 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
They had high asperations, the filmmakers tried to make something special...but something went terribly wrong somewhere.
1)Waterworld....Mad Max on the sea! Just plain awlful.
2)Godzilla....Comic charm is why the old Japanese 'Zillas worked for kids of all ages.3)Jaws 2/3/4 & anything in the future with the word "Jaws" in it.
4)Heavans Gate....Stevens Bachs' book says it all.5)Armageddon....awlful & stupid. Period.
6)Independance Day....-ditto-
7)Pearl Harbor....awlful, painful, dialouge. Ben Affleck, again walking in boots WAY too big for him. Oh!..& how about the scenes with a NUCLEAR-powered aircraft carrier, painted up to look like WWII.
8)Pick any "comedy" with Adam Sandler
9)Jurrasic Park 2 & 3....Just awlful. Jurrasic 1 with T.Rex coming through the fence was stunning in 1993, Jurrasic 1 contained the "holy S#%T!!" factor....the "holy s#%t factor goes a long way.
10)Howard the duck...I dont know what to say.
All this of course, IMHO...but is it hard to disagree??
Follow Ups:
sure it belongs on that list. I think it was actually worse than "Waterworld," a difficult feat.
My favorite critical comment on it was "It's not as bad as you think".
Simply terrible. I can't remember when I heard such forced dialog.
I agree. Diane Keaton spent the whole movie possing.
Cameron Diaz as a red headed irish girl.....so wrong and incredibly distracting. The movie should have been edited to focus on Daniel Day Lewis's character story.Tom §.
D.D. Lewis did some acting there eh? It was a good movie, but as you said, it could have been a great one.
(nt)
I liked Rocky 1 and Nighthawks
Not a GREAT flick, but it sure isn't a bad one either.
Stallone could actually be in a motion picture frame, and not cause audience members to run away screaming. And because of it, a borderline landmark film. I've often wondered how he pulled it off? Did he sell his very soul to the devil. Did some of the cast's talent somehow rub off during the principal shooting. Was there a crease/tear in the space time continuum?Makes no matter (anti-matter?). What cheeses me theese days are those TV shows where they put a smidgen of some doofus make up on a character (usually sci-fi). And call it a costume. Most times a medallion or squiggly line on the forehead. Maybe some contrasting/alternating color fields. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
Second thing that burns me? Some daytime TV shows that exploit teenage girls. Displaying their sexuality or tawdry behavior as if they were giving her some free psychotherapy.
What was the topic? Bad movies? Awww ..... sometimes they are fun just because. Back in the day, you could actually ask the theater manager for your money back. Once sat in a six hundred seat theater with brother. Ernest Borgnine, giant fish on the screen. We were the only two in audience. Manager begged us to let everyone go home.
"Stallone could actually be in a motion picture frame, and not cause audience members to run away screaming. And because of it, a borderline landmark film. I've often wondered how he pulled it off? Did he sell his very soul to the devil. Did some of the cast's talent somehow rub off during the principal shooting. Was there a crease/tear in the space time continuum?"After pretty much hating anything that Stallone ever did, I reluctantly let my wife rent Copland. I was more than a little amazed that I could not only sit through it, but actually enjoyed the film!
....when he plays a dim-witted doofus. Same for Leonardo D'Caprio playing a mentally handicapped person (Gilber Grape). Natural roles for each of them....Tom §.
Without considering/discussing Stallone's addition or subtraction. And well the sets/costumes are quaint as well.Back to the original post ..... just in case anyone missed 'em: Wild Wild West, and Johnny Mnemonic.
ah
It is so bad, that it is actualy Good!
I didn't get any comic relief from that film, but we can certainly
agree to disagree. - AH.
.
... I strongly differ with your appraisal of the Jurassic Park sequels. For one thing, I think Jurassic Park II & III are much better than you've given them credit. The scene with the T-Rex eating the former barking occupant of the dog house with the chain dangling from it's jaws is a classic in my book, as is the chase through the city including the brief scene with the Japanese tourists and the animal control truck making a hasty retreat. These are some of the best comic relief vignettes ever put into a monster flick. In fact, in many ways JP II is much better than I, not that I'm trying to say that any of these films are without flaw.Where II falls down is where most of Spielberg directed films fall down: failure to pay attention to continuity errors that become painfully apparent with repeated viewings. These can be simple details or genuine gaffs that defy credibility. One example: Everyone in the escaping party is aware that the infant T-Rex's blood on clothing will draw the T-Rex, because the big-game hunter discusses how the T-Rex would be drawn by blood, but no one suggests that the doctor dispose of her blood soaked jacket. If such an error in judgment is obvious to the audience it should be obvious to the characters.
Of course, there are some glaring continuity gaffs in JP I that are even more egregious, but this has been discussed before and can wait for another thread if it must be brought up again.
Nevertheless, continuity mistakes and script flaws notwithstanding, Jurassic Park II is still rousing entertainment, as was the first film in the series; even III, without Spielberg at the helm, is a fun film. IMHO, these certainly don't deserve to be on anyone's "worst of..." list, but everyone's mileage varies I guess.
Now, please excuse me while I get medieval on Victor's film-snobbish arse for trying to nuke Peter Jackson's Lord of The Rings films YET AGAIN!
Cheers,
AuPh
And since it's Spielburg, politically correct snackin' and painfully so.Agh, mon. With nachos and margeritas and with rowdy mates it ain't horrible . . . but the third margerita really helps!
Mission to Mars
The Cable Guy
2001 A Space Odyssey
Apocalypse Now
Deer Hunter
Legends of the Fall
Arlington Road
Rob CThe world was made for people not cursed with self-awareness
Leonard Part 6
A Force of One
Clash of the Titans
Death Wish 5 (this may be the worst of them all)
Glitter (sorry, this is the worst of them all)
Cheech and Chong's The Corsican Brothers
Kazaam (Shaq don't give up your day job)
n
*
.
It has and need, a class of its own. A kind of " Special Merit "...
.
No. Hors concours is also use in the English language, that makes me it a little hard to explain...maybe like...outside the regular competition.
Mostly as " Prix hors- concours ".
I hope it helps if not we will have to try better!
.
In case our friend missed the point....
;^)
Well...a bad film list would contain hundreds of titles. Titanic had that silly love plot aimed at 14 yr. old girls, but technically it was almost brilliant. What keeps Titanic off a bad film list for me is that scene of the elderly couple resigning their fate..& snuggling up in their bunk as sea water flows under their bed. The editing of those scenes against the violin music in the backround.
But Titanic is not a great film. It almost is.Here is a doozy in the annuls of truly bad cinema: "FROGS" starring Ray milland (1972)
...just another example of how bad it can get.
Grins
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
