posted
Are we talking outlandishly bad, awesomely bad movies?
Or are we talking about popcorn flicks that suck but delight? There's a big difference.
For example, one of my favorite awesomely bad movies is Hobo With a Shotgun, which is stunningly, badly awesome.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: Bring It On and Legally Blonde are two movies that I have to stop on if I'm flipping channels. Its stupid how many times I've seen each movie.
I'm such a giant nerd for Repo: The Genetic Opera. Like "crazy drunken stories" level of nerd-dom.
My college roommate and I used to have arguments about whether Newsies was so bad it was good (me) or just bad (her).
And I had a phase some years back where I was watching Italian Job every week. Not quite sure why but I was obsessed with it and its just so stupid.
I'll also throw Hook out there too.
I'll give you Newsies, which I still watch whenever I catch on TV.
But Hook? Hook was awesome. Not awesomely bad, just awesome.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Mentioned this before, but: Kung Pow.
I mean, it's awful. It's garish. It's terrible. And yet none of us can stop quoting it.
Samprimary speaks the truth.
I would qualify this by adding that the degree to which Kung Pow becomes genuinely enjoyable (instead of ironically enjoyed) increases with the number of teenagers you have watching it at once, and how late at night it is. (I've tested this multiple times)
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Destineer: Ah, Kung Pow. "What do you get when you cross an owl with a bungee cord? My ass!"
I have been called bad before. Many have said I do things that are not correct to do. I don't believe in talk such as this. I am nice man, with happy feelings. All of the time.
Yes, a tiny net is a death sentence. It is a net and it is tiny!
I'm in the camp that says Hook is awesomely bad, not awesome period. But while we're on the topic of Hook: anyone know what "Bangarang" is actually supposed to signify? Is it just supposed to mean the same thing as "Boo-yah" or "You got pwned"?
Also, T_Smith: Star Trek the Motion Picture is a wonderful film. Second best in the series.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Destineer: Also, T_Smith: Star Trek the Motion Picture is a wonderful film. Second best in the series.
Despite what some people say, I thought First Contact was awesome. In fact, I'd place it right after Wrath of Kahn.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Greatest Show on Earth won an Academy Award for Best Picture, way back in the early 50s. It beat films like Singin' in the Rain, Ivanhoe, Moulin Rouge, and High Noon.
In the years since, it's become incredibly clear that the Academy made a terrible mistake. This thing is a messy, silly, syrupy-goofy bizarre wreck.
It's also so enjoyably awful that it never fails to make me smile.
The terrible performances coaxed out of otherwise fine actors. The plot twists played so dead set serious that they cross a border and become high comedy. The train wreck. Dear me. The train wreck.
You must see this movie.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SteveRogers: Terminator 2? Terrible? Why?
Furlong had a lot to do with it, yes. Horrible acting and cheese all around, though. Still, Linda and Arnold were pretty bad-ass, as well as the T1000 guy (don't know his name), and the effects for the time rocked.
So okay, maybe it doesn't quite qualify as terrible. Pretty bad, though. I'd lump it in with the likes of Transformers, except that T2 has that je ne sais pas that keeps it from being a total pile.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
I'm in the camp that says Hook is awesomely bad, not awesome period. But while we're on the topic of Hook: anyone know what "Bangarang" is actually supposed to signify? Is it just supposed to mean the same thing as "Boo-yah" or "You got pwned"?
Also, T_Smith: Star Trek the Motion Picture is a wonderful film. Second best in the series.
quote:Originally posted by Destineer: Also, T_Smith: Star Trek the Motion Picture is a wonderful film.
In what sense?!?
I say this as a devout Trekkie: nuh-UH!
First, the visuals (not just the effects, but the cinematography) are fantastic. As is the soundtrack, best score of any Star Trek movie.
Second, most importantly, it's a rare and precious example of a sci fi movie where the central conflict is all about discovery. There's an actual scientific mystery that the Enterprise crew is trying to figure out, and the answer does not disappoint.
