Jump to content

Talk:Golden Raspberry Awards/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Golden Raspberries

Umm, I searched for Golden Raspberry and it brought me right to this page. I'm looking for the fruit. Couldn't there be a disambiguation page or a link somewhere for this topic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.37.124 (talk) 17:13, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Moving the pages

I'm planning on moving all of the "YEAR Golden Raspberries" pages to "YEAR-1 Golden Raspberry Awards". This obviously needs some justification. It's a two-part change, so I'll handle them seperately.

Changing from YEAR to YEAR-1 (eg. 1981 to 1980) is necessary for clarity. The page 1981 Golden Raspberries is not about movies released in 1981, it is about movies released in 1980. This is not only counterintuitive, but it conflicts with the numbering used by the Golden Raspberry Awards themselves. [1]

As for the text part of the title, that's more subjective. However, changing it means the year part of the titles can be corrected without page deletions.

The Golden Raspberry Award Foundation predominantly refers to the awards in three ways:

  • Golden Raspberry Award
  • RAZZIE Award
  • RAZZIE

Note that the Golden Raspberry Award Foundation almost never uses the term Golden Raspberries. They either use the full title, or the razzie contraction.

I prefer the visual of 1980 Golden Raspberry Awards to 1980 RAZZIE Awards, 1980 RAZZIEs, 1980 Razzie Awards, or 1980 Razzies.

I also plan on moving Golden Raspberries to Golden Raspberry Awards, for the same reason.

Any objections?

-- Cyrius 06:29, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Fine with me, but you may want to consider a RAZZIE redirect since it is in such common use. Davodd 07:18, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)
Probably a good idea. There's already several redirects that will have to be... redirected. Adding one for a link that's actually in use (Kiss of Death, Earth Girls Are Easy) won't hurt. -- Cyrius 07:43, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

MediaWiki

Good call on the MediaWiki Razzie years for the footer. Davodd 11:14, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)

1999 is listed twice instead of 1989

Gah, typo. The actual link was still correct, which is probably why I didn't notice. Because of caching issues with {{msg:}} it may take some time for the fix to show up. -- Cyrius 04:27, Mar 26, 2004 (UTC)

Quotation marks

Does anyone else find all the extra quotes "distracting" ("award", "nomination", etc.)? localh77 16:24, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

I "agree". They are gone now. Rl 16:41, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Question on image uploading

Hi everyone, I'm fairly new to this Wikipedia-editing malarkey. This is a fairly general query (and I apologise if I'm asking this in the wrong place) but I was wondering how strict the rules on image uploading are. I gather that you need to obtain explicit permission from the photographer, or otherwise the image has to fall into one of a number of categories such as its age. To cut a long story short I was wondering if the rules permit me to upload the following image to the Razzie page: http://funnynews.free.fr/photos/1374.jpg . I can't see any indication that it's in the public domain, but on a quick Google image search, it seems the same photo has circulated around many websites. Any info regarding whether I can or can't upload it (obviously after getting myself an account first) would be really appreciated. (please forgive this newbie :/) 80.229.161.131 13:43, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Error in the article?

It says, in reference to Bill Cosby, that he "became the first person to personally accept his Razzies" and then the next paragraph says of Paul Verhoven, "Paul Verhoeven was the first person to accept a Razzie in person". Which one is correct? Chronologically, I'd assume it was Bill Cosby in 1988, before Verhoven in 1996... no? 62.0.114.159 00:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I was confused by it as well, but I understood it that Cosby was the first person to accept the Razzie and Verhoven was the first person to accept the Razzie at the Razzie award ceremony. Pnkrockr 19:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Its not that confusing

GRAF ????

