posted by Paul on 2/12/01 The movie industry is notoriously unoriginal, with movies often being produced carelessly and with little imagination - churned out like an assembly line of inferiority. Once in a while, an original idea will rear itself; the movie will become a raging success; the writer and director will be inducted into the Hollywood set-up, asked to re-write and helm a slew of future " on the shelf " projects; and the idea will be beaten to death. It's no secret that Hollywood is all about the bottom line. There are some Hollywoodites concerned with quality, but I'm convinced that if a film starring nothing but a brick wall made a profit, you could expect a string of rip-offs - " Wooden Door - the Keanu Reeves Story ", " PVC Window " and " Brick Wall 2- this time it crumbles ". Independent Movies are a breed onto themselves, and undeniably the best thing the industry has going for it. And while some Hollywood movies display sensibilties of quality, actually concerning themselves with satisfying the audience, and not just draining them of precious dollars, most Hollywood fare is regurgitated, uninspired tripe. A Hollywood movie is sometimes hard to define. After all, many big-name Hollywood stars have been appearing in more low-budget projects as of late. This is an attempt to make them look serious about their acting and the quality of their movies, as opposed to just insecure megalomaniacs, more concerned with how good they'll look. The latter is a more accurate description of most Hollywood stars. For purposes of brevity, Hollywood movies are usually associated with big movie studios, big-time actors, big budgets and huge promotional pushes. " Independence Day " is a perfect example of a Hollywood movie, and its unoriginality and utter stupidity is considered a trait common to the majority of big Hollywood movies. Hollywood distributes what it thinks the audience will want to see ( read: what they'll PAY to see ). Its choices are dictated by the box office. If Richard Simmons made a farce called " My father the Lesbian " ( about a man with a campy son , who decides to get a sex change and become a lesbian ), and it made $100 million, you could expect at least three results: 1) It would make Richard Simmons a sought after star. 2) It would guarantee a sequel. 3) It would give rise to a host of copycat " gender-bending " comedies. Sometimes Hollywood can get away with the cheap rip-offs. Either the genre is so vogue, and the actor/actress/writer/director is so " hot " that they can make formulaic movies and still turn a profit. " Scream " was a success and re-started the whole teen/horror trend. Earlier cash-ins like " I Know What You Did Last Summer " and " Urban Legend " turned a tidy profit, but money-motivated execs exhausted even the most inexhaustible of moviegoers. It fizzled. This article is here to celebrate the
glorious failures in cinematic history, the " sure-fire " hits which didn't
quite hit their targets. Not only did they fail to cash in, they failed miserably and in
fine style. This is a celebration of Hollywood lunacy and hubris. As only Hollywood can do
it.
Bless The Child Year of Release: 2000 The Pitch: " The Sixth Sense " meets " The Omen ", starring Oscar Winner, Kim Basinger. Starring: Kim Basinger, Christina Ricci, Jimmy Smits and Kim Basinger's make-up artist. Reason for release: " The Sixth Sense " 's stunning and eye-opening success paved the way for a string of rip-offs. The Supernatural " Sense ", featuring the supernaturally good ( and Oscar-nominated ) Haley Joel Osment, convinced movie execs that audiences wanted their movies stocked with precocious children and supernatural storylines. Nice idea if you have a clue what you're doing, but this movie clearly didn't. Nevertheless, on the outside, it looked set to be a reasonable hit at the very least. After all, it starred Kim Basinger, hot from her " LA Confidential " Oscar win, and it featured every geek's favorite, Christina Ricci, in a co-starring role. Where it went wrong: Take your pick - incomprehensible plot; silly script; hammy acting; a lack of direction. Where it REALLY went wrong: The critics tore into this like Oprah tears into new literary talent. It was a resounding flop in the eyes of the critics, who noted its " silliness " and " unoriginality ", but critics are usually superfluous to box office. Usually. They rarely make or break a movie ( see ANY Adam Sandler movie ). However, this time audiences took the bait, and " Bless The Child " only made $29 million. And that was after the studio dragged its release to three months in a vain attempt to recoup some of its bloated $40 million budget ( $ 20 million of which was spent on Kim Basinger's make-up ).
Overall: Not the worst movie you'll
ever see, and nowhere near as bad as some would have you believe, this is nevertheless a
huge dud. But, you know, it's SO preposterous, you may even find yourself entertained by
its silly dialogue and outrageous plot. A personal guilty pleasure, but I'm not bragging
about it.
Showgirls Year of Release: 1995. The Pitch: " Basic Instinct " meets " Blue Velvet ". It starred Kyle MacLachlan from David Lynch's cult favorite " Blue Velvet ", and it was directed by Paul " Basic Instinct "/ " I'm an artist, not a voyeur " Verhoeven. Written by super-rich Hollywood hack , Joe Eszterhas , who also scripted " Basic Instinct ", this hoped to cash in on the voyeur boom ( see also " Sliver ", " Disclosure " and " The Specialist " ). Starring: " Saved By The Bell " mainstay, Elizabeth Berkley; Kyle MacLachlan; Gina Gershon. Reason for making the movie: Put simply, sex sells. " Basic Instinct " showed that women opening their legs can open box office. Well, that's what the filmmakers thought. In fact, this is an exercise in sleaze, and an opportunity to push the boundaries of censorship. It tries the erotic thriller approach, and erotic thrillers were all the rage in the mid-nineties, so it's a selling point here. This movie tried to cater to the sleazeball demographic, and it was expected that this would be a strong enough hit.
