (All Concept/No Content) - Winnie the Pooh: Blood & Honey.

And finally, here's an old "award" category from the past that didn't make its return this year but I will mention anyway and give out myself for my own amusement, since I felt a few films last year could have "won" it if it was still around.

This "award" was given out at the 24th Golden Raspberry Awards held in 2004. Nominations that year included From Justin to Kelly (a project that American Idol finalists Kelly Clarkson and Justin Guarini were forced to star in as part of their contract), 2 Fast 2 Furious, Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle and The Real Cancun (a movie I hadn't heard of until writing this blog post). However, the overall winner was the horrific Dr. Seuss bastardisation The Cat in the Hat, which is an absolute insult to the original book and should never have been made in the first place. In fact, it was so bad that Dr. Seuss' widow Audrey Geisel actually BANNED all future live-action adaptations of his stories. It also says an awful lot about some of the people I was at high school with that they actually liked this movie (they also liked other lo-brow "comedies" such as the Grown Ups films and Jack & Jill). In case you're wondering, I don't keep in contact with those people.

Though this award did not pop up again at this year's ceremony, if it had, I would choose to give this to Winnie the Pooh: Blood & Honey. Though the concept of Winnie the Pooh becoming a bloodthirsty serial killer and cannibal did interest people at first, the actual execution was appalling and just an excuse for violence and bloodshed as well as corrupting everybody's childhoods in a mean-spirited manner. My other two nominations would be The Exorcist: Believer, due to it being a remake that we never wanted OR needed, and Disney's 2023 vanity project Wish - though the latter film is more mediocre than downright horrible, it ultimately becomes an excuse for Disney to gloat about their past 100 years and shove in as many references to their past projects as possible. The latter film is definitely getting a mention on my "Oh Disney!" blog post.

Now it just leaves the following question to answer - is The Cat in the Hat or Winnie the Pooh: Blood & Honey the most terrifying thing to have been released so far this century? Personally myself, I would pick the former.

Anyway, that's it for my retrospective on this year's Razzies. Overall, I had mixed views about the inclusion of some of the nominations (as well as the absence of certain movies), but I highly agree with the winner choices, ESPECIALLY with Winnie the Pooh: Blood & Honey sweeping the board. I look forward to a similar selection of winners next year, and Disney is probably hoping not to land any nominees that time round too. Who knows? Maybe next year's list will include Frake-Waterfield's Mickey Mouse slasher movie?

Reviewing The Golden Raspberry Awards 2023

Razzie time again! I was a bit delayed releasing this due to work, but that allowed me to hopefully avoid another embarrassing incident like with my last one, as I will mention soon. As with my previous two posts, I plan to analyse every single recipient of these "awards" as well as give my thoughts on whether they deserved them or not. I saw the many guesses that people had made as to which films would be nominated - some of the ones I'll be mentioning were expected, but others came off as a surprise.

Before I start reviewing though, I would like to discuss two things from last year's post.

The first is the business with Bruce Willis' award. A whole category was set up for all the dreadful movies he was part of in 2021, due to there being so many. However, it was discovered afterwards that Willis had been diagnosed with aphasia and the "award" was rendered null and void in response. I honestly think this was the best course of action. Sure, the movies are still horrible and I cannot believe that so many could have been made in one year, but if his illness affected his acting, it shouldn't be right to hand him an "award" that makes fun of him. Especially since the disease affects his cognitive abilities such as language and speech.

The second is about a case of bad timing on my part, specifically with regard to Will Smith winning the Razzie Redeemer award for King Richard. You see, I made sure that the article was up in the afternoon just after the Razzies were announced - in fact, I wrote a lot of the article before the Razzie winners were announced, with the appropriate edits being made afterwards. Keep in mind that the Razzies get announced the night before the Oscars. I wrote quite a glowing piece on how King Richard was a redeeming moment for Will Smith and that he was the favourite of the awards season and how hopefully his career wouldn't go downhill again in the future...

...And then at the Oscars, he bitch slapped Chris Rock onstage for making fun of his wife and got kicked out of the Academy as a result. Honestly, my views on it are very mixed. On the one hand, I don't think much of Chris Rock anyway. When he was at the Oscars last time, he made a derogatory comment about voice acting and how it was so easy, even though in reality it's an entirely different beast when compared to onscreen acting. If anything, I think it's harder due to having to focus more on the voice than anything else and some people who are brilliant on-screen actors like Sandra Bullock don't do so well with the voice-acting part. The tasteless alopecia joke was simply a new low for Rock, even if the rumours that he didn't know about Jada Pinkett-Smith's alopecia condition turn out to be true. Considering he made jokes about her before, I think he just has a really misguided conception that since they were together in Madagascar, it gives him the right to joke about her. And it doesn't help that some people were all like "it's just a joke, why do you have to be offended?", even though alopecia is a genuinely serious condition that can really play havoc with your self-esteem.

On the other hand though, don't slap someone live on TV like that. Everyone else was already moaning and showing distaste for the joke, so in hindsight the slap wasn't really necessary. All it ended up doing was overshadowing the rest of the night, which saw some surprisingly diverse films and actors win for once - kind of a surprise considering how the Oscars has a pretty poor diversity track record. And as much as I look down on Rock at times, he actually did recover well from that incident. Word of advise for next time someone makes a tasteless joke about your wife at an award ceremony - either make a snide comment in response to the joke without any swearing, or better yet, wait until you get your award and then make a joke about him in response. NEVER bring physical violence into the equation.

Anyway, now I've got those two points out of the way, it's time to look at the categories from this year's ceremony!

Worst Picture - Blonde.

From everything I saw, Morbius was THE biggest contender for Razzie nominations, and it of course got nominated for this category, along with four others. The nominee in this category with the most nominations overall (eight in total) is Blonde, another exploitative movie in the same vein as The Haunting of Sharon Tate that this time focuses on Marilyn Monroe - like Morbius, it was also highly expected to get nominated in the first place. Another major contender is Disney's live-action remake of Pinnochio, which one of my friends (a major Disney fan) stopped watching after ten minutes due to how awful it was - it was also nominated for five other categories. Next is The King's Daughter, a bizarre film about King Louis XIII capturing a mermaid for the sake of gaining immortality (a thing that makes sense in you understand Japanese mermaid folklore, but doesn't work here) - "fortunately" for it, it has only received two other nominations. Finally, there's Good Mourning, a Machine Gun Kelly and Mod Sun "stoner comedy" project that scored 0% on Rotten Tomatoes and received six other nominations here.

This year, Blonde took the win for Worst Picture. It's an interesting win, as while it still has a Rotten rating on Rotten Tomatoes, it isn't that low compared to some of the other films on the list. Plus, I know that a lot of people were banking on Morbius to win overall. But it's still a well-deserved win for Blonde - it's shallow, exploitative and sexist, with the message it tries to send out ringing hypocritical in the process. At least Morbius is an enjoyable film to watch despite its flaws, mainly in the "so bad it's good" manner. I remember a few people who would have preferred the equally offensive Haunting to have won over Cats a few years ago due to them seeing the latter as "so bad, it's good", but the similarities between Haunting and Blonde mean that this essentially makes up for that.

