Golden_Raspberry_Award_for_Worst_Prequel,_Remake,_Rip-off_or_Sequel

Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Remake, Rip-off or Sequel

Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Remake, Rip-off or Sequel

Add article description

The Razzie Award for Worst Remake, Rip-off or Sequel is an award presented at the annual Golden Raspberry Awards for the worst film adapted from some form of previous material (derivative work). The category covers films that are prequels, sequels, remakes, reboots, spin-offs, film adaptations of other media franchises, mockbusters and "rip-offs" (thus making the award open to nearly any high concept film with a superficial resemblance to any other work of fiction).

Quick Facts Awarded for, Country ...

The following is a list of nominees and recipients of that award, including each film's distribution company.

History

From 1994 to 2005, the category was titled Worst Remake or Sequel. The category was divided into Worst Prequel or Sequel and Worst Remake or Rip-off in 2006 and 2007. The categories were again merged in 2008 to form Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-off or Sequel, and it was shortened to the current title from 2012 onward. The award was not presented in 1996 and 1999.

Criteria

Despite not being mentioned in the name of the award, film adaptations of other media (books, graphic novels, cartoons, etc.) are eligible for nomination (extending the term "remake" broadly to include adaptations).

Razzie nominations have also stretched the definition on occasion; for example, Jack & Jill was described as a "Remake/Ripoff of Glen or Glenda" despite bearing no resemblance beyond that they both feature male actors portraying both male and female characters; this was widely viewed as an excuse to nominate the film in every category.[1][2] Similarly, Karen was described as an "Inadvertent Remake of Cruella" despite the lack of any real similarity between the two films,[3] and The Meg was listed as a rip-off of Jaws despite both films having little in common beyond having a giant shark as villain.[4]

Worst Remake or Sequel (1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 2000–2005)

Worst Prequel or Sequel (2006, 2007)

Worst Remake or Rip-off (2006, 2007)

Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-off or Sequel (2008–2011)

Worst Remake, Rip-off or Sequel (2012–present)

Franchises/properties

Most wins

As of 2023, no franchise/property has won this award more than once.

Most nominations

Notes

  1. Considered a remake of Blonde, a 2001 TV miniseries.[11]

References

  1. [1]
    "Adam Sandler sets worst-movies awards record, winning 10 Razzies for 'Jack and Jill'". syracuse. Associated Press. April 2, 2012.
  2. [2]
    "Adam Sandler film sets Razzie record". Bangkok Post.
  3. [3]
    The Immortan Scott (January 21, 2022). "Scott Looks at the Razzie Ballot Year 4: Did Ben Affleck Run Over the Razzie's Cat or Something?". The Avocado. Retrieved January 22, 2022.
  4. [4]
    Disalvo, Tom (2022-03-27). "From 'The Shining' To 'Jaws:' 10 Times The Razzies Got It Wrong". Collider. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  5. [5]
    Hiatt, Brian (2002-03-25). "Tom Green, Estella Warren are Razzie winners". Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved August 23, 2015.
  6. [6]
    "M Night Shyamalan's Last Airbender wins Razzie Awards". BBC News. 27 February 2011. Retrieved 2011-02-27.
  7. [7]
    "Adam Sandler movie Jack and Jill sweeps Razzie awards". BBC News. April 2, 2012. Retrieved May 17, 2012.
  8. [8]
    King, Susan (2014-03-01). "'Movie 43' is named worst film of 2013 at the 34th Razzie Awards". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 2014-03-01.
  9. [9]
    King, Susan (February 21, 2015). "Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas Dominates the 35th Razzie Awards". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved July 28, 2017.
  10. [10]
    Razzie Awards 2021 Winners: MUSIC, 365 DAYS WIN BIG AT 41ST GOLDEN RASPBERRY AWARDS < < Rotten Tomatoes
  11. [11]
    "ANA DE ARMAS – BLONDE – Hollywood Authentic".
Share this article:

This article uses material from the Wikipedia article Golden_Raspberry_Award_for_Worst_Prequel,_Remake,_Rip-off_or_Sequel, and is written by contributors. Text is available under a CC BY-SA 4.0 International License; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.