Where it went wrong: " Showgirls " lacks anything it claims to have. Where it claims to posess sexiness, it posesses only sleaze and soulessness. Where it claims intrigue, you find only absurdity. This is lowbrow dreck at its very worst. " Showgirls " is a genre onto itself. It may be cinema's first " erotic thriller " self-parody. It's not erotic, it's not thrilling, but it is unintentionally hilarious. Where it really went wrong: It featured strippers, it was crude and it only served the most base purpose: somehow you knew the critics wouldn't be too kind to this dog. Nor did it stand much chance at the Academy Awards. Lines like "She misses us like that lump on my twat I had taken off last week." aren't likely to amuse the Academy an awful lot. Overall: This movie only made about $20 million in box-office sales, after costing $40 million to make. An obvious and humiliating bomb at the box office, it nevertheless went on to develop a huge cult following. " Showgirls " really found its niche on homevideo, where over-sexed men felt more comfortable watching this misogyny. One of the worst movies you could dread to see, you might still find humor in this one - if you're wildy intoxicated and not very bright.
This movie deserves a special introduction. In fact, it deserves its own section. IT.. IS.. THE.. WORST..MOVIE..OF..ALL..TIME. Now, this movie was made just last year, but it destroys all other pretenders to the crown. " Howard The Duck "? A George Lucas acid trip. " Showgirls " ? Cheesy fun. " Battlefield Earth "? Well, where do you start? Can we overlook that it was made for $80 million, and only recouped $21 million? This movie is a nightmare, the low point of John Travolta's career. The low point of Hollywood cinema. Rumor has it that L Ron Hubbard ( creepy Scientology guy ) came back from the dead just to tell Travolta what an idiot he was. This makes " Look Who's Talking " and all the talking dogs sequels which followed look like " Citizen Kane " by comparison. This makes Ed Wood look competent.
To think that this movie was even conceived let alone given the all-important greenlight is unthinkable. To even think about this movie is depressing, but to think that people actually took time to work on this movie ( a collaborative process ) is unfathomable. You know why it's depressing? Because these idiots just spent $80 million on cinematic feces. What a waste of time and money. While children starve the world over, John Travolta is given another chance to prove what a moron he is. For he is the biggest cuplrit in all this. He is the Scientology freak who decided to inflict this on audiences. You want the 101 on Scientology without reading through a 400 page booklet? Ok, here you go. " Scientology is a cult, wherein stupid millionaires with nothing better to do, spend their money and their time on a stupid cause. They believe that we're ruled by aliens and that we can purify ourselves with advanced forms of mind control. "
Well, Travolta must have a very special brand of mind control, because something more sinister than persuasion was at work here. Not all executives could be this stupid. No, this...this.. movie was made for Travolta, and only made because his waning starpower still held some value. In other words: in a midst of bombs, Travolta somehow managed to attach himself to some quality projects. These quality projects made him look more marketable than he actually was. John Travolta is box office poison, and any major exceptions to that are negligible. Chances are that if he's starring, the box office race is already dead. But why's this movie so bad? Well, not only has it effectively sealed the final nail in Travolta's already lowering career coffin, it displays the worst attributes of any movie ever. Every, and I mean every facet of this movie is dire. 1) Bad script: Combine non-sensical dialogue
with non-sensical plot and you're getting close. This is not so much a movie gone bad, as humanity gone bad. And the scary thing is that it takes itself so seriously. This was not designed for campy thrills, and Travolta is proud of this movie. So proud that he tut-tuts at anyone who derides it, and has remained adamant that a sequel will be made. What planet is he living on?
