Poll: Will Robert Pattinson win a Razzie for 'Water for Elephants'?
RPattz has been nominated three times over the last two years, but, alas, mysteriously, he keeps losing. When he was nominated for worst actor of 2010, he got trounced by Ashton Kutcher ("Valentine's Day," "Killers"). The previous year, when Pattinson was up for worst supporting actor for "Twilight: New Moon," he got beat by Billy Ray Cyrus ("Hannah Montana: The Movie"). He and Kristen Stewart lost worst screen couple that year to Sandra Bullock and Bradley Cooper ("All About Steve").
This year, Pattinson has a new "Twilight" installment due out –- "Breaking Dawn - Part 1" –- that could result in his next Razzie nom, but he sometimes earns bids for two films at once -– like last year when he was nommed for both "Twilight: Eclipse" and "Remember Me."
Arguably, RPattz doesn't deserve to be nominated for "Water for Elephants," which scores a respectable 54 at Metacritic. The film even received a socko review from Variety, which hailed it as "a splendid period swooner that delivers classic romance and an indelible insider's view of 1930s circus life." The L.A. Times enjoyed it too, but added a caveat: "There is quite a bit to enjoy in a film that certainly qualifies as broad-based popular entertainment. But because the ingredients are so promising, there hangs over this serviceable project the wish that it had turned out better still."
However, "Water for Elephants" was panned by the New York Post, Time magazine and the Wall Street Journal. Salon blamed Pattinson for "glowering" too much, but the New York Times noted, "Mr. Pattinson is only partly to blame for the fatuity of a character who even in the novel is really a generic male ingénue with no personality."
To a large degree, RPattz gets picked on by Razzie voters just because he's a heartthrob, like recent champs Hayden Christensen and the Jonas Brothers. Surely, that means he'll "win" someday soon.
-- Tom O'Neil
Photo: Robert Pattinson in "Water for Elephants." Credit: 20th Century Fox