My main offense is that both the 365 Days sequels are not in this category, despite people highly suspecting they would be, due to them being tasteless sequels to an already tasteless movie that glorifies trafficking and sexual abuse. Oh well, at least it was nominated for two other categories, which I'll get to later. And Blonde is just as sexist and exploitative as well, so that also makes up for the absence.

Worst Director - Machine Gun Kelly and Mod Sun for Good Mourning.

Machine Gun Kelly and Mod Sun receive a joint nomination for directing Good Mourning. As for solo nominations, Andrew Dominik is nominated for directing Blonde, Daniel Espinosa is nominated for directing Morbius and Robert Zemeckis (whose career has really gone down the tubes in recent years) is nominated for directing Disney's Pinocchio. Another interesting to note is that Judd Apatow, most known for successful comedies such as Superbad, Pineapple Express, Knocked Up, The 40 Year Old Virgin and Funny People, has been nominated for The Bubble, which may be one of his first major missteps. Of course in the past, he was nominated for a Stinker's Bad Movie Awards for his screenplay for the mediocre Fun with Dick and Jane remake in 2005 and was placed in the Hall of Shame in 2009 by the Women Film Critics Circle Awards due to his questionable ways of portraying women in his films, but this is his first ever Razzie nomination.

MGK and Mod Sun "enjoyed" a joint win for this category. The whole movie comes across as some dire vanity project which doesn't even come across as the comedy that it's supposed to be. I mean, they not only star in it, but also star in it and write it - kind of similar to when Shane van Dyke wrote, directed and starred in the utterly abysmal Titanic II in 2010. In fact, last time I looked at Rotten Tomatoes, Good Mourning was still at 0%, which should warn you about the quality.

I will also note that this is not the first time a musician has "won" for Worst Director, as Sia "won" for her offensive film Music in 2021. Sure, she didn't star in it, but it was still an absolute mess. Maybe having musicians dabble in film directing is something that should be avoided in the future.

Worst Actor - Jared Leto as the titular character of Morbius.

After winning Worst Supporting Actor last year for his laughable performance as Paulo Gucci in the otherwise decent House of Gucci, Jared Leto has now been nominated for his role as the titular Morbius, another role in which he carried out some bizarre method acting for it. Tom Hanks also received his FIRST EVER Razzie nomination for his role as Geppetto in Pinocchio, a role in which he puts on a bizarre accent and thus played a major role in making my friend stop watching the movie. Next is Colson Baker (a.k.a. Machine Gun Kelly), more of a music artist by trade than an actor, nominated for his role as London Clash in his own movie Good Mourning. And then of course there's Razzie veteran Sylvester Stallone being nominated AGAIN, this time for his role in Samaritan as Joe Smith/Samaritan/Nemesis (?). One nomination I was heavily surprised by though was Pete Davidson for his voice role as the titular Marmaduke - mainly because I didn't even know they'd made another one recently after the live-action trainwreck from 2010 with Owen Wilson.

I mean, is it really a surprise that Leto won for the second time in a row? Pretty much everyone banking on the Razzies saw this one coming. His method acting was so laughably bad, just like in the role he won the Razzie for last year. Hanks was dreadful in his role, I will outright say, but Leto just outright overshadows him when it comes to bad acting. Overall, a category win that not only most Razzie fans (including myself) predicted, but was also well deserved.

Worst Actress - The...Razzies itself.

This was the category with the nominees I recognised the least. By that, I mean that I wasn't aware of these roles in the first place. Bryce Dallas Howard is a well-known actress and Jurassic World: Dominion was a known critical disappointment - she plays Claire Dearing in the movie. Meanwhile, Alicia Silverstone and Diane Keaton are also well-known actresses, but I was unfamiliar of their respective roles in The Requin as Jaelyn and Mack & Rita as Mackenzie "Mack" Martin/Rita. And I'm certainly not familiar with Kaya Scodelario, who plays Marie-Josèphe in The King's Daughter, though the film is also a major Razzie contender this year.

Though Blonde has been nominated for nearly every single other category at this year's Razzies, Ana de Armas, the actress who played Marilyn Monroe herself, was not nominated here due to critics seeing her as the one positive thing about the movie. Bizarrely enough though, she was nominated for an Oscar despite it still not being an outstanding performance, and it just makes the exclusion of Danielle Deadwyler for her outstanding role in Till even more ridiculous and further proof of the diversity issues with the Oscars - thank goodness that Michelle Yeoh ended up winning it in the end over Armas.

It should also be noted that Ryan Kiera Armstrong was originally nominated for her role as Charlene "Charlie" McGee in Firestarter, but was ultimately removed from the list after extreme public outcry. I think this was definitely the right thing - after all, getting underage actors involved in this sort of thing is extremely risky business and could definitely cross the line into bullying rather than simply saying "they were a bad actor". The only thing I will add though is that Maddie Ziegler still deserved her Razzie for her offensive role in Music as an autistic girl two years ago despite being neurotypical (besides, I think she was eighteen at the time anyway), though removing Armstrong from the nominees list this year is still the right move.

...Which is why this year, the Razzies ended up taking the win itself for the embarrassing and tasteless blunder, with their mascot Razz Berry giving the acceptance speech at the online ceremony. This was BY FAR the biggest surprise of the night - it turns out that voting still went ahead as normal, but they put themselves in the place of Armstrong and won by a landslide. But hey, I'm not complaining - it shows that they're willing to own up to the blunder, especially considering the Bruce Willis controversy from last year. I will also say that none of the other roles on this list are memorably bad like some of the other nominees in different categories, so I would not have had any strong opinions on them winning. Fortunately however, this one will certainly be a memorable win. ;)

Worst Supporting Actor - Tom Hanks as Colonel Tom Parker in Elvis.

Two films dominated this list - both Mod Sun and Pete Davidson (again, but in a cameo role this time) from Good Mourning were nominated for their respective roles as Dylan and Berry, as were Xavier Samuel and Evan Williams from Blonde for their respective roles as Charles "Cass" Chaplin Jr. and Edward G. "Eddy" Robinson Jr.. But the biggest shock I got was Tom Hanks (again!) being nominated for his role as Colonel Tom Parker in the film Elvis. That film was a major critical darling, with Austin Butler in particular being praised for his role as Elvis Presley, and I feel that it was a much-needed return to form for Baz Luhrmann...up to the point in which I forgot that the same critics had also slated Hanks' performance in the same movie. And for good reason too. It sure seems that Hanks has either had a dud year or is starting to have his career derailed.

And of course the unthinkable has happened - Tom Hanks has actually WON his first Razzie ever, all for this category. Good films have been nominated for and won Razzie awards for this category in the past (Fahrenheit 11/9, Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm and House of Gucci being prime examples), and this is no exception. I think that a LOT of people out there thought that Hanks would never have receive a Razzie nomination itself, let alone a Razzie win. But I'm just going to say it outright at the risk of outrage - I think he's kind of overrated sometimes. Some of his film roles like in Toy Story and Saving Private Ryan are brilliant, but others like Forrest Gump should not have received the acclaim they did in the first place. Guess we'll just have to see what happens afterwards and whether he can keep his Hollywood darling status after this blunder.

Worst Supporting Actress - Adria Arjona as Martine Bancroft from Morbius.

