This goes up to 1994... I Was too lazy to go past that... Anyway I selected a lot of cult favorites... I'm curious how many people agree or disagreee.... Like how the **** do you nominate Stanley Kubrick as worst director! HOW!?
Nominations for Worst Pictures
Friday the 13th
Year of the Dragon (1985) - Dino De Laurentiis (I)
Howard the Duck (1986) - Gloria Katz
Cliffhanger (1993) - Alan Marshall (III); Renny Harlin
Last Action Hero (1993) - Stephen J. Roth (I); John McTiernan (I)
Wyatt Earp (1994) - Jim Wilson (I); Kevin Costner; Lawrence Kasdan
Nominations for Worst Actor
Michael Caine in Dressed to Kill (1980)
Conan the Barbarian (1982) - Arnold Schwarzenegger
Rocky III (1982) - Mr. T
Supergirl (1984) - Peter O'Toole (I)
Exorcist III, The (1990) - George C. Scott
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991) - Kevin Costner (Won)
Hoffa (1992) - Jack Nicholson
Basic Instinct (1992) - Michael Douglas (I)
Nominations for Worst Supporting Actor
Howard the Duck (1986) - Tim Robbins (I)
Willow (1988) - Billy Barty
Nominations for Worst Supporting Actress
Hook (1991) - Julia Roberts (I)
Nominations for Worst Actress
Nancy Allen in Dress to Kill (1980)
Nominations for Worst Director
The Shining - Stanley Kubrick
Dressed to Kill - Brian De Palma
Scarface (1983) - Brian De Palma
Wyatt Earp (1994) - Lawrence Kasdan
Worst Screenplay
Year of the Dragon (1985) - Oliver Stone (I); Michael Cimino (I)
Howard the Duck (1986) - Willard Huyck; Gloria Katz
Willow (1988) - Bob Dolman; George Lucas (story)
Worst New Star
Bloodsport (1988) - Jean-Claude Van Damme
Ernest Goes to Camp (1987) - Jim Varney
Worst Actor of the decade (80s)
Sylvester Stallone
I'm not a huge fan of Dressed to Kill, but the direction if anything is MASTERFUL... The problem lies in the script and the fact that it's just a lame copy of Psycho(which Depalma excuses by calling it a homage)... Hell Michael Caine wasn't even given that much screen-time but the time he was given he was perfectly fine. It seems they had more of a problem with the character.
---- Dressed to Kill
Written and Directed by Brian DePalma
Rating: 6/10
First off let me say, Im not a Brian DePalma fan, the only film of his I truly liked was The Untouchables (1987). Dressed to Kill (1980) underscores why I dont like DePalma and thats because he never manages to rise above mediocrity. Make no mistake Brian DePalma is a master of his craft, however he treads a fine line between copy-cat and true artist. All artists steal, its what art is, however they change it enough where it become there own, Brian DePalma doesnt do this. What were are left with is usually a well-meaning film that comes off tepid simply because you rather watch the original instead of some carbon copy.
IMDB.com said:
While taking a shower, Kate Miller (Angie Dickinson), a middle-aged, sexually frustrated New York housewife, has a rape fantasy while her husband stands at the sink shaving. Later that day, after complaining to her psychiatrist Dr. Robert Elliott (Michael Caine) about her husband's pathetic performance in bed, she meets a strange man at a museum (Ken Baker) and returns to his apartment where they continue an adulterous encounter that began in the taxicab. Before she leaves his apartment, she finds papers which certify that the man has a venereal disease. Panicked, Kate rushes into the elevator, but has to return to his apartment when she realizes she's forgotten her wedding ring. When the elevator doors open, she's brutally slashed to death by a tall blonde woman wearing dark glasses. Liz Blake (Nancy Allen), a high-priced call girl, is the only witness to the murder and she becomes the prime suspect and the murderess's next target. Liz is rescued from being killed by Kate's son Peter (Keith Gordon), who enlists the help of Liz to catch his mother's killer as Detective Marino (Dennis Franz) who's in charge of the case is uncooperative in the investigation.
DePalma main source of inspiration as usual is Hitchcock, in many ways Dressed to Kill (1980) is a remake of Psycho (1960). However they carry very different themes, Dressed to Kill is very much tied into Freuds theory on the duality of Thanatos and Eros. According to Freud, Eros is the human will to create and make life which is tied to a persons libido while Thantos is the will to destroy. This theme is driven home by the fact that each form of violence takes place after a sexual act. Thematically Psycho and Dressed to Kill are very different films however what kills the film for me is how much Dressed to Kill rips off Psycho for what essentially are two films discussing two different things.
The most obvious and jarring of the similarities between Psycho (1960) and Dressed to Kill (1980) is the fact that the main character, a female, has an extramarital affair and soon after is killed within the first 30 minutes, just like Psycho (1960). It worked with Psycho (1960) because the main character was likeable and you could empathize with her, simply poor girl caught up in a bad situation, even when she does the immoral thing of stealing the money from the bank, Hitchcock masterfully paints the guy she steals the money from as an ******* and gives her a good reason for taking it, that way we actually care about the main character. Dressed to Kill (1980) were introduced to some ***** complaining about her sex-life so she sleeps with some stranger in a cab. This sadly completely destroys what is great film-making in the museum. Theres a scene in a museum where the main character plays a cat and mouse game with this stranger and the scene shows of DePalma mastery of the camera. However since he introduced a rather unlikable character that I couldnt connect with, the scene just dragged on and on, till finally she has sex with some stranger in a cab.
Other Psycho (1960) riffs would be the shots of voyeurism, the most defining shot of this in Psycho (1960) was a close-up of Normans eye as he watches Marion Crane undress. Dress to Kill riffs off this by having the killer in this film constantly watch characters through binoculars, DePalma drives the point home bluntly by even showing you the killers eyes through the binoculars. The useless shower scene at the end is another homage to Psycho.
The biggest offense however is Michael Canes character, how hes a transvestite, to the point where he makes a different voice for his alter-ego just like Norman Bates. They also use the same exact shot and scene as Psycho right after Norman is taken in by the police, and the main characters ask why he did it. Theres a psychiatrist in the room that explains the entire thing, EXACTLY like Psycho.
Why do I point out all the obvious references to Psycho right down to camera angles? Because why bother watching Dress to Kill (1980) when I can just go watch Psycho (1960) which is infinitely better.
This is the case with DePalma most of the time, that he borrows far too much instead of developing his own style. Which is a shame considering his mastery of the camera. For example there is a scene in the beginning between the doctor and the patient, where there never is a shot of the doctor by himself, the shot/reverse shot editing goes like this: close-up of patient cuts to medium shot of Patient and doctor, repeat. Which subtly relays to the audience this scene is about the patient and not about the doctor. Through out the entire film, every shot is masterfully planned. Its a shame that DePalma rips too much instead of just letting himself rein free.
I havent said much about the acting in this film simply because the actors while very competent are completely cut short by a lacking script. The script is written with the assumption that audiences immediately will care about any character you put on the screen which simply isnt the case. So while the actors are competent, it renders their performances completely useless since we dont care what happens to their characters. However I must say that there is a turning point in the film, when two of the characters meet and they spark such chemistry between in each other you do end up caring about them, but this doesnt happen till the last 3rd of the movie. Last point however is the utterly dreadful score. The music is far too over-the-top in this movie that it kills the mood. It completely dictates every moment in the film to the point where it makes what could be genuinely heart-felt/scary scenes rather cheesy. So in the end, I have to give it a 6 since theres an obvious mastery in the craft and all the actors are competent, but strangely enough this does not lead to a good film.
This goes up to 1994... I Was too lazy to go past that... Anyway I selected a lot of cult favorites... I'm curious how many people agree or disagreee.... Like how the **** do you nominate Stanley Kubrick as worst director! HOW!?
Because the Razzies are just as political as the Oscars, they just represent the audience rather than the Academy. People vote for whoever they don't like at the time. In 2006, Tom Cruise was nominated for Worst Actor for War of the Worlds. Absolutely nothing to do with his performance in the movie itself. Off the top of my head, he was far better than say, Orlando Bloom in Kingdom of Heaven - but Bloom wasn't a media traget at the time.
Or Halle Berry in Catwoman. Lame film, not a great performance from Halle, but obviously not the very worst performance by an actress in 2004.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
