Bmwolf21 Posted May 19, 2008 Report Posted May 19, 2008 I saw Airheads there....witch I'm watching right now...haha "Pip gets his hands on more bumper than a body shop." "All those BJ's for nothing.." Unfortunately, 5 of the top 8 threads right now are OT (well, four are marked that way, but the home-runs thread should be, too.) That's the problem with this time of year; not enough hockey to talk about. Going one step further I counted 10 OT threads on the front page alone. It's just that time of year. The Sabres are golfing, just one playoff series is still going, and no one seems to be paying close attention to the World Championships. Makes for some boring time around these parts. Besides, how many times can we rehash that the Sabres need a true no.2 center, a gritty SOB defenseman and to get rid of Max? It's just the nature of the beast this time of year.
shrader Posted May 19, 2008 Report Posted May 19, 2008 Well someone could always start a "Dary's low balling Kennedy" thread. Personally, I can't wait until that Niagara Falls writer implies that our entire offseason hinges on his signing.
inkman Posted May 19, 2008 Report Posted May 19, 2008 How many millions of dollars did they spend on this #%^$#!ing movie, only to have it come off looking like a really cheap Sci-Fi channel "original" (read: suckass) movie? The sets are laughaubly cheap, and the aliens look like geeks from a #%^$#!ing star trek convention who couldn't afford to buy the "good" Klingon costumes (or get their mommies to sew one up for them). Everything about this film reeks incomprehensible badness. Forest Whitaker should be flogged for stooping to this trash, although it's about what I expect from Travolta these days. The rest of the cast is pretty much unknowns (what a big surprise there), and after this, they are going to stay that way... And after about 20 minutes of this amateurish picture, extinction doesn't seem like such a bad idea. A couple of reviews of my choice for worst movie I have ever seen, Man Animals!
MattPie Posted May 19, 2008 Report Posted May 19, 2008 You're all amateurs: Manos: The hands of fatePlan 9 from Outer Space I know they're cliche, but they are truly, supremely awful. Most of the movies list in this thread have some sort of coherent plot, even if cheesy or over-done. Not these. Coupled with the horrific special effects, these may never be beaten.
X. Benedict Posted May 19, 2008 Report Posted May 19, 2008 You're all amateurs:Manos: The hands of fatePlan 9 from Outer SpaceI know they're cliche, but they are truly, supremely awful. Most of the movies list in this thread have some sort of coherent plot, even if cheesy or over-done. Not these. Coupled with the horrific special effects, these may never be beaten. But Plan 9 is so bad it is good.
stuhast41 Posted May 19, 2008 Report Posted May 19, 2008 But Plan 9 is so bad it is good. Yes, but Glen or Glenda is worse. M. Night Shymalamamdingdong is a eogtistical hack whose plots hinge on gimmicks. His movies are not scary or insightful. If you ever saw an interview with him, you would think that he is the second coming of Hitchcock. IMO, he's closer to Edward D. Wood Jr.
Mike Oxhurtz Posted May 19, 2008 Author Report Posted May 19, 2008 Yes, but Glen or Glenda is worse. M. Night Shymalamamdingdong is a eogtistical hack whose plots hinge on gimmicks. His movies are not scary or insightful. If you ever saw an interview with him, you would think that he is the second coming of Hitchcock. IMO, he's closer to Edward D. Wood Jr. Lady in the water, I gave it 10 minutes then turned it off.
inkman Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 M. Night Shymalamamdingdong I like his movies. :unsure:
Screamin'Weasel Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 I like his movies. :unsure: So do I. I guess movies that require thought or have unique plot lines are no longer entertaining.
Bmwolf21 Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 So do I. I guess movies that require thought or have unique plot lines are no longer entertaining. I said pretty much the same thing earlier in the thread. I like some of his movies and others are not as good. But he does a good job at throwing a late-movie curve ball that you either really have to watch for or catches you off-guard...
jimiVbaby Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 I said pretty much the same thing earlier in the thread. I like some of his movies and others are not as good. But he does a good job at throwing a late-movie curve ball that you either really have to watch for or catches you off-guard... Just saw Signs last night, and I was extremely disappointed in the ending. Everything leading up to it had me hooked though. His movies after Sixth Sense are a very poor man's Fight Club without the social commentary.
Mike Oxhurtz Posted May 20, 2008 Author Report Posted May 20, 2008 Just saw Signs last night, and I was extremely disappointed in the ending. Everything leading up to it had me hooked though. His movies after Sixth Sense are a very poor man's Fight Club without the social commentary. I liked The Village until the end, when it was discovered that the elders made up the entire society & dressed in Halloween costumes to scare everyone when they crossed the village boarder. I initially liked Unbreakable until the end when the whole story was about real life comic book heroes & villians, that ruined it for me. I liked Signs, but I couldn't get into Lady in the Water.
Guest Sloth Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 Just saw Signs last night, and I was extremely disappointed in the ending. Everything leading up to it had me hooked though. His movies after Sixth Sense are a very poor man's Fight Club without the social commentary. I don't understand why people are bashing "Signs." The ending displayed what the movie was all about, which was the signs. I'm not a huge fan of his movies, but a number of them were buyable. 1. Sixth Sense - It was a movie you wanted to watch as soon as it was over to catch the hints being given 2. Signs 3. The Village - My wife did not like this movie, but I thought the plot twist was great. I was stunned w/ what was actually going on. I don't want to say what happens in case some people on this board haven't seen it. I'll admit I do not like all of his movies, but we feel that way about every person who creates movies. I enjoy Steven Spielberg's movies, but there are some I thought were beyond stupid, such as A.I. I hope the upcoming Indiana Jones movies is on par w/ the other Indy movies. It took Lucas, Ford, and Spielberg a while to agree upon a script. That is a good sign.
shrader Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 That guy really needs to make a movie that doesn't have that surprise ending. When every single movie ends that way, it becomes too obvious and isn't really a surprise anymore. I never even saw the Village but I could tell right away how that one was going to end.