I recognised the films in this category slightly more than I did for Worst Lead Actress. Adria Arjona are Lorraine Bracco are nominated for respective Razzie favourites Morbius and Pinocchio for their respective roles as Martine Bancroft and Sofia the Seagull. Meanwhile, I remember Lamborghini: The Man Behind the Legend being slated and being seen as a potential Razzie contender, and Mira Sorvino has been nominated for her role as Annita in it. I was not so familiar with The 355, which has Fan Bingbing and Penélope Cruz (likely the most famous actress in this category) nominated for their respective roles as Lin Mi Sheng and Graciela Rivera, though it should be pointed out that Fan Bingbing has also been nominated due to her role as the Mermaid in The King's Daughter, which has already popped up a few times at this awards ceremony.

Morbius took its second "win" with regard to Arjona this time round. This was likely the most forgettable win in my opinion, with the main thing standing being that she was named "Adriana" for some reason in the accompanying video, but as I said, I'm not familiar with these roles on the list anyway. Plus, Morbius itself is a memorable movie for all the wrong reasons and Arjona was legitimately bad in her role - though not to the same extent as Leto in his.

Worst Screen Couple - Tom Hanks and his latex-laden face (and ludicrous accent) in Elvis.

The main non-joke nominees are Machine Gun Kelly and Mod Sun for Good Mourning, due to not only starring in the film together, but also directing and writing it together, and both of the 365 Days sequels (I say "non-joke" due to the tragic reality of their existence and the horrific aspects of them). In fact, the nomination of "both real life characters (Marilyn Monroe and John F. Kennedy) in the fallacious White House bedroom scene" from Blonde could also be a non-joke case due to the exploitativeness of the film, but the way that the Razzies wrote it down is slightly tongue-in-cheek. As is Andrew Dominik and his issues with women from the same movie, which is also written in a tongue-in-cheek manner in the Razzies website but is ultimately criticising a man for his misogynistic creative choices. What is most certainly a "joke" nominee though is Tom Hanks and his latex-laden face (and ludicrous accent) in Elvis, which is mainly just joking about a man's dreadful prosthetics and fake accent.

And for a SECOND time, Hanks takes a Razzie for the same role. I am just going to say outright that yes, the accent is indeed stupid. And it's not the first time he's done something like that either. Forrest Gump involves him putting on a stupid accent too, but people chose to fawn over that performance anyway because he was playing an "inspirational" autistic person - despite the fact that it's an extremely stereotypical portrayal of autistic people and insulting for autistic people like myself. In fact, there are MANY problems with that film that people overlook, but that would be deviating from this subject for now. What I will say is that any of these nominees would have been the right winner for this category anyway, and this combo certainly was.

Worst Remake, Rip-Off, Or Sequel - Disney's Pinocchio.

We have three sequels and three remakes here. For the sequels, both 365 Days: This Day and The Next 365 Days follow on from past Razzie winner 365 Days (obviously) while Jurassic World: Dominion is the third Jurassic World movie. Disney's Pinocchio is obviously a remake of the much better animated film from 1940, as well as an adaptation of the book of the same name. Firestarter is essentially an adaptation of a Stephen King novel, but is also a remake of the 1984 movie (which also did badly, but hey, at least it has a soundtrack by Tangerine Dream). Finally, Blonde is based on a book by Joyce Carol Oates, but is essentially a bad "remake" of Marilyn Monroe's life.

The 365 Days sequels did not win here, so unfortunately they did not win any awards at all. However, I am perfectly willing to accept Disney's Pinocchio as the actual winner of the category. It's yet another dire live-action remake of a Disney classic, following in the footsteps of duds like Beauty & The Beast, Mulan, Aladdin, The Lion King (even though that remake is still animated in a sense) and Dumbo (I am also willing to count Maleficent here too). Pinocchio and Jiminy Cricket look unintentionally creepy (even creepier than the new Dumbo) and Hanks is of course overacting with a ridiculous accent. There's also the fact that it has the bad fortune of coming out around the same time of the Guilliamo del Toro version, which is downright fantastic and also extremely surprising with its take on the original story. That one definitely deserves the awards that it has received...while this one only deserves at least one Razzie.

I will also discuss my friend for a moment - she loves Disney movies, especially the animated types. She is not so fond of the live-action ones however. For instance, she actually cried when watching the Mulan remake due to how bad it was. The fact that she stopped watching this one after TEN MINUTES should be an indicator of how horrible the movie is. Definitely a Disney film that should be skipped altogether.

Worst Screenplay - Blonde (Andrew Dominik).

MGK and Mod Sun are once again nominated, this time for "writing" Good Mourning (yes, the Razzies put "written" in speech marks as well). Dominik also gets nominated again for writing Blonde, based on the "bio-novel" by Joyce Carol Oates (again, the Razzies put the quotation marks around "bio-novel"). Meanwhile we have some newcomers at this ceremony - Matt Sazama and Burk Sharpless have been nominated for Morbius, while Emily Carmichael, Colin Treverrow and Derek Connolly have been nominated for Jurassic World: Dominion (Carmichael wrote the screenplay, Connolly wrote the story and Treverrow wrote both). Disney's Pinocchio is also nominated, with Robert Zemeckis making a return but Chris Weitz getting his first nomination at this year's awards (and according to the Razzies, the screenplay is not authorised by the Estate of Pinocchio's original writer Carlo Collodi for some reason).

Fitting that the last of the Worst awards should go to the first winner on this list, making it go full circle. Though the original book is very controversial itself with regard to its take on Monroe's life, it seems that the movie and its script heightened all of its flaws. The fact that Dominik also directed the film just adds salt into the wound, even if he didn't win that category in the end. It's clearly trying to be all "stylistic" and "arty", but is basically an outright exploitation film. Definitely up there with The Haunting of Sharon Tate with regard to bad taste and sexism towards its actress lead.

Razzie Redeemer Award - Colin Farrell for The Banshees of Inisherin.

To finish this off, I will mention the Razzie Redeemer Awards, the award that honours the good rather than the bad. Three nominees were here this time - Colin Farrell, who had a major blunder with the 2004 movie Alexander, for his role in The Banshees of Inisherin, regular Razzie nominee Mark Wahlberg for his role in Father Stu and Val Kilmer for his role in the Netflix documentary Val.

Farrell won this category, in what I feel is a well-deserved win. The film is just another masterpiece from Martin McDonagh, who has worked on other brilliant films such as In Bruges, Seven Psychopaths and Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri. And Farrell is brilliant in his role too. That scene they showed where after a moment of awkward silence, he tries to insist that his friend loves him only for his former friend to say no is absolutely heartbreaking. I highly recommend you check this film out, along with the other McDonagh films I just mentioned.

Overall, a very interesting ceremony with some surprise wins, as well as an interesting distribution of awards. Blonde, Morbius and Elvis won two awards each (the latter film mainly for Tom Hanks) and Good Mourning, Disney's Pinocchio and the Razzies awards themselves won one award each. There were also many nominees that I didn't expect to see on the list, but ultimately made sense - Tom Hanks for his role as Colonel Tom Parker being a primary example.

As I said earlier, I feel that the 365 Days sequels should have been in the Worst Picture and Worst Screenplay categories (it would have even been nice if it had won a category) and I still think that the major dud Don't Worry Darling should have been nominated for some awards - I'm thinking Worst Picture, Worst Director (Olivia Wilde) and Worst Lead Actor (Harry Styles), given that Wilde cast Styles simply because they were dating at the time. That said, the more "positive" award shows like the Oscars, Annies, BAFTAs and Golden Globes screwed up BIG time by not nominating The Bad Guys for Best Animated Film despite its major critical and commercial success (plus the fact that it's a brilliant film anyway), and of course the Oscars made a MAJOR mistake in not nominating Deadwyler for Till, so it's not like only one award ceremony left something out.

Anyway, that concludes my Razzie review for this year. I'm interested to see what garbage makes it onto the nominees lists next time, and hopefully the Razzies doesn't make any mistakes with the nominations like with Armstrong next time around. Hope you enjoyed the ceremony just as much as I did and I'm curious to see other people's opinions on what they thought of the chosen winners as well. ;)

Celebrating 10 Years Of Club Penguin's Operation Blackout

Remember back in 2012 when people thought the world was going to end because of an absurd misunderstanding of how the Mayan Calendar works? People were churning out books, songs and even Minecraft mods based around it, and yet on the 21st December, nothing happened. Which, being a major skeptic of the whole business in the first place, I wasn't surprised at all. Besides, as long as you didn't take the mass hysteria over the whole deal into account, there were absolutely zero signs of this so-called apocalypse about to occur during the "build-up" to it.

...Except in Club Penguin. For about a week, the apocalypse really was coming. And it was the most badass moment in the franchise of all time.

It's exactly ten years since the famous Operation Blackout mission occurred and ended in Club Penguin. Originally planned to last from the 14th November to the 4th December 2022, it received so much positive feedback that it got extended by two days.

The live-action Disney Channel promotions were outright dire and didn't get the whole scope of the mission across. It was just teenagers explaining to each other what you had to do and making it seem like light-hearted fare. The adverts made by the game itself though really let you know what you were in for. It showed that for once, Club Penguin as you knew it was know more and would now go into straight-up dystopia territory.

Essentially, longtime villain Herbert P. Bear, after failing to stop the E.P.F. spy organisation that protects Club Penguin Island, finally proved he was more than a joke villain. He now planned to block out the sun in order to freeze his penguin enemies to death. He'd already made the machine, which was causing an eternal winter to come about the island in response...and he successfully destroyed the E.P.F. base to make sure they couldn't do anything.

Of course, Herbert had ended the P.S.A. (the originally spy organisation) sometime back when he blew up the facilities...with a popcorn bomb. Yep, you read that right. A popcorn bomb. And despite the place looking pretty bad on the inside as a result of the explosion, that was the extent. Barely anyone except the P.S.A. themselves reacted when the explosion happened, and the E.P.F. replaced it soon afterwards anyway. Certainly a far cry from setting another building on fire and having fire engines failing to put it out.

Why Herbert planned to block out the sun and freeze the island over when he himself hates the cold and would have risked death himself is a mystery. I'm guessing though that he was planning to give them an ironic death and was making sure to stay safe in his own lair, so that when the penguins were no more, he could just undo everything and then turn the island into a warm paradise for himself.

Fridge logic aside, the rest of the mission is ingenious. All the other E.P.F. members are being hunted down and being cryogenically frozen in order to stop them from interfering with Herbert's plans. Meanwhile, you as the player have to complete set tasks in order to shut down the machine that Herbert is using to block out the sun. Oh, and the whole time, Herbert has turned the island into a dictatorship where fun is banned and the only play you can watch is of his "life story".

Yes, this all happens in a family-friendly online game. It's both horrifying and amazing at the same time. Both a mixture of dystopia and spy thriller. If you encounter anyone who claims that Club Penguin was just simplistic "kiddie" fair, let them know about this mission and it will help change their mind.

And as for when you do complete the mission? You get treated to an epic cutscene in which sunlight returns to the island, the E.P.F. are freed and Herbert is forced to watch his plans fall apart from a distance. It's not even like the other cutscenes that you received in other missions - it has a genuinely cinematic vibe.

Best of all though? The Director, previously one for hiding their identity, finally reveals themself...and it's none other than Aunt Arctic everyone's favourite agony aunt and the top suspect for being the Director's true identity in the eyes of the fans. It's a wonderful moment, and the voice acting that they chose to add for the scene really heightens it.

In the eyes of many fans, this is where the franchise peaked. The story was brilliant, the gameplay amazing and it really changed the course of the game. It had gone to places it would never have explored beforehand, Herbert was no longer a joke and the Director's identity was no longer hidden. It's kind of a bummer that everything else that happened in the franchise afterwards was just Disney using it to piggyback their own franchises, but the mission still has a positive impression on fans today.

For more discussion on why Operation Blackout was such an awesome moment for Club Penguin from a Club Penguin fan's perspective, I highly recommend checking out YouTuber Keyan Carlile's video essay on the mission and its history here, which really helped give me a new insight into it and goes into depth on the love and talent put into it by the game developers and fans. There are also many fan projects that exist out there linked with it, as well as the walkthroughs that you can watch in case you were unable to play the mission while it was happening.

Deconstructing Masculinity With Boomstick

[Note: This article uses Death Battle! screenshots that were used in previous blog posts of mine, and all rights for them belong to Death Battle! and Rooster Teeth.]

It's World Mental Health Day and I thought about something I could write for it. Keeping in mind that the "Macho Man vs. Kool-Aid" death battle was released on this exact day a year ago and that I am a massive fan of Death Battle itself, I decided to revisit it for inspiration, mainly the plot involving Boomstick getting over his father issues.

I already discussed that particular plotline in a previous blog post of mine, so I don't really need to explore it in full detail again. But there was another thing that stood out about Boomstick as a whole. Death Battle fans all know him as an outright gun nut with a fiery temper, filthy mouth (both with regards to swearwords and sex jokes) and a lust for bloodshed and death. This is mainly because he's a parody of the stereotypical redneck of the Deep South (though fortunately without the racism and bigotry that they are infamously associated with). But there's also another side to him, one that has so many mental health issues and vulnerable moments, as well as someone who pined for a father who never gave a rat's arse about him in the first place. Combining this side with the one he initially presents, it makes him an incredibly complex and messy character, and a highly interesting one at that too.

Which made me think to myself - he's not just a deconstructive parody of rednecks. He's also a deconstructive parody of the concept of toxic masculinity and what it means to be a "man".

And that's why I'm writing this article today. Sure, I'm not a man myself, but being someone who has also struggled through mental illness, I feel that this is something that also relates to mental health. Keep in mind that this is not going to be a proper academic essay on the matter, though I did study critical analysis at university. This is mainly going to be a summary of two things - toxic masculinity as a general thing with regard to mental health, and how Boomstick as a character comes across as a deconstruction of the concepts associated with toxic masculinity, both throughout the series as a whole and in the "Macho Man vs. Kool-Aid Man" episode.

So What's The Deal With Masculinity?

Masculinity is a complex subject matter. Essentially, it's the idea of what defines a "true" man. We can all have our ideas on what that means, but there is ultimately one defined view that most people think of when the idea of a "manly man" comes up.

Western society in particular has cultivated a view on masculinity, dating back to the time of the Greeks. The perfect heroes in their myths and legends are portrayed as dashing, well-built, confident fighters with a bit of a temper who slay the bad guys and get the ladies. Think Hercules, considered the strongest man ever, or Perseus, the guy who slew Medusa, for instance. Of course, looking back at these stories now, they may have been unwittingly deconstructing these ideals, with Achilles' hot temper in The Iliad leading to further problems in the Trojan War, but at face value, this doesn't appear to be the case.

And it's this mentality that has led to the concept of toxic masculinity. Men are expected to not cry or ask for help, as it implies that they are "weak". In fact, the only emotion they really seem to be allowed to have is anger, and they are encouraged to fight in order to preserve this masculinity. They have to have huge muscular bodies and chiselled bodies and not look like "sissy" pretty boys with slender bodies or nerdy "wimps" with spindly bodies. They are seen as "superior" to women and have been allowed to physically, verbally and sexually abuse them in the past in order to assert their dominance (despite changing laws, it sadly still happens today).

This even extends to children's media of all things. Dennis the Menace (the UK one, not the US one) was often depicted picking on "softie" Walter and yet we were supposed to root for Dennis (this is before Walter was revamped into being more of a killjoy who wanted to seem "sophisticated"). Horrid Henry often went out of his way to ruin his more effeminate brother Perfect Peter's life, and yet you were supposed to root for Henry (even though he's legitimately horrid as his name suggests) and not the "whiny" Peter. The idea is that they are promoting the lifestyle of naughty children and that you didn't have to be a "goody two-shoes", but these works only serve to promote the same message - brash masculinity is good, soft effeminacy is bad.

This is all disgusting, to put it bluntly. Crying and asking for help are completely normal behaviours that should be more accepted. In fact, the common situation in the UK of men being more likely to commit suicide than women, despite women being more likely to even attempt it, is likely linked to the idea that men can't show "weakness" and their mental health issues building up as a result. (more information can be found in this Samaritans document here). And as for the whole "sexual prowess" thing, why do you think there were so many cases of sexual abuse in Hollywood and other places? Heck, a lot of convincing articles have even been made for the idea that toxic masculinity played a role in the infamous Oscars 2022 moment where Will Smith slapped Chris Rock in response to a tasteless joke about his wife's alopecia, such as this one written by Ateh Jewel for Glamour and this one written by Shaun Harper for the Los Angeles Times.

Toxic masculinity plays a huge role in mental health problems. When men try to hide their emotions, act “strong” and pretend to be someone else in order to fit in with society, it just ends up breaking them on the inside. They refuse to get help even when it would really suit them, and consequently it leads to worst issues such as lashing out and hurting others or considering suicide. It's dangerous for both them and other people. And yet the media still insists with their depictions of men that this surprisingly harmful mindset is a good thing rather than a bad one.

Fortunately, this is not the case with Boomstick at all. In fact, as my next section will discuss, he pretty exposes the harsh reality of the mindset rather than tries to gloss over it.

How Boomstick Takes A Sledgehammer To This

What is so brilliant about the character of Boomstick, and the main reason he's not only my favourite Death Battle! character of all time, but also one of my favourite characters of all time in general, is just how effectively he deconstructs the concepts of "true" masculinity. Every single aspect associated with what it "means" to be a "man" gets torn apart when applied to him.

It's funny, because the first time he appears, he does appear to be your typical frat boy, albeit, with a violent streak. He drinks beer, he makes perverted comments about women, he has a tattoo and he has muscular arms. There's also not forgetting the fact that he has a moustache, which can be seen as another sign of manliness (depending on the type though - toothbrush moustaches are forever associated with Adolf Hitler and therefore highly condemned nowadays). But overtime, he stops playing the "manly" tropes straight and veers into being a deconstructive parody of a manly man. I don't even know whether this was the intention of the writers or not, but he sure comes across as satirising toxic masculinity to me.

Boomstick in general.

Given the fact that Death Battle is a long-running series and the voice actors tend to improvise, it's hard to tell whether Boomstick's more broken side was planned from the start or just something that gradually made its way into the scripts. Either way, though he takes pride in his manliness, his more broken side will show from time to time. Even when there's no Freudian excuse for his traits, they appear in parodied form, making traits such as a love of violence and sexual habits seem genuinely absurd.

The whole missing father business is just one aspect. There is a prevailing opinion that men need a father figure in their life to help them be more of a man. Boomstick obviously had his father walk out on his family and his stepfathers weren't any better either. This has not helped him at all - not only is a major reason that he became an alcoholic, but he bitterly reminisces on it in several episodes, often to the point of tears. And whenever he tries to make out that he's okay about it, he's clearly not.

The smile says "I'm fine". The tears scream "OH GOD SOMEONE HELP ME".

As a result, there have been moments in which Boomstick has tried to look up to somebody else as a new father figure, particularly one who comes across as "manly". His Top 10 Dads list involves him discussing the ones that he looks up to, and apart from the Greek god Zeus, most of them were pretty good choices. However, his obsession with Sarge during the "Red vs. Blue" episode shows how deluded he is with regard to wanting a new father. He sees him as the epitome of awesomeness for being someone who also likes bloodshed and serves as the leader of his troops, yet RvB fans will know Sarge as a comically deranged nutcase who abuses his subordinates and cannot imagine a life without war, leading to him temporarily betraying his comrades in Season 15. Even worst, it's heavily implied that Sarge IS Boomstick's true dad in this series and could not care less for his son at all.

The excessive drinking is another aspect. Beer is stereotypically seen as a masculine drink, appreciated by frat bros and other men. If a woman is shown drinking beer rather than wine, it's a sign that she's masculine too, even if this isn't necessarily the case in real life. With Boomstick, he takes this to the extremes. His first words were apparently "Beer! Now!", which implies that he first got into it at a RIDICULOUSLY young age, likely because of his daddy issues and his own family being into the stuff in the first place. Let's be real here, that's an extremely inappropriate to get into alcohol at. He has gotten black-out drunk on several occasions and it has led him to carry out ridiculous stunts, such as driving his dune buggy into a lake. The original "Link vs. Cloud" fight implies that his alcoholism may have led to his divorce, or maybe even his MANY divorces. In the "Amy vs. Ramona" preview episodes, he goes on a bender and ends up puking his guts out onto a horrified Wiz, clearly not feeling great at all. Wiz himself shows great disdain for this alcoholism, but seems unable to do anything about it.

There's also the matter of Boomstick's perverted nature. Sure, this was back in the days of the internet when making perverted jokes about women was seen as more harmless, but his sexual comments ultimately come off as ridiculous even back then, with Wiz being confused by the whole matter. One time, he was fine with the idea of dying from a heart attack after seeing Black Orchid's large breasts. Another time, Wiz managed to disgust him by pointing out that Toph Beifong was twelve before he made a joke about "hardening", making him realise how morally messed-up his joke would have been. Then there was the time Wiz won a bet against him because he couldn't make it through Cammy White's rundown without mentioning her arse. Even the subtitles once called him out when he chuckled over the word "climax" when discussing Bayonetta. And yet, despite him bragging about his sexual prowess and (allegedly) large dick size, he legitimately thought his ex-wife's sex toy was a crazy pen in a surprise moment of innocence with regard to sex. Interestingly enough, this trait of his has actually been downplayed in recent years, likely because of a greater backlash against sexual harassment and perverted jokes since the Me Too movement.

Oh, and we can't forget his violent traits either. The fact his name is "Boomstick" pretty much hints at them, and apparently he was trained in martial arts and guns as a child. However, rather than make him out to look badass for loving a good fight, these traits instead show him as incredibly deranged and dangerous to be around. The alcohol in particular serves to heighten them at the worst moments. He has confessed to killing a magician and a clown in self-defence in the past, despite the heavy implications that they weren't planning anything suspicious at all. In the infamous Sol Badguy preview, he shoots Wiz's robot dog due to throwing a fit over the whole business with That Man, with the "Ragna vs. Sol Badguy" episode emphasising how over-the-top this reaction was. In fact, the third Death Race episode reveals that he has a warrant on his head in all fifty states of America due to his obsession with violence, something that he would prefer not to talk about.

Leading on from that is his hot temper. Besides the whole business with the robot dog, Boomstick's anger has led to several other awkward moments. When throwing a hissy fit BECAUSE Wiz mentioned his hot temper in "Flash vs. Quicksilver", he storms off, only to trip over something and hurt his balls, much to Wiz's amusement. His arguments with Jocelyn just emphasise how much of a dreadful boss he is towards her and you ultimately end up siding with her in the arguments rather than him. Hot-blooded men in fiction are normally shown as cool badasses who refuse to be messed with, but here, Boomstick's hot temper makes him come across as childish and even a danger to others. In a way, this is pretty much the reality of having a foul temper or lashing out at the wrong moment. As I mentioned earlier, the Oscars 2022 slap is fine proof of it, as are Sean Penn and Alec Baldwin's real life moments of angry ranting.

If anything, the more "effeminate" and "weak" aspects of Boomstick serve as redeeming points for him. He has confessed to having a therapist, though whether they are actually helpful towards him is a questionable point. The moments in which he cries, especially if it's to do with his father, show how vulnerable he really is, but they also serve to humanise him whenever a tragic incident happens to another character, such as with the death of Bell-mere in One Piece or the depressing outcome of the "Tanjiro vs. Jonathan" death battle. In contrast, Wiz, who very rarely cries and gets startled by some of Boomstick's more violent crying fits, is mainly the resident stoic (and a geek rather than a "manly man" to boot) who tries to appear sane in order to cover up his more deranged side. Oh, and he's a cyborg too, which puts his less emotional behaviour in a particularly interesting light.

Boomstick's relationship with women is also an interesting thing to explore. He has a perverted mindset, trash talks his ex-wives and mistreats Jocelyn the Intern. However, episodes like "Goro vs. Machamp" imply that for all his trash-talking, he's actually a lot more upset about his inability to stay married than he lets on. Meanwhile, whilst he is depicted with a disturbing crush on the sadistic Esdeath in her death battle, he has shown sense when it comes to potential future wives in the "Top 10 Waifus" episode. Not all of his choices are sexualised characters and most of them are outright heroic and kind-hearted women, with even Mystique coming across as sympathetic. There's also the fact they go across the whole spectrum from being more conventionally feminine to pretty masculine, but there's no denying how capable they are, especially if they can fight well. Most misogynists out there wouldn't dream of pursuing a woman who can at least win one arm-wrestling watch.

And then there's his relationship with his mother, who he looks up to greatly. His tattoo is even a heart with her name written on it. Usually, being a "momma's boy" is seen as a sign of a man being a wimp, but this trait once again simply shows that there's more to Boomstick than him being a loud gun nut. Especially since she's the only original character in Death Battle that he hasn't had any conflict with - he bickers with the other hosts often and he loves to beat up on DUMMI, making his connection with his mother stand out all the more for it.

The "Macho Man vs. Kool-Aid Man" episode.

So that's how Boomstick's masculinity gets explored in general. The "Macho Man vs. Kool-Aid Man" episode explores the whole thing further, especially when Macho Man gets involved. The man himself, when it comes to masculinity, comes across as both the idealistic opposite of Boomstick as well as the guy he probably strives to be.

For those who have absolutely zero wrestling knowledge (to be fair, I'm not that much of a wrestling fan myself and had to do quite a bit of research for this section), Macho Man is the alternative name of Randy Savage (real name Randall Mario Poffo), one of the most famous wrestlers associated with the World Wrestling Federation (WWE). With his charismatic and flamboyant personality, outrageous fashion style and just outright manliness, he was a major favourite with the crowds. He was often associated with Hulk Hogan, another WWE face with a macho all-American image, and in the 80s, was one of the few people who rivaled him in popularity. He won 18 different titles and in general had a 70.2% win rate in his 2,104 matches. He was also well-known for his passionate romance with the equally talented wrestler and manager Miss Elizabeth, and their onstage wedding was a major moment in his career. No wonder he ended up being posthumously inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame as a headliner in 2015.

In real life, there have been plenty of scandals associated with WWE and wrestling in general. The famed Attitude era is looked back on as a time of toxic masculinity and questionable sexist behaviour, such as when then WWE owner Vince McMahon ordered Trish Stratus to strip her clothes off and bark like a dog (something that was just seen as his "bad boss" gimmick at the time), or some of the comments that Jerry Lawler made about the female anatomy or calling Molly Holly old and ugly during her down period after having her hair shaved and being forced to wear a tacky wig. For a while, when it came to female wrestlers, there was more of an emphasis on how good they looked rather than any talent they actually had. There have also been the matter of the same sex scandals that you get in other places such as Hollywood - recently, McMahon got accused of sexual misconduct himself and had to step down from his position as a result.

There's also the matter of the deaths of famous wrestlers linked with drugs, whether due to overdoses or heart attacks linked with past addictions, especially during the Ruthless Aggression era. Most the drugs were performance-enhancing ones such as steroids, designed to beef up the body and help in the ring, though there were others used such as alcohol. Examples of drug-related deaths include Reid Flair, Louie Spicolli and most notably Eddie Guerrero, who had gone clean but ultimately died from heart failure caused by past drug addictions. In a particularly nasty situation, Chris Benoit was found with steroids and other drugs in his system after he first killed his family and then himself. Though a strict drug testing programme has been implemented since then, it still doesn't eradicate the memories of these incidents and the fact that Flair died in 2013 shows that the problem hasn't quite gone away. The Wrestler Deaths website has plenty more examples of wrestlers who died from drug overdoses.

Of course, that's not what we're presented with when we watch wrestling (even if the situation with McMahon and Trish was shown onscreen). We're presented with badass, well-built champions and cool wrestling moves. And it's pretty much what Boomstick gets presented with when him and Macho Man finally meet each other.

If Macho Man represents everything awesome about masculinity, then Boomstick represents everything repulsive about it, only without the misogyny, rape and transphobia that also comes with it. Macho Man is buff, charismatic and a world-famous superstar, and he can also rock a nifty beard. Boomstick also has pretty muscular arms, but appears to have a beer belly, has scruffy facial hair and can barely keep a relationship. Macho Man oozes confidence with his onstage persona, but Boomstick is prone to having emotional breakdowns whenever his own mask of confidence shatters.

Boomstick is more than determined to accept the idea that Macho Man was his true father all along, despite evidence being very clear that this isn't the case. The main reason is likely that he sees him as the type of man he wants to be and looks up to. After all, if you can't be like someone else you admire, you might as well form connections with them in one way or another in order to improve your own reputation. Alternatively, it could be interpreted that he's ashamed of his own sense of masculinity and feels that by accepting him as a father figure, he can project Macho Man onto himself in order to gain at least some confidence.

Does this attitude work? No. Macho Man makes it clear that he's not his father, shattering his hopes. He has another one of his temper tantrums, snapping out at even the combatants, which I doubt did him any favours in Randy's eyes. And then I guess something happened during the screen transition that REALLY did a number on him. By the time Boomstick reaches his mother's house, he's essentially scared and broken, lacking any of the bravado he had beforehand. It's a far cry from the guy who, when he first appeared in the series, was obsessed with using his gun, made sexual comments about the ladies and took delight in nearly all the violent deaths he witnessed. You'd think that they were two completely different characters.

To really seal the deal, it's Boomstick's mother who turns out to be his savior. Once he relates the problem regarding the search for his father to her, she's able to help him realise that things are better than they seem to be. And it really does wonders for Boomstick during this moment. Around her, he can easily show off his more vulnerable side and not be judged for it. He can show affection, cry and accept advice from her, stuff that toxic masculinity discourages but in reality is something we all need to do at some point.

And by accepting his own mental health issues regarding his father and allowing himself to have this vulnerable moment, Boomstick comes out all the better for it. He gains back the boisterous personality he's had for most of the series, but it doesn't come across as a mask for his own issues anymore. Considering this outcome, is it any wonder that releasing this episode on the 10th October, Mental Health Awareness Day (even if the original reason was to celebrate the show’s 10th anniversary), makes so much sense?

Obviously this won't completely fix Boomstick's state of mind. He still has a love of violence, an obsession with beer, a perverted nature and a foul temper, but in this moment, he did manage to get the advice he needed and therefore move on from a major issue that was wreaking havoc his mental health. And it's quite likely that, if he has more moments like these in the future, with him allowing himself to get emotional and having someone to help him through his issues, he'll probably get closer to further recovery...

...Which is exactly what other men with similar issues need to be doing in real life. Just pretending to be tough, hiding emotions and refusing to rely on other people just makes mental health issues related to toxic masculinity worse. Allowing yourself to show emotion, cry and ask for help will stop that from happening and instead help to improve things. It's fortunately something that is starting to happen in our modern society, but it's still a long way before the situation truly improves.

At this point, it's time for masculinity as a concept to be redefined completely. Our society may try and claim that "boys don't cry", but in the words of Malorie Blackman's novel Boys Don't Cry (named sarcastically in this case), "real men do". And the same goes with other aspects of toxic masculinity - they're simply a sign of immaturity, whilst the other things it tries to discourage against are the true signs of maturity and a mentally healthy mindset. After all, it's not important at all to be a man who tries to fit in with society's unhealthy demands, and it's more important to be a man who can be true to himself and rely on others and be a happier person as a whole in response. That's what true strength and masculinity is really about.

The Hell Is Up With The Dork Diaries Movie?!

On April 25th, it was announced that the Super Mario Bros. movie, starring the like of Chris Pratt (for some goddawful reason) was going to be delayed until next year. But that's not what I'm here to talk about today. Instead, what this annoucement has done has re-reminded me of another franchise I got into which also seems to be having a delay, but unlike the Mario film, which at least somewhat has a release date next year, this one just seems to have vanished without a trace.

So there's a book series I read at times called Dork Diaries, which chronicles the high school misadventures of a certain Nikki J. Maxwell as she makes friends, falls in love with the charming yet lovable photographer Brandon Roberts and goes up against bonafide bitch MacKenzie Hollister. Some people have described it as a girl's version of Diary of a Wimpy Kid, but UK marketing aside, it actually takes a different turn.

Overall, I've had a love-hate relationship with this book series at times. There was a period in which I was obsessed with it, then a period in which I disliked it, then a period in which I was obsessed with it again. At the moment, it's mostly reasonable pleasure with the series...though seriously, that crappy MacKenzie. She needs to get fucked.

If they offered dartboards like this, it would make my dream come true.

I could rant all day about how much MacKenzie sucks and all the horrible things I wish could happen to her (she's a manipulative cyberbully trying to ruin other people's lives, for crying out loud!), but it's not why I'm writing this post. I'm writing it because of something called "development hell".

On the 5th September 2014, a now-deleted post was uploaded on the Dork Diaries blog. Here's an excerpt from it that I managed to save before it vanished, complete with the original font size, just to emphasise its main point:

Lionsgate Summit Entertainment, the same people who made amazing movies like Divergent, Hunger Games and Twilight, will be filming a DORK DIARIES movie!!!

Yeah, sure, because vampire romance stories written by Mormons and gritty dystopians for young adults sure do mix well with high school comedies. Also, wasn't The Hunger Games the only one of these franchises to get decent reviews from critics? And didn't the Divergent franchise die a swift and anti-climatic death two years later?

Hey, if District 1 tribute MacKenzie does get a hit in, dreamy vampire Brandon can simply save chosen Divergent Nikki's life by turning her into a vampire too. Isn't that the outcome the audience wants to see?

Anyway, enough of that snarking. The film was supposedly going to be released in 2016. That didn't happen. They said it would then get released in 2017. It's now 2022. A source in early 2021 claimed that the "reason" why was because of COVID-19 restrictions, but given the unrealistic time frames and the fact that the film was already getting delayed, they were probably just trying to save face.

Next of all was a (also now deleted) blog post on the 15th May 2015 (a year before the supposed release date), which was asking fans to give suggestions for who they wanted to play the characters in this movie. The idea being that the film-makers would then look at the suggestions and take them into account. Most of the comments consist of:

1. People trying to think up big names that would be way too old for the role by now.
2. People trying to get themselves, or a a friend or family member hired for a role.
3. People saying that Meryl Streep should be the grandmother, which would certainly help to improve the film's quality given her track record. A lot of people also mentioned Betty White for the role, which considering recent events, is now sadly impossible.
4. People saying that Peyton List (the one who plays Holly Hills in Diary Of A Wimpy Kid and Emma Ross in Jessie) should be MacKenzie. And then some people complained that it shouldn't happen because she's too "nice".
5. Paying saying that Mia Talerico (plays Charlie Duncan in Good Luck Charlie) should be Brianna. They would have to age Brianna up from 6 to 13 if they want to consider this now though, and thus that would make her only one year younger than Nikki.
6. People complaining that other people's suggestions won't work because their suggested actors don't look like the characters that they are suggested for. There was also a priceless moment in which someone had to remind someone else that Ellen Albertini Dow (the rapping granny from The Wedding Singer) could not be Grandma Maxwell because she had died about a week before the blog post went up.

I will also post my suggestions that I made at the time right here:

1. Nikki J. Maxwell: Chloe Grace Moretz, Maddie Ziegler, Abigail Breslin, Kaitlyn Dias, AnnaSophia Robb or a friend of mine from primary school who may or may not have starred in Casualty at some point.
2. Chloe Garcia: Allegra Leguizamo (John Leguizamo's daughter).
3. Zoey Franklin: Ciara Bravo (though she would have be a white Zoey if that was the case). Also liked the suggestion of China Ann McClain.
4. MacKenzie Hollister: AnnaSophia Robb or Claudia Lee (the latter played Brooke in Kick-Ass 2).
5. Brandon Roberts: Ryan Potter.
6. Mr. Maxwell: Ray Romano (I unfortunately spelt it as Rino Romano in the actual post - completely different actor), Ty Burrell, Alan Tudyk or Brad Garrett.
7. Mrs. Maxwell: Amy Poehler, Tina Fey, Isla Fisher or Kristen Wiig.
8. Grandma Maxwell: Helen Mirren, Judi Dench or Julie Waters.
9. Principal Winston: Denis Leary, Alan Tudyk, Jim Broadbent, Brad Garrett or Scott Adsit.

Obviously I was a young and naive teenager at the time, though I still think some of these actors could work (mainly for the adults). You can tell that everyone really had their hopes up too high, myself included, if this was how they were going to consider roles for it.

Look, Boomstick could make the role work if he wants to. It certainly can't be worst than choosing Chris Pratt as Mario.

Now let's focus on the people who were hired to make this film and analyse them (as well as roast some of them in the process). When Summit Entertainment buying the film rights was announced, the book's original author Rachel Renee Russell said this:

"Summit Entertainment bringing Dork Diaries to life is a dream come true! My book series could not be in more capable hands. My fans and I are super excited to see Nikki Maxwell and her dorky world come to life."

"More capable hands", huh? Well, let's see what the analysis has to say about that.

Karen Rosenfelt and John Sacchi - The Producers.

Let's start with the producers first. These people have worked for Lionsgate for some time, mostly on the less impressive films. It's likely that Rosenfelt in particular was in negotiations to produce due to producing the Twilight films, since the original books are gushed over in the original Dork Diaries books (in a non-ironic way, unfortunately).

Can I just say that Rosenfelt's name is essentially a dark mark on most of the films that she produces? Sure, Marley and Me was fairly successful, but everything else she produces is just pure trash, The Twilight films do much better at the box office than with critics (just like the original books), Me Before You was pretty mediocre, the Percy Jackson films and The Book Thief are insulting adaptations of the original books, Yogi Bear is an equally insulting adaptation of the original cartoon and then there was the issue with The New Mutants film, which kept on changing its release date every single time and was eventually got released with little fanfare. Considering that I saw Rosenfelt's name attached to it, it's safe to say that nobody should have been getting their hopes up about that film.

Now onto Sacchi. Probably most known for producing Punisher: War Zone and being the executive producer of My Bloody Valentine 3D. Most of his films tend to be action flicks or horror thrillers that are mostly mediocre or average. The IMDb ratings for them at least are either 4, 5 or 6 out 10. So why he's now producing a light-hearted school comedy, I have no idea. Not much to say on him otherwise.

Mark Waters - The Director.

On 18th September 2015, the blog announced that Mark Waters would be directing the film. The post is no longer available on the website, just like the other ones, making it sound even more like a pipe dream than before.

Dear lord, this guy's directing career is all over the place! He was clearly cast as director due to his work on Mean Girls and the Freaky Friday remake (both Lindsay Lohan vehicles) and yes, they are fantastic films you should check out. However, I feel that most of Mean Girls' high quality can be attributed to writer Tina Fey and whilst Waters did not directed the hated sequel, Fey had nothing to do with it either.

Otherwise, Waters' directing career is just mediocre. Either the films get mixed reviews or they get slated. The Spiderwick Chronicles was okay for instance, but pretty forgettable after its release. Particular duds aimed for a young audience include Mr. Popper's Penguins (2011), a Jim Carrey vehicle that has barely anything to do with the original book, and the failed adaptation of Vampire Academy in 2014.

Plus there was the issue of this Mark Waters film being released in 2016 rather than Dork Diaries:

The original Bad Santa (which was directed by Terry Swigoff and somehow had the Coen brothers providing rewrites) received pretty good reviews and was the only film of Swigoff's career that was financially successful. This sequel on the other hand scored crap reviews from most sources - it has a 23% critics rating on Rotten Tomatoes, 34% audience rating on that same website, 1.5 on Bomb Report and 34/100 critics score on Metacritic (though IMDb and Metacritic audiences were "kinder" to it with a 5.6/10 rating and 5.3/10 rating respectively). Additionally, against its $26,000,000 budget, it only grossed $23,229,371-$24,079,268 overall (sources differ on what the actual final gross was). Swigoff had nothing to do with this film, so most of the blame has been placed on Waters and the co-producer Andrew Gunn.

Of course, Mark Waters then directed Magic Camp, which got released in 2020 on the Disney+ streaming service...after originally being planned for a 2018 cinematic release and then being replaced by Christopher Robin. And given that the film has 38% on Rotten Tomatoes, and his next film He's All That (a "gender-flipped remake" of She's All That) has 30%, I doubt those movies did any favours for his career either (though at least they're somewhat better than Bad Santa 2).

Annie Hendy - The Scriptwriter.

Not really much to say here compared with Rosenfelt and Waters, but still more than Sacchi. Hendy is an actress and writer known for the the comedy play The Catholic Girl's Guide to Losing Your Virginity (which I vaguely remember from somewhere) and the short black comedy film #twitterkills. The former won the "Pick of the Fringe" award from both critics and audiences at the 2006 Cincinnati Fringe Festival and was nominated for two Cincinnati Entertainment Awards, before going on to have sold-out performances. The latter has a 7.0/10 IMDb score and a 3.1/5 Letterbox score, and it won some awards at the 2014 HollyShorts Film Festival including Best Comedy. So this does seem promising in how this may affect the Dork Diaries movie's quality. That said, they aren't necessarily mainstream and they're not family-friendly either. Maybe this was intended to be her first foray into family-friendly and mainstream fare? There's some more information on her here in case you're curious.


So "capable hands"? Not really. If anything, they're the type of hands that could cause a potentially trainwreck (except for Hendy's, it seems). It's likely that these roles have changed since being announced and that we'll get a different producer, director and writer though. But who knows? Maybe the film won't happen anyway?

I won't be surprised if the film actually does get made, it ultimately ends up on some streaming service like Netflix or the like. It happened with the film adaptation of James Patterson's Middle School, despite earlier implications that it would be a cinematic release. Plus, the recent Diary of a Wimpy Kid movie was released on Disney+ (likely due to a combination of COVID-19 restrictions and because The Long Haul was a dreadful box office bomb). What's to prevent this film from going the same route?

What I'm trying to say is that given the fact that the movie seems to have some unrealistic expectations on release dates and casting, as well as some really iffy choices for people working on the movie, I expect it to be a "meh" experience at best and a trainwreck at worst. If it does turn out to be good, I'll be pleasantly surprised. But we'll just have to wait. Depending on whether it actually does get released or not.

Oh, and also, MacKenzie's a lying, cheating, manipulative, abusive, vain, diary-stealing, cyber-bullying queen bee who should have been expelled for some of the stuff she's done in the Dork Diaries books. Just saying.

Again, it would be awesome if they offered punching bags like these in real life.

Anyway, that will be it for this blog post. The film might happen, or it might not. If it does, good. If it doesn't...well, considering the people supposedly involved, probably for the best.