My basic instinct when watching these sort of cinematic abortions is to: shake my head in disbelief and laugh defiantly, because, no matter how low I think I've stooped, there are always people like John Travolta. People to make me thankful that, although I've screwed up on occasion, I've never appeared as a dreadlocked alien in " Battlefield Earth ". I've never been that cruel. Paul When Movies Go Bad: Part Two posted by B on 2/17/01 "Girl, Interrupted"
The Pitch: "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" for the sexually abused/trendy lesbian/brother humping crowd. That means taking away the humanity of the characters, every ounce of believability, and any aspect of entertainment. Based on the true memoirs of one of those "I want to carve Cure lyrics into my arms" girls, it comes across NOT as a delicate portrayal of a damaged psyche, but as a woman rationalizing her life as a social reject. Imagine a depressed Golden Girls. Starring: Former Johnny Depp-humping Winona Ryder, former Ted Danson-humping Whoopi Goldberg, former brother-humping Angelina Jolie, Angelina Jolie's greasy lips. Reason for Making the Movie: The idea of mentally queered young girls bemoaning their horrible lives must be appealing to somebody. Especially when the "victims" are skinny, pretty girls with big boobs. Anyway, it's a case of the Erin Brockovich, some woman thinks her life is so amazing and wonderful that we've got to sit through a two or so hour ego-stroke in the name of cinema. At least Erin Brockovich did something marginally important. This chick just kinda sat in the hallway of a mental institution and played the guitar. The stuff dreams are made of. Where It Went Wrong: The memoirs were written by a brain fart to begin with, and the script seems to have combined the farted memoirs with a diatribe that could've been produced by a twelve year old with a Powerbook. To create your own "Girl Interrupted" go to the convenience store and buy about twenty-thousand dollars worth of cigarettes. Then, sit around with your beautiful friends smoking the cigarettes and call each other "asshole" all day. They should've changed the name of this movie to "Don't Date Me." Where It REALLY Went Wrong: Giving Angelina Jolie as Oscar for this movie was a huge mistake, both because of her abysmal performance as a SCARRED LESBIAN OMG (her third or fourth time playing the exact same character, read "Gia," "Foxfire," etc.) and because boyfriends across the country were forced into the theaters against their will. Taking a guy to see "Girl, Interrupted" is right behind "putting their nuts in a bear trap" on the "Horrible Things to Do to Your Boyfriend" list. Overall: Hey, it's not as good as "Spice World," but at least it's not "Boy's Don't Cry." Can't a woman pursue a relationship with another woman without them having to have lesbian sex all over the place? Jesus. Strike a blow for equality, dammit! Pow! Pow! "Eyes Wide Shut"
The Pitch: People walk around on the streets, staring and wondering about things. For three hours. Then they sit and think about things. For three more hours. Then they watch people have sex for a few more hours. Then it's over. The movie's only about 2 1/2 hours long, but sitting in the theater it felt like eight or nine. Or maybe that was the number of times I tried to take my life. Starring: CRUISE KIDMAN KUBRICK, like it says on the poster. Also, many naked and uninteresting people. Reason for Making the Movie: Stanley Kubrick, the undisputed King of Hit and Miss, wanted to make a movie where famous people had lots of sex. Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman didn't want people to keep thinking they were gay, so they took a break from adopting "children of the world" to hump each other on camera. It was to be Kubrick's first film in years, and the 27th time Cruise would appear in his underwear on the silver screen. Where It Went Wrong: I'm sure the movie's point and direction was GREAT, but Stanley Kubrick up and died during the filming, so he never got a chance to edit it. That means that scenes drag on, motivations become diluted, and movie goers starve to death waiting for it to end. You miss out on the films high points, like it's lighting and art direction, when you're trying to smash your face on the seat in front of you. Where It REALLY Went Wrong: There's only one song on the entire soundtrack, a grating piano tinkling that sounds like somebody's cat walked across the keys. Nothing adds to the twenty or so minute scenes of Tom Cruise staring at the camera doing nothing like music notes so soft they appear to be jabbing you in the ears with a fork. A sharp fork. With spikes all over it. Overall: The movie's not as bad as I say, but I really can't remember the good parts. All I remember is BING...BING...BING BING BING BING BING BOOONNGGGGG..... In fact, that's all I hear all day, every day, no matter where I am. The madness will soon take my soul. And remember, you can NOT powerbomb Kidman. He'll reverse it. Every time. Disney's "Hercules"
The Pitch: There was a pitch for this? I would imagine that Disney has abused every fairy tale they could get their hands on. After a failed attempt to rape history (Pocahontas) and before a failed attempt to rape classic literature (The Hunchback of Notre Dame), Disney decided to attempt a rape of religious history. Starring: The voices of Tate Donovan, James Woods, Bobcat Goldwaith, and hundreds of others who ALSO have no cultural relevance. Reason for Making the Movie: Michael Eisner wanted his name written in platinum gold on the bottom of his swimming pool. When company execs told him that they could only do it in yellow gold, an enraged Eisner prompted his already trained and low on morale staff of animators to produce the story of Hercules, of course, without having anything to do with Hercules at all. Where It Went Wrong: The songs and cheesy one-liners hit a Disney low previously only touched by "The Aristocats." When the kids are in trouble, they shout out "CALL EYE X EYE EYE" because they use ROMAN NUMERALS AND THIS IS FUNNY ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 In one of the major songs, a parade of black women (?) proclaim that Hercules "puts the 'glad' in 'gladiator'." That's when I put the poison down my throat. Where It REALLY Went Wrong: Disney's always been kinda out of it when it comes to the theme song for their animated classics. Phil Collins, Vanessa Williams, Peabo Bryson, etc. But Michael Bolton? His song "Go the Distance" is one of the most forgettable in animated history, in the "Swan Princess" or "Quest for Camelot" category. Besides, who in the hell likes Michael Bolton other than my aunt, and she only likes him because she digs bald guys with mullets. Overall: The dirty number one on the list of worst Disney movies. I worked at a Blockbuster Video, and one day I was working with Carol...who put in Hercules. I remember falling to my knees at least twice in pain, trying to straighten up videos molested by children and help people find the latest Ashley Judd classic. The worst part is that I couldn't even SEE the movie. I couldn't imagine what WATCHING the movie would be like. Paul's a great writer, but he made a big mistake in When Movies Go Bad: Part One. He said that "Battlefield: Earth" was the worst movie ever made. Though it CAN kill a baby still in the womb, it cannot COMPARE in any category with the sacrilege of the TRUE worst movie of all time. Close your eyes and pray. "Batman and Robin"