Guest Sloth Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 That guy really needs to make a movie that doesn't have that surprise ending. When every single movie ends that way, it becomes too obvious and isn't really a surprise anymore. I never even saw the Village but I could tell right away how that one was going to end. That is a good point. Maybe his movie "The Happening" will not have a surprise ending. Now that would a surprise ending for one of his movies!!!
apuszczalowski Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 I think we have found a topic where I can actually agree with Deluca on I liked Death Proof and Planet terror, the key to them is that you have to go in expecting it to be cheesey because thats what those kinds of movies were and they were paying homage to them, like House of a 1,000 Corpses. Rob Zombie wasn't looking to write the next best scary movie, he was making a movie that paid homage to the movies he grew up watching. I have liked all 3 of his movies The problem with some of the movies listed is that they were either A. Sequals in a series that was starting to run its course or B. Geared for certain audiences (like children, or teens) Personally, I never liked anything with Stalone, I was not into Rocky (except the video game for PS2), hated Rambo (even the new one my friend dragged me to because he loves stalone), and think he is one of the worst actors alive. Showgirls was bad, but anyone that actually went into that movie expecting more then just getting to see some nudity was going to be greatly disapointed. I guess it all depends on a persons taste though on whats the worst movies. I liked the movie "Death to Smoochy", where alot of people hated it, even Jon Stewart makes fun of it and he was in it. I think the key to making it onto a list of "Worst Movie Ever", it has to be bad all around. Story, Acting, Quality, all have to be bad, but the movie also has to be one that is trying to be a great movie and take itself seriously. I didn't like the "Scary Movie" franchise, and thought they were horrible, but I wouldn't put them as worst movies because they weren't supposed to be great. A movie like "Snakes on a Plane" (or any non Disney Lindsay Lohan movie) come accross as trying to be good movies, but are horrible.
shrader Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 Snakes on a Plane trying to be a good movie? If that was the case they would have actually put some thought into the title. Oh, and they would've cast some actual actors behind Jackson.
apuszczalowski Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 Snakes on a Plane trying to be a good movie? If that was the case they would have actually put some thought into the title. Oh, and they would've cast some actual actors behind Jackson. Word was that they did try and come up with a better title, but Jackson said he would not do the movie unless they kept that title. What I meant was that it wasn't made to be a bad movie, they made it expecting to make a scary/action type movie. It wasn't a farce or a movie that was intended to be a stupid kind of movie, it just ended up bad As for other Actors, they may not have had A-listers lining up behind Jackson for the role, but there are some there that have done other movies before. Maybe the budget wouldn't allow for anyone else after jackson came aboard?
shrader Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 It was meant to be a B action movie that would sell a couple tickets. It far exceeded those goals thanks to all the internet buzz it got.
ROC Sabres Posted May 20, 2008 Report Posted May 20, 2008 I have a question that is off topic, for this topic but not really. I'm watching "The Shadow" right now. Terrible Baldwin movie. Anyways, why are bombs always made with multiple colors of wiring? Make them all red or blue or whatever. Am I right or what?
SwampD Posted May 21, 2008 Report Posted May 21, 2008 I have a question that is off topic, for this topic but not really. I'm watching "The Shadow" right now. Terrible Baldwin movie. Anyways, why are bombs always made with multiple colors of wiring? Make them all red or blue or whatever. Am I right or what? That's a great point. The next time I make a bomb I'll be sure to use the same color wires to ensure that it goes of no matter who tries to diffuse it.
apuszczalowski Posted May 21, 2008 Report Posted May 21, 2008 That's a great point. The next time I make a bomb I'll be sure to use the same color wires to ensure that it goes of no matter who tries to diffuse it. Well, except if MacGyver tried to difuse it, he could do it!
rbochan Posted May 21, 2008 Report Posted May 21, 2008 Well, except if MacGyver tried to difuse it, he could do it! But only if he fashioned a volt-meter, out of some old broken sunglasses he found plus some diodes and the display from his digital watch plus some duct tape he had stuck to the inside of the sleeve of his members-only jacket, so he could actually see which wires had what current running through them.
Chilly Posted May 21, 2008 Report Posted May 21, 2008 Word was that they did try and come up with a better title, but Jackson said he would not do the movie unless they kept that title. What I meant was that it wasn't made to be a bad movie, they made it expecting to make a scary/action type movie. It wasn't a farce or a movie that was intended to be a stupid kind of movie, it just ended up bad As for other Actors, they may not have had A-listers lining up behind Jackson for the role, but there are some there that have done other movies before. Maybe the budget wouldn't allow for anyone else after jackson came aboard? Snakes on a Plane was awesome because it was unintentionally a parody of Hollywood, and Samuel understood this (I don't think anyone else working on it did, however).
ExiledInIllinois Posted May 22, 2008 Report Posted May 22, 2008 Joe Versus the Volcano... The only movie I ever walked out on. Then there are the Jane Campion flicks... Stuff like The Piano and The Portrait of a Lady just make a poor guy's head spin with her ciematography and the tormenting plot! The wife would never let me leave! :angry: In fact, The Portrait of a lady, we were the only ones in the theater! A first for me! Should I even be admitting I have been to these flicks! :blush:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.