Who does the Golden Raspberry Award Foundation (GRAF) consist of? How are they chosen? Are they just friends and relations of Mr Wilson or are they people seriously linked to the film industry. If anyone has that information, please add to the article. Mohylek 20:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Anyone can join, they just have to pay the subscription fee, which I think ranges from about $50 for a year to $500 for lifetime membership. All the information is at their official website at

www.razzies.com

Shan246

Films that were nominated for both an Academy Award and a Raspberry Award

Besides the already named "Only When I Laugh", "Yentl", "Pearl Harbor" (2001), and "Norbit"; does anyone else know of any other movies that were nominated for both an Academy Award and a Raspberry Award?204.80.61.110 (talk) 16:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Bennett Turk

"Pearl Harbor and Norbit were nominated for both for an Academy Award and a Razzie. Pearl Harbor won an Oscar for best Sound Effects Editing while getting shutout at the Razzies while Norbit saw Eddie Murphy winning three of the four Acting Razzies (see Razzie Records below) while getting shut out at the Oscars."

I can't make any sense of this! What is shutout/shut out? Also, I'm sure there are plenty of films nominated for both, especially in obscurities like sound effects editing - are these two particularly notable? 91.110.103.105 (talk) 14:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming "shut out" in this case means "did not receive an award" which would seem logical in this context. --Shruti14 t c s 13:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

making enemies...

this article could explain more about what are the criteria to be made to determine an artist worst in the film. this article gives an impression that any artists who acted lousily in the film are qualified for the $4++ worth of gold painted plastic award. how hilarious. any big fans or die hard fans might not voice out to criticise but such award itself gives bad impression on somebody somehow.
Xmlv (talk) 20:28, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I found several red links in this article. If their subjects are notable, articles about them should be created, but if not, the red links should be removed. --Shruti14 t c s 13:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Special Award Categories

I changed the years for the various special award categories to reflect the year of the awards (most were the year of the films' release dates, although some were just plain wrong). I used IMDB.com as reference for these changes. THEN, I went to confirm these changes on the official website. I was surprised to see that the Razzies referred to the previous year (year of release) for the awards...so I undid my changes. However, having the year in parentheses makes it seem like the awards were given in the respective years. Maybe they could be taken out of the parentheses? I don't know. Maybe it doesn't matter. 24.208.206.162 (talk) 06:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

"Oscar/Razzie Connection"— relevant?

I think the Razzie/Oscar connection is one of the most interesting aspects of this article. It is certainly true that careers have their ups and downs, but that is no reason not to document the high and low points. After all, you wouldn't want to remove the history of significant hurricanes with the argument that weather will vary. If the information on actors who have had brushes with both Oscars and Razzies isn't relevant here, then where would it be relevant? One possibility, I suppose, would be to follow the hurricane analogy above and break out the information into a list? Even there, though, there is a "highlights" section within the main hurricane article that summarizes the most significant. I actually think that approach might work well, if consensus is that the current arrangement is undesirable. Blorblowthno (talk) 16:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

General background and history sources

  • Snyder, S. James (January 21, 2009). "A Brief History of The Razzies". TIME. www.time.com. Retrieved 2009-05-06.
  • Marrs, John (February 25, 2009). "'They have no excuse to be as bad as they are' -The Golden Raspberry awards aren't just a refreshing antidote to the Oscars, they can help sell films too. John Marrs talks to the Razzies' founder, John Wilson". The Guardian. www.guardian.co.uk. Retrieved 2009-05-06.

Cirt (talk) 22:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced, moved from article to talk page