The Pitch: The other three Batman movies, despite a steady decline of quality, made hundreds of millions of dollars. The idea is that the series could be improved by CRAMMING every celebrity they could into the picture and sliding it deep into our gullets like we're on a cruise with Tommy Lee. It worked. Sort of. Starring: Here is a quick list of who could've given a good performance in this film: Everyone else ON THIS FUCKING PLANET EARTH but George Clooney, Chris O'Donnell, Alicia Silverstone, Uma Thurman, Elle McPherson, and Arnold Schwartzenegger. Reason for Making this Movie: Director Joel Schumacher felt that the story of a man who lives with a boy and dresses up in a rubber body suit to prowl the night wasn't homosexual enough, so he decided to give them rubber nipples and dump gallons of neon paint on them. Other than that, I would imagine he made this movie to skip the romance and get straight to ass-fucking the American public. Where It Went Wrong: From the first shot of the movie: Batman and Robin changing into their superhero gear: CROTCH SHOT, ASS SHOT, CROTCH SHOT, ASS SHOT, NIPPLE SHOT, etc. Thousands of images of giant rubber wieners and buttcracks pound you in the neck until you're down in the movie theater floor, gasping for air. Other places where it "went wrong:" 1) Batman and Robin attempt to stop Mr.
Freeze from stealing a diamond. So Mr. Freeze freezes the museum and sends padded thugs
with sticks to battle the heroes. Robin screams out "It's the HOCKEY TEAM FROM
HELL!" while clicking his feet together, showcasing his "bat ice-skates." And the list goes ON and ON and ON and ON. Bad special effects (Robin jumping straight up into the air and the moving forward, Robin being pulled underwater through the advanced technique of REWINDING THE FILM), stupid storylines (Butler Alfred dying but NOT REALLY, Batman wants to get married and reveal his identity for the fourth straight movie), and so much more that I cannot even begin to express through words make this undoubtedly the most awful offense in cinema history. Where It Really Went Wrong: I could've excused the whole movie if it wasn't for the "Batman American Express." Wanting to buy the services of Poison Ivy at a (whore) Auction, Batman and Robin get into a dispute and begin bidding with each other. Bats trumps Robin by whipping out a credit card with the Batman logo on it. "Never leave home without it." Way to keep your secret identity, Bruce. "Yeah, I want a card with the Batman logo on it...no, no, I'm not Batman, I swear!" Like George Clooney wasn't a big enough idiot to begin with. Overall: Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy are supposed to be costumed super villains, right? So if they act stupid I'll forgive it. Same with Batman, Robin, and Batgirl. And if I'm going for the Tim Burton look I'll excuse the fact that Gotham City seems to be 10,000 feet tall and made up of statues. But when Robin goes joyriding in the Batmobile and gets harassed by street urchin (read, normal people on the street), they are wearing arm tassels and have neon paint all over their face. If I pretend I'm brain damaged even THAT can be made to be okay. But why in GOD'S GREEN NAME are Gotham City's streetlights black lights? RAGE!! That's it. That's the end. I don't want to talk about it anymore. I don't think I've got the strength. It makes me hate myself more every time I think about it. B When Movies Go Bad: Part Three
"But I'm a Cheerleader" Year of Release: 2000 The Pitch: "The Birdcage" meets "Queer as Folk" meets "Dawson's Creek", starring virtual unknowns, Jen from "Dawson's Creek" and RuPaul as a man. Starring: Natasha Lyonne, Clea DuVall, Cathy Moriarty, Michelle Williams and Ru Paul (in male form). Reason for release: This is a tough one, made even tougher when you actually watch the finished product. I guess, because this was independent fare, they decided it would be edgy and orginal. And to be fair, the premise is: it centers on a school that would train gay and lesbian children to act straight and therefore become straight. Think "A Clockwork Orange" mixed with brown love. In the right hands, this could have been comedy gold. In the hands of this cast, it's an absolute shambles. But, on the surface, it looked like it could be a marginal success. It was never going to perform at a blockbuster level, but movies such as "Swingers" proved that independent movies could find a niche and become successes even under the weight of a low budget. Where it went wrong: Pretty much from the off, you knew this had taken the wrong turn. It's campy, but not campy in the enjoyable way. Campy in the way that makes you want to spew your dinner, and campy in the way that gives all sausage-pokers a bad name. I mean, not all gay people stand in a field in a hideous top hat, and not all gay people wear pink and talk like they've been kicked in the nuts. At least not many gay people I've met. And, believe me, I've met a lot of gay people. Some of them even seem straighter than me. I know, I know. It's a hard one to get your head around. "But I'm a Cheerleader" is sheer torture. The characters are gay caricatures and help set gay relations back by about sixty years. The characters in this are the sort of people who'd rape your dog and not even give the poor mutt the decency of a reacharound. To make matters worse, Ru Paul is portraying an "hilariously" effeminate man, trying to suppress his gay desires. Oh, for the love of fuck. Words cannot even begin to explain the agony I endured watching this. When I saw this in the cinema, the gays, of which there were a few, seemed to find it hysterical. I wanted to run.....