I can understand why some true Trekkies might like it less, since they probably saw the Nomad episode of TOS first and thus felt like the movie was somewhat derivative from it. But as a stand-alone movie, it's good in a way that very few movies are good. (For the same reason, I love Peter Hyams's 2010.)
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I can understand why some true Trekkies might like it less, since they probably saw the Nomad episode of TOS first and thus felt like the movie was somewhat derivative from it. But as a stand-alone movie, it's good in a way that very few movies are good.
I really loved this review. His "cut" gag made me squirt milk out of my nose. At least, I hope that was milk. Come to think of it, I wasn't drinking milk at the time.
...I'm off to the doctor.
But before I go, I'll throw Equilibrium into the mix of great, terrible movies.
Posts: 1831 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ginol_Enam: Speed Racer
The most faithful movie adaptation I've ever seen. Had the Star Wars Prequels stayed this true to their source material, George Lucas would be able to pay Bill Gates to shine his shoes.
It is, in all honesty, one of my all-time favorite movies.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: But before I go, I'll throw Equilibrium into the mix of great, terrible movies.
Short of Tony Jaa or certain young Jackie Chan movies Equilibrium has some of the best choreography I have ever seen.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rivka, I hate to say it, but I couldn't stand that guy and his retinue, and had to stop the video after a couple minutes.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's an actual scientific mystery that the Enterprise crew is trying to figure out
"Big, scary thing approaching Earth! Our scanners are useless! It has nigh omnipotent, never explained powers based on whatever the plot requires! Woo!"
and the answer does not disappoint.
"It's a probe that was found by a never before mentioned world of sentient machines! They decided to make IT sentient! Just because! And being sentient made it HeckaCoolPowerful! Now it's back and it's TICKED. Unless it can "merge with the Creator". Get it? Merge? Because humans have feelings and machines don't!"
Man, it's like something a college kid cooked up after watching 4AM television after finishing an all-night shift at Arby's.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, it was Alan Dean Foster, and you can see his creative fingerprints all over the script.
There are a couple of awkward lines, mostly from Lt. Ilia, but overall I'd say it's the best script of the series.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
That film felt like a rehash of 2001: A Space Odyssey, except with Kirk instead of Dave. I'm not complaining, though. 2001 was a fantastic movie, but both films are definitely a product of their time.
To some, this results in making the film seem boring and long, but all of it makes sense if you really think about it. Star Wars had the market cornered with action space fantasy, so Trek had to take a more scientific approach to things. If you really watch the movie, it feels like the complete opposite if Star Wars.
Another key thing to remember about this Trek film is that it was less about the characters and more about the idea of discovering the unknown. The second film in the series, The Wrath of Kahn, is much more about the characters, which is probably why it is regarded as the best in the series.
Anyway, that's just what I think. I could be wrong.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, that critic's voice is not only annoying, but he obviously has no idea what the movie is about. I got to the part where he trashes the Vulcan that isn't Spock and I closed it. We all know he is a stand in for Spock, the character knows it, and that is the point. Is a movie about getting stuck in the past just like the second is about fearing the future.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I stuck around long enough to see what he said about that transporter scene. I thought he inadvertently highlighted just how cool a scene it is. An incongruous moment of horror in the middle of a Star Trek story. I really admire them sticking something so jarring near the beginning of the film.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suspect this is just a case of us having different expectations for what the movie was supposed to deliver. I definitely respect it when a movie moves really smoothly, as the Abrams Star Trek did. But I also really like it when a movie throws something unexpected at me. The first time I saw the movie, I found that scene absolutely chilling, and that's held true across repeated viewings.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: Wow, that critic's voice is not only annoying, but he obviously has no idea what the movie is about. I got to the part where he trashes the Vulcan that isn't Spock and I closed it. We all know he is a stand in for Spock, the character knows it, and that is the point. Is a movie about getting stuck in the past just like the second is about fearing the future.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
