MovieChat Forums > The Black Dahlia (2006) Discussion > Why Wasn't This Nominated For Any Razzie...

Why Wasn't This Nominated For Any Razzies?

posted 15 years ago by gnolti
8 replies | jump to latest

I have never gotten over how bad this movie was, and cannot believe people are still taking it seriously today.

It practically SCREAMS for Razzies in so many categories.

Anyone?

There, daddy, do I get a gold star?

[–] rowenad 15 years ago

I think this film is so bad that it doesn't even deserve razzies

[–] BQQ 15 years ago

No, but it somehow got nominated for an Oscar. (????)
Sorry, but this film, nominated for an Oscar... you gotta laugh! HA! HA! HA!

[–] Gus-69 15 years ago

Make a case why Zsigmond's lensing shouldn't have been nominated - I dare you.

______________
Mulholland CineLog: http://mulhollandcinelog.wordpress.com/

[–] Gus-69 15 years ago

Because it wasn't one of the worst films of the year. Obvious.

______________
Mulholland CineLog: http://mulhollandcinelog.wordpress.com/

[–] DeuceWild_77 14 years ago

Hillary Swank should have been nominated for Worst Actress and won!!! the same for Fiona Shaw in the supporting category. Now about the Oscars, had Brian De Palma gave more screentime to Mia Kirschner, she could have been Nominated for Best Supporting Actress, she gave the best performance in such a limited screentime.

[–] gorgsharpy 14 years ago

Brian's got 5 already.

[–] AnxietyAlex 14 years ago

it wasnt nominated for any because its a fantastic movie

[–] dalldorfw 11 years ago

"it wasnt nominated for any because its a fantastic movie"

You're on of the very few people that has figured that out.