Where it REALLY went wrong: The critics were fairly kind to this movie, and much more congratulatory than I would ever have guessed. Most saw it as lightweight fluff, but applauded it for trying to be different and capture the pressure of trying to conform when all your instincts convince you that it's impossible. I like Limp Bizkit, dood. If they want to look at a movie that captured rebellion in its truest sense, they need to look at movies like "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest", then come back and look at this piece of dung. Those two movies aren't even on the same stratosphere, let alone comparable. I'd say the best movie about men who enjoy a bit of a reaming up the sphincter is "Philadelphia". Sure, Tom Hanks cries at opera music and dies of AIDs, but at least he looks, walks and acts (sometimes) like a man. That's more than can be said for the blatantly insulting stereotypes in this. It's like saying that gay people are only fairies with one thing on their mind; and it implies that lesbians only want to munch rug. Hell, sex is a big part of that lifestyle, I'd imagine, but there has to be some love. Eh? There are some not-so-hot lesbians in "...Cheerleader", but if you want some hot lesbian action, click here!!!111 Overall: This is one of the worst movies I've ever had the displeasure of sitting through. The acting is barely passable, the script is atrocious and the story might as well have been written by someone with Down's Syndrome. I don't mean that in a nasty way. Perhaps someone with mental illness could have come up with a better story. Ithink Corky Thatcher could have done a better job, personally. But we'll never know...
Speed 2: Cruise Control Year of Release: 1997. The Pitch: "Die Hard" meets "Carry on Cruising" meets "Battlefield Sea". ROTF!11 Starring: Sandra "I wanna be Julia" Bullock; Jason "I wanna be noticed" Patric; Willem "I wanna be less ugly" Dafoe Reason for making the movie: After the surprising success of "Speed" in 1994, a sequel was inevitable. The original "Speed" made over $100 million, made a star out of Sandra Bullock and suggested that Keanu Reeves was not quite as clueless as we'd all feared (read: assumed). It was a fast-paced actioner about a bus with a bomb attached to its under-side. If the bus slowed, the bomb would explode, and if the bus sped up, the bus would explode. No win sitch, eh? It was a simple premise but one which provided many "hair-raising", "edge of the seat" moments. And it never really died down until a ridiculously contrived ending with Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock making out on the crashed bus. What went before was very impressive, though. The action movie staples were all in place: strong, silent "hero"; damsel in distress; goofy sidekicks; red herrings galore; annoying civilians. And, as "Die Hard" and "Lethal Weapon" showed, it was an easy formula to replicate.
Where it went wrong: Oh, where to start... Hmm, let's look at the new hook. There's a psycho on a...cruise ship. Ok. Not too bad. He has a bomb. He wants to blow it up. Cliched, but we can live with it. The biggest stumbling block/ plot hole is that this psycho is threatening people on a ship. Now, by any common logic, if you're on an endangered ship, you have two choices: stay onboard and die or dive into the sea and give yourself a chance. You see, it's hard to jump off a moving bus, and that's why it was credible that the passengers would sit terrified and trapped. Here, their stupidity is glaring. Jump off the boat, for Christ's sake!!111 Where it really went wrong: Once Keanu "Whoa" Reeves turned down the multi-million dollar lure of a comeback, the production was in jeopardy. You knew that if he had no faith in the script, something was seriously amiss. And it was. The sequel was directed by Jan De Bont. He did a great job with the first movie, somehow convincing Hollywood that he was a competent director. Those suspicions were put to rest with an abysmal display of directing here. It's stilted, we have zero interest in the characters and the action scenes are decidedly flat. This is a world away from the original movie, and De Bont would go on to prove his ineptitude in turkeys such as "The Haunting" and "Jennifer Lopez Ate My Baby". Jason Patric is a terrible choice of leading man - for any movie, but particularly a franchise like this. He makes Keanu's absence look all the more notable. Patric is not a bad actor, just a very forgettable one. His serious lack of charisma and zest really leave this dead in the water. And, whereas the first movie had a dynamic male-female connection, this time it's dull and lifeless. Chemistry is non-existent. Look at this sorry excuse for repartee: Annie Porter (BULLOCK): This night
seems almost too perfect. Plus, they had to go all cuckoo and hired Willem Dafoe to play lead villain.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Dafoe is a capable actor, but as a villain, his John Geiger pales next to Dennis Hopper's maniacal turn in the first movie. Overall: "Speed 2" was a box-office dud and was critically stoned. Not like Woody Harrelson. He's a dud who gets publically stoned. This was just a bad, bad movie. Although there are some things to enjoy. I could watch Willem Dafoe shaving, and he is an absolute nut in this. There have been some terrible action movies over the years. After all, the genre alone dictates that this will never be high art. That said, "Speed 2" is one of the few that is boring. It fails to elicit any intrigue and is horrible. Flat, lifeless. And, more than any other stinker in which she's appeared, this is probably most responsible for drowning Bullock's career as a future Julia Roberts lite. What a shame. We cannot get enough of bitchy,
insincere "girls next door".