Razzie/Oscar connection
  • Filmmaker M. Night Shyamalan was nominated for Oscar in the categories of Best Director and Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen for his film The Sixth Sense in the year 2000. He was later nominated for Razzie awards in the categories Worst Supporting Actor, Director and Screenplay for Lady in the Water in 2007. He later went on to win both Worst Supporting Actor and Worst Director. He was again nominated two years later, for both Worst Director and Worst Screenplay for The Happening in 2009. He failed to win either award for that film.
  • Diana Scarwid was nominated for Best Supporting Actress at the Oscars in 1981 for the film Inside Moves. The next year, she was nominated for, and won, the Razzie for Worst Supporting Actress for her role in Mommie Dearest.
The Golden Globes
Razzie Records
  • The 2003 film Gigli was the first, and so far only, film to win in the top five categories at the Razzies (Worst Picture, Actor, Actress, Director and Screenplay). This makes it the Razzie equivalent of 1934's It Happened One Night, which was the first film to win the Oscar "Grand Slam" (Best Picture, Actor, Actress, Director and Screenplay).
  • I Know Who Killed Me (2007) has received the most Razzie awards, at eight wins out of nine nominations (only losing Worst Supporting Actress), in a single awards year. It is also the only movie to have an actress win the Worst Actress award twice: both of Lindsay Lohan's characters tied for the honor. This also ties the record for most Razzies won by a single film: Showgirls (1995) and Battlefield Earth (2000) each won seven Razzies in their respective eligibility years and then an eighth in later years (the former won Worst Movie of the Decade in 2000, the latter Worst Drama of Our First 25 Years in 2005).
  • Actor Sylvester Stallone has received 30 nominations and ten wins and is the actor with the largest number of nominations and wins. He was nominated for the Worst Actor award for nine consecutive years from 1984 to 1992, winning four times.
  • Actor Eddie Murphy received a single-year record five nominations in 2007 for Norbit: three acting nominations (one for each character he played), one for Worst Couple (again, relating to his playing multiple characters) and one for Worst Screenplay. He went on to win all three acting nominations, becoming the first person ever to win a Razzie for both male and female performances in a single film.
  • Actress Sean Young won two Razzies in 1991 in different categories for playing twins in A Kiss Before Dying. She won Worst Actress for playing the twin who survives throughout the film and won Worst Supporting Actress for playing the twin who was murdered during the film.

Unsourced, moved from article to talk page. Cirt (talk) 17:13, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced, moved from article to talk page 2

Categories

The Official Categories of the Razzies are:

Special categories

Special categories have also been introduced for specific years. Such special awards include Worst Screenplay Grossing Over $100 Million (1996), Worst Reckless Disregard for Human Life and Public Property (1997), Most Flatulent Teen-Targeted Movie (2002), Worst Excuse for an Actual Movie (All Concept/No Content!) (2003), Most Tiresome Tabloid Targets (2005), Worst Excuse For Family Entertainment (2006), Worst Excuse for a Horror Movie (2007) and others.

Other types of awards

Over the years, the Golden Raspberry Awards have awarded special awards next to the actual Razzie Awards as well.

Worst Career Achievement Award

This award has been given only five times, in 1981, 1983, 1985, 1987, and 2009 to Ronald Reagan, Linda Blair, Irwin Allen, "Bruce the Rubber Shark" from Jaws [1] and director Uwe Boll [2] who received his for his achievement as "Germany's answer to Ed Wood".

Governor's Award

This is a special award given by Razzie Award Governor John Wilson to an individual whose achievements are not covered by the Razzie's other categories. It was awarded in 2003 to Travis Payne for "Distinguished Under-Achievement in Choreography" in the film From Justin to Kelly.

Unsourced, moved from article to talk page. Cirt (talk) 17:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Also

Also, is it possible to see if any movie was nominated for both Oscars and Razzies in the same category and, if so, their fate in both awards?--Xiaoshan Math (talk) 17:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Do secondary sources make these analyses themselves? Cirt (talk) 22:31, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Lede

The lede of the article is supposed to be able to standalone as a summary of the topic, by itself, per WP:LEAD. Cirt (talk) 19:49, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Repeats

Just read the article, and you'll see several repeats of certain facts, like when it's held, and what the award looks like —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.140.241.125 (talk) 01:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:LEAD. Cirt (talk) 05:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Too repetitious

This article is a joke. It is FULL of redundancies that need to be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.197.241 (talk • contribs)

The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. Cirt (talk) 14:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Protection

I've semi-protected the page for a week because anon IPs are removing material from the lead. Could the anon (if it's the same person) please explain on talk what the problem is, rather than repeatedly removing it? Many thanks, SlimVirgin TALK contribs 14:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


What's wrong with this article

I see that I'm not alone in finding this article inferior. Here's a quick list of what is wrong with it. (Of course the anti-IP admins will ignore it because of their "holier-than-thou" attitude, but at least I tried. I won't be back to see if I got anywhere so feel free to ignore it.)

1 - The lead section is overly detailed and redundant. The sentence "Wilson traditionally held potluck dinner parties at his house in Los Angeles on the night of the Academy Awards, and decided to formalize the event after watching a double feature of Can't Stop the Music and Xanadu. " is imbalanced. The lead should be concise, and this isn't. "The event began as an informal gathering in Wilson's house in 1981 but quickly expanded." 2 - The second paragraph of the lead almost duplicates the following opening paragraph of the history section. This makes the article clunky and amateurish.

There you go, now ignore away. Perhaps you should semi-protect the talk page as well because an IP dared to make a comment here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manning Bartlett (talk • contribs)

I plan to greatly expand the rest of the article. At that point, the lede in comparison will actually seem quite small in size. At this point in time, the lede adequately satisfies WP:LEAD. Cirt (talk) 04:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
At this point in time, the lead is a ridiculous regurgitation of sentences copied from the rest of the article. Maybe when/if you get around to expanding the article that won't be a problem, but in the meantime this article is worthy of a Razzie itself. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
P.S. Please read WP:OWN. - Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Per WP:LEAD, the lede of an article is supposed to function as a standalone summary of the entire article. This lede accomplishes that. Reducing the lede to a mere couple of sentences merely because of the current size of the rest of the article, would be inappropriate. -- Cirt (talk) 20:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
It isn't a "standalone summary"; it's a copy of the article itself with some of the details removed. The article is not substantial enough to be summarized. As several people have already pointed out, the redundant repetitiveness you keep reverting to is bad writing, which they have sought to fix, but you keep standing in their way. Please cut it out. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Having a lede of only a few sentences is bad writing. -- Cirt (talk) 20:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but that is not the only measure of writing quality. It is not even the most important. "Clunky and amateurish" above was right. Now, are you going to let anyone try to improve this article or not? -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
If by "try to improve this article" you mean gut the lede to a mere few sentences, then that would be a reduction in quality. If by "try to improve this article" you mean expand the rest of the article with good material from WP:RS sources, that would be most appreciated. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Update: Please see [2] NOTE: Performing a SELF-REVERT. Drastically reducing the size of the lede, until such time as rest of article is expanded upon further.  Done. -- Cirt (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit Warning

What's with the edit warning about removing info from the lead? It seems to only serve the purpose of scaring away editors who may have improvements, and I feel it should be removed. Yaksar (let's chat) 00:37, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Here is a summary of edit-warring by Yaksar (talk · contribs) on the same subject of Golden Raspberry Award. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 02:00, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Poor grammar change to first sentence

Please see [3] followed again by same user with revert [4]. This is poor grammar: "A..." followed by "A..." in same sentence. The 2nd "A..." is unnecessary. It can simply be removed. -- Cirt (talk) 01:57, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, that's not incorrect grammar at all. See the page for Academy Award, for example. Yaksar (let's chat) 02:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Completely different usage. That sentence uses parentheses. You have failed to provide anything to back up your edit, which is grammatically inappropriate and poor reading, with the dup word usage repeated. -- Cirt (talk) 02:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
And this sentence uses commas. That does not change whether or not it is correct. Yaksar (let's chat) 02:31, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, but that is poor English. You do not need or even want the second "a" in there. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:42, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, you do. You would say "the actress won an Oscar" not "the actress won Oscar," and the same rule applies here.Yaksar (let's chat) 03:45, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request:
I have to agree with Yaksar on this one, at least as the sentence is written. The Golden Raspberry Award is not called "Razzie" for short, its called "a Razzie". You would say "X won a Razzie" or "X won the Razzie for Y", so to say the award is "called 'Razzie'" seems to me both technically and grammatically incorrect. If the word "called" was not present, it would be a different matter, and the "a" would then be superfluous: "A Golden Raspberry Award, or 'Razzie' for short,..." would, indeed, be the correct form. Perhaps you can agree on that last form as a compromise?—Anaxial (talk) 10:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
I note that, coincidentally, someone did exactly that while I was in the process of typing the above...Anaxial (talk) 10:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
This change seems to work. I have no idea why Cirt seemed to take issue with the contested but correct sentence, but since this one is grammatically correct as well this is fine. Yaksar (let's chat) 18:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Acceptance speeches

I came to this article looking for information about which winners came to accept the prize in person, but there was none to be had :-( Would be great if somebody could add this. As far as I know, Paul Verhoeven was the first winner to come and pick up his prize, for Showgirls. KarlFrei (talk) 20:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

This is what you're looking for: List of people who have accepted Golden Raspberry Awards. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh... I see. Thanks! I guess it was a little too well hidden for me in the list below. KarlFrei (talk) 13:06, 25 February 2011 (UTC)



I have a question...is this award just to make fun of people like saying they were bad at somthing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.88.241 (talk) 00:22, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Repeated sentence

Hi. I'm having trouble finding a way to change the phrasing so that "The awards themselves typically cost $4.97 each, in the form of a "golfball-sized raspberry" which sits atop a Super 8 mm film reel, the whole of which is spray-painted gold." is not repeated verbatim twice in the article. Any help is much appreciated. Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 02:45, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't necessarily think these awards are notable...

Seriously, they're nothing but defamatory awards intended to insult other actors, and there's no notability to winning an "award" for the worst performance.--I'm a Graduate! (talk) 04:37, 7 February 2012 (UTC)Chris

I tend to disagree. These awards receive wide and international coverage in the news (speaking anecdotally, they're in the Irish and UK newspapers more than, say, the Screen Actors Guild Awards), and their "defamatory" nature doesn't speak to or against their notability. GRAPPLE X 03:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm with Grapple X on this one. The Golden Raspberry Awards have been significant covered in the news, therefore notability is established. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:25, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
I think you both misunderstood my point; 97% (approximate) of actors who win absolutely decline (or don't accept) the award, so even if the press covers them, why make them notable?--I'm a Graduate! (talk) 20:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)Chris
They are notable because the press covers them. Simple. GRAPPLE X 21:11, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Come on. These awards nominate kids, for God's sake. Do these neckbeard fanboys feel better about their lives when they slam kids? Disgusting. 24.215.160.133 (talk) 06:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Seriously, please be civil and don't make any assumptions about myself or anyone else. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:44, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I think it is really insulting for people who worked really hard on making these movies. And they always target the same people which is totally unfair. I'm not against it or something, I just don't think that it should be all other the news, they're embarrassing themselves! -and hardworking artists in the process- makes them look like a bunch of losers who spend all their time criticizing movies instead of uh... I don't know... Make one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.150.31.48 (talk) 23:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


These "awards" are only reported in the media because of the nature of them. They are not serious at all (obviously), and anybody off the street, qualified opinion or not, can join a website to vote for the "winners". Technically I think this organization would count as a bully by today's standards (I wish that was a joke). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oz Man Can (talk • contribs) 02:49, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Nominated for both Oscar *AND* Razzie

Wouldn't films and people who were nominated for both an Oscar (or any other highly-esteemed movie award) and the Razzie for the very same performance be notable enough to be mentioned? Kubrick's The Shining comes to mind here, for example. Kubrick seems to have been especially vulnerable to such scenarios, as also proven by the initially exceptionately poor critical reception of his 2001: A Space Odyssey (albeit that was before the Razzies even existed). --79.193.36.213 (talk) 19:22, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

The Shining was actually not nominated for any oscars.--174.93.160.57 (talk) 01:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

How about we add "The Last Airbender" 2010 movie in "Films considered the worst"

Hello there wikipedia users. As you know even though "The Last Airbender" 2010 won many razzie awards, I'm surprised the wikipedia article called "Films considered the worst" doesn't have "The Last Airbender" 2010 included in the worst movies. Please let the wikipedia users in charge of "Films considered the worst" to please allow "The Last Airbender" movie to be included and let them know we are ready for "The Last Airbender" 2010 movie to be included in "Worst movies ever" Let me know if you can convince them thanks. CrosswalkX (talk) 16:50, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Is this really notable?

It just seems like a weird event created and sponsored by a weird famous guy.

Some of these awards coincide with the "Raspberry" film then getting an academy award soon after, or at least a nomination. So how is this even a legitimate article topic?

If there was a "Worst Film" award that was done in a more credible and serious way, I could see that. But this doesn't even seem legitimate or real, other than in the minds of the award givers. 64.134.60.51 (talk) 06:07, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Because the Razzies are actually covered by major websites and news outlets over the world, including several Dutch newspapers and Gawker. Supertanno (talk) 16:11, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
While I do think that the razzies are notable enough to have an article of their own. I think it is rather silly to include Razzie nominations and awards in other film articles "Awards and Nominations" sections. It is a joke award ceremony and I feel shouldn't be mentioned in sections dedicated to awards. -Xcuref1endx (talk) 02:50, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

I would like to open this section for further discussion. By now one would hope that this joke of an "organization" would have been considered unworthy of an article. If this has an article, why shouldn't there be an article about every internet troll and/or heckler out there too? Razzies are not an official event or organization and is nothing but a way to spread hatred similar to how in a group where one or more people say something and everyone else just agrees to stay popular. Please come to the consensus that this is a useless and purge it. This would be the best way to begin to take attention away from these guys and make them disappear into obscurity. Further, it seems in modern times, this event isn't even designed for anything but to get the $40 fee from people who think it's an actual legitimate ceremony. Grez868 (talk) 23:57, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

As noted above, the Razzies are covered by major websites and news outlets all over the world - most other (no other?) internet troll and/or heckler is covered to this extent. The Golden Raspberry is the award for "Worst Film". Razzies are an official event, the latest ceremony being held at The Palace Theatre in Los Angeles on February 27. We have a criticism section in the article which discusses the controversies addressed by the media. And as far as spreading hate, I'd point out that they added a category 2 years ago for actors who "redeemed" themselves by appearing in better works - a token of good will. Not to mention several winners have accepted their award, acknowledging their shortcomings in a light-hearted way.
If you still feel this article should be deleted, feel free to nominate it at WP:AFD. Hoof Hearted (talk) 16:00, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

All Razzies

Did Every movie that was nominated for a Razzie has negative reviews? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C8:C001:8A3A:91F2:4EC9:CF9E:8DD7 (talk) 20:30, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Certainly most films received negative reviews. However a spot check of Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Picture finds there are a few that are described as "mixed/average reviews", and even "universal acclaim" for The Blair Witch Project. Hoof Hearted (talk) 18:42, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Worst actor and actress

Is Adam Sandler the only person to yet receive razzies as both actor and actress in the same film (Jack and Jill)? Andrewa (talk) 19:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Citation needed

Is there a source for the trophy having an "estimated street value of $4.97" - I can't find anything??? MeldMaker (talk) 22:36, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Golden Raspberry Awards

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Golden Raspberry Awards's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "razzie":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. Feel free to remove this comment after fixing the refs. AnomieBOT⚡ 22:24, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Original research and synthesis

I just cut the article in half kilobyte-wise by removing violations of WP:No original research and WP:SYNTH. Please stop inserting unreferenced comparisons. And please stop inserting comparisons that are cited to [other award cite] and [Razzie award cite]. The act of putting two separate cites together to infer something else is a violation of WP:SYNTH.

What you need are citations that actually say this film or this person got a Razzie and they also got an Oscar (or whatever). These should not be listed blankly like at IMDb. Instead, a human author should be cited writing prose about how the two awards are remarkable being won by the same person or film. Good examples of that are:

Thanks in advance. Binksternet (talk) 05:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://razzies.com/asp/content/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=14, visited 2007-04-30.
  2. ^ John Wilson (2009-01-21). "Razzies 2008 Nominees for Worst Career Achievement". Retrieved 2009-01-22.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Golden_Raspberry_Awards/Archive_1&oldid=1220709984"