"Hollow Man" Year of Release: 2000 The Pitch: "The Invisible Man" meets "Sliver". Starring: Kevin Bacon; Elisabeth Shue; Josh Brolin; and Paul Verhoeven's voyeurism Reason for release: The premise had been tried before. In 1992, Chevy Chase played the invisible man in "Memoirs Of An Invisible Man", and the movie tanked. People accepted that Chase movies just tank. So, Verhoeven thought "Hollow Man" could even the odds. With a big budget and a cast of knowns, he set about the task. Movies featuring people who disappear and people who shrink to pea size have always been popular with the mainstream. But how can one be both sleazy and sinsister in this sort of concept? Only Paul would know. And he was confident the audience would eat it up.. Where it went wrong: The thought of Kevin Bacon disappearing for ninety minutes may have seemed an irresistible one for many cinema-goers. Many have been hoping he would disappear for years now. Ever since he flashed his half-mast wang in "Wild Things", I've been praying for his demise. He's one of those guys who can't resist showing us his ass and balls - and in that order. Put it away, Bacon!!1 ROTF.
Plus, with Paul Verhoeven at the helm, sexual perversion was obligatory, He hasn't filmed a female he didn't want to objectify. Always sure to degrade the female form with that phallus he calls a camera. "Hollow Man" features gratuitous close-ups of women's breasts, Bacon's bouncing buttocks and his invisible man raping an attractive woman. It's probably enough to get you to run to the video shop right now, but it's not as arousing as you'd think. You sit there watching and feel like a dirty old man. I'm all for a bit of well-placed T+A, but this is unnecessarily sleazy. The movie isn't helped by Elisabeth Shue's vacant presence. She plays a brainy scientist in one of the most laughable cases of mis-casting. She can barely talk without squinting, so pulling off "brainy" is beyond her. This is as funny as the time Denise Richards was cast to play a brainy scientist in James Bond. Tsk Tsk. Directors and their pubescent fantasies. I remember Shue used to be a goddess. I thought she was gorgeous in her eighties heyday, but she's really let herself go, and her cosmetic surgery is painfully obvious. She's one of those dumb actresses who was given the opportunity of reviving her dying career and blew it all. After a great performance in an acclaimed movie ("Leaving Las Vegas"), she had the chance to go for edgier roles and cement her position as a serious actress. However, instead of using any gray matter, she opted for "The Saint" and "Palmetto". Let's just say those weren't wise career moves. And that's why she's playing a one-dimensional love interest in this douche. Where it REALLY went wrong: Well, it really went wrong when it forgot to include a single interesting character. Every one of them is at the service of the routine plot. I'd say it's fairly easy to predict said plot. Let's see if you can figure it. Scientist tests out inivisibility, decides he likes the power and anonymity it gives him and slowly changes within himself. Does he: a) Decide that not being seen enables him to be a badass and sets up a new persona for himself online. So, he forks out on a shitty website, gets lots of hits, makes "friends" and spends the rest of his worthless life in a dank basement. b) Go around spying on oblivious girls and try to kill his old colleagues. c) Die by the end of Act Three, after a series of jumpy camera angles and red herrings. If you said (a), you're wrong. Yes, it's that formulaic. Sadly, while the special effects are dazzling, they lack context. The filmmakers would have been better served if they had imbued "Hollow Man" with less hollow dialogue and richer characters. Instead, our eardrums are exposed to garbage like this: Sebastian Caine: You don't make history by following the rules, you make it by seizing the moment! Overall: I watched this movie in the cinema, and while it does have its suspenseful moments, it's lacks all the key ingredients to be even a decent watch. When I left the theater, I didn't have that sinking feeling or the nausea, but I couldn't help feeling they dropped the ball here. In the right hands and with the right emphasis, this had the potential to be a good movie. But you can't put reason into Hollywood's dollar-signed logic. Paul When Movies Go Bad: Part Four - Bad Date Edition posted by B on 6/13/01 As much as we've tried to avoid it, people who read our site tend to have some serious relationship woes. I've had my share myself...let's see, a girl I was dating cheated on me twice (once with a guy at her church, once with a guy who had a nicer car), I dated a Mormon who got mad at me for laughing at Beavis and Butthead...OH, and I dated a Wiccan girl who had Sailor Moon posters all over her house and a love for John Waters movies. I'd rather gnaw my own arm out, poop it, and then eat it again than have to sit through another movie about shit-eating transvestites. Anyway, anybody who reads this site knows about our love for movies. We talk about them all the time, especially when there isn't anything better to talk about *cough cough*. When I was asked to write part four of our big series of "When Movies Go Bad" entries, I asked myself, "self, what was the WORST experience you EVER had going to the movies?"
Or, from the Lord at least. When I was in High school I had a HUGE crush on a blonde named Karla. It took me almost four years to get over my Kevin Arnold syndrome and actually talk to her, and when I did, we found out that we had a lot in common. Being a bit of a horndog but mostly empowered with the best of intentions, I tried to spend as much time with her as possible. I came from a fairly religious family, but Karla was RELIGIOUS. She didn't (and doesn't) even believe in friggin holding hands before getting married. So the best I could do was to see the occasional movie with her, or with her and her friends. Big mistake. Movies can go bad, but when movies I KNOW are bad are forced upon me by people I like, it's a tough situation. Listed here are the three big bad demons that Karla and I sat through together. Two of them feature Ben Affleck and one of them involves Julia Roberts fanning her hairy armpits out in front of a portable electric fan. What could be worse than trying to procure a meaningful relationship amongst this mess? Nothing. Nothing at all. Forces of Nature
Year of Release: 1999 The Pitch: A two-hour attempt to show that tornadoes will ravage the land, floods will destroy the Earth, and Earthquakes will break California off the world map and send it plummeting into Level 1-2 with the blue Goombas before Ben Affleck will accurately portray emotion. Starring: Sandra Bullock and that ugly chick from NewsRadio. Also, Ben Affleck as "Ben." Joey Lawrence as "Joey" and Tony Danza as "Tony" evidently hit the cutting room floor. And before I continue, I'd like to officially state that I'd like Ben Affleck to hit my cutting room fist. Reason for Release: Somebody out there...be it the aforementioned females or the bizarre species of mentally deficient bryozoan responsible for green-lighting any movie with "Affleck," "Bullock," "romantic comedy," and "natural disasters" in the description. The basic plot revolves around Ben's plane trip home to marry his ugly girlfriend. Without warning, a FORCE OF NATURE causes his plane to crash. Subsequently, several other FORCES OF NATURE draw him toward fellow TWO TIME PLANE CRASH SURVIVOR Sandra Bullock, who's constant survival severely hurts the theory that a loving, Christian God exists. They have a big stinky teased romance for what seems like hours and hours before a tornado hits and Ben gets married to his ugly girlfriend. Completely confused? Not really completely confused, but you don't really CARE enough to try to figure it out? Now you're getting it. Where it Went Wrong: As bastardized as the idea of "love" is in modern cinema, Forces of Nature naturally forces it down your throat. In the beginning of the movie we see Ben Affleck making those gay little schmoopie pet-noises with his would-be wife, and a half hour later BANG, he's fantasizing about some chestless chick with a cigarette hanging out of her mouth! I'm sorry, but there is no way in all existence that earth, fire, wind, water, or heart could possibly separate two people who really love each other. Even if those powers COMBINED, and a blue man with a green flattop mullet swooped out to break them apart it wouldn't work. It's one thing for a movie to evoke that titanic ex machina "they just love each other for no reason" theme. It's a whole 'nother ballgame when Hollywood passes off Affleck wanking intellectual about life. I kept expecting him to start ramming Bullock up the ass and ask her who her favorite New Kid was. Where it REALLY Went Wrong: In "Roman Holiday," Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck fall in love amidst a backdrop of 1950's Italy. "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" follows the love of flying Asian people over deserts and through mystical forests. "Forces of Nature" brings the romantic tension to a head in...K-Mart. Yes, fans, in perhaps the most appropriate scene placement in recorded history, the proprietor of Fashionable Males and the "practical magician" get sentimental between the blue light special and the white trash staggering around looking for cheap Batman Beyond underoos. Perhaps the message of the film should be to lower your expectations, and not take your emotions so seriously. That's like saying "Street Fighter: The Movie" is being funny on purpose, though. The real message of this film is "don't let your girlfriend find out that you want to cheat on her. And, if you're on a plane with Sandra Bullock, push her head out the window when you start to crash." Overall: Lemme put it this way. I watched this movie while sitting awkwardly next to a girl I had a crush on for like six years. Every couple of seconds I'd offer to go get her Milk Duds and end up falling out of my chair like they do in Pokémon when they're exasperated. We were both watching one of the biggest hunks of festering horse crap ever thrown onto a silver screen...and WE had more chemistry than Ben and Sandra. She could've been stabbing me in the eyes with one of those plastic sporks for the nachos and we'd have more chemistry. In a world of Jack Nicholson and Helen Hunt, "Forces of Nature" is as bad as it gets. I'll take a moment to "Pay it Forward" and advise everyone reading to avoid this movie like a "Twister." I'm such a good movie critic! Booya! Runaway Bride
Year of Release: 1999 The Pitch: Julie Roberts has already completely destroyed the institution of marriage with "My Best Friend's Wedding." Let's see if audiences will pay upwards of nine dollars a head to watch us drop the atomic fucking bomb of lame on it. Starring: Sweetheart of America Julie Roberts as "Runaway Bride," Richard Gere as "Runaway Groom," B as "Runaway from the Movie." The film also stars Joan Cusack, who I really want to sleep with but have no idea WHY. Do you ever have those celebrities that you find irresistible that you're ashamed to admit to anybody? It's like having a crush on Steve Buscemi. Or a "Gadget" from Rescue Rangers. Not, uh, not that I have either of those. Reason for Release: This is the true story of a woman who is so caught up in personal identity issues that she continually runs away from every relationship she gets in... Kiefer Sutherland, Lyle Lovett, an...oh, wait, that isn't the movie, that's the star. What can you expect from the little sister of perhaps the greatest Shakespearean talent to ever grace the motion picture industry? Julia Roberts continues her career of being America's sweetheart, despite having distorted facial features and a mouth that can stun and devour other, smaller carnivores in the blink of an eye. Sure, she might be the better actor in the family, but let's look at the list: Movies I like starring Eric Roberts:
1 (Best of the Best) So the guy's got a feathered mullet that can crush cars, at least he isn't trying to pass himself off as a quirky twenty-year old all the time. HAHA JULIA IS SO EARNEST OMG. She really MEANS what she's saying! She's SO in character! She's in love, she's fighting for your rights, she's in love AGAIN! She's so "earnest" in her roles that I expect her to don a denim vest and head off to camp. Besides, why do people keep going to see these movies? In the last decade Julia Roberts has fallen in love with Nick Nolte, Dennis Quaid, Dermot Mulroney, Mel Gibson, Hugh Grant, Andy Griffith, Brad Pitt, and Richard Gere. Do we have some sick fascination with watching Julia Roberts getting it on with a bunch of different men? It's just like your Mom. OOOOH BURRRNNNN Also, Richard Gere buys a gerbil. That's the joke, right? Where it Went Wrong: The movie wasn't about me having sex with Joan Cusack. Oh, wait, haha, perhaps it was, because I was banging my head against the seat in front of me to induce hysteria and, ultimately, death. Where it REALLY Went Wrong: Let me be a good film critic here for a second. The hook of the story is that Julia Roberts is afraid to get married because she adapts to the personality of the men she's with and doesn't want to lose her individuality, right? How is that fixed by her changing her life to marry Richard Gere? Oh, right, it's ROMANTIC this time. Let's put them on a sinking boat next time, we'll make a billion dollars. Overall: Would a computer generated donkey voiced by Eddie Murphy make this film better? Probably not. Would a computer generated donkey voiced by Eddie Murphy make this film better if he was biting Julia Roberts in the throat? Only if she was on fire. All kidding aside, this movie is basically interchangeable with any other film in the genre. My favorite movie of all time is (as stated) "Roman Holiday," a romantic comedy about lovers who weren't meant to be starring Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck. It's a beautiful film that tackles the idea of love without ever making it feel sissy. Movies like "Runaway Bride" gives the idea of love a perm and sends it to school wearing Hello Kitty suspenders. Gregory Peck probably buried himself alive just so he could roll around in his own grave. Shakespeare in Love
Year of Release: 1998 The Pitch: The film takes a real event (the creation of the play, `Romeo and Juliet') and presents a fictional reason why that event occurred. And if the fictional reason is plausible, then the movie can be fascinating for the audience. Watching "Shakespeare in Love," I expected Ben Affleck to swoop by in his fighter plane in an attempt to save Shakespeare from the Japanese. Starring: Gwyneth Paltrow, people contracting flesh-eating disease because they are standing next to Gwyneth Paltrow, people impaled on Gwyneth Paltrow's hip bones, and Joseph Fiennes as the SUPER SEXY Shakespeare who would've fallen in love MUCH EARLIER if he didn't spend so much time being SUPER SEXY. Where it Went Wrong: I know Paul already covered this film in detail, but since I went to see it with a big group of apprehensive Christians I think I've got a right to weigh in on it. Most of Paul's review ripped apart Shakespeare himself, commenting on how he looked more like one of the Goombas from Super Mario Brothers than the SUPER SEXY Shakespeare who is in love. Paul might not be a big fan of the bard but I am, with much thanks to the killer Hamlet one-man show I pulled off to get an A for the semester in AP English senior year. Ever see that cartoon where the dog breaks out of jail but ends up inside the prison warden's television set, and he has to act out the television programs to keep the warden from finding out he tried to escape? That was me reciting lines with a wig in one hand and a plunger in the other, bringing forth the magic of William's timeless classic for bored and pretentious young people. Shakes has a big place in my heart, so watching this movie made me sick to my stomach. Don't worry, I "got" all the little in-jokes that supposedly won this movie Best Picture of the year. I thought it was pretty funny when the Lord of Wessex thought Shakespeare was a ghost (a SUPER SEXY ghost), but once you tar and feather the audience with in jokes you end up looking like a shitty English Teacher's remake of the Naked Gun. Look! That guy in the graveyard is holding up a skull. Just like in Hamlet! OJ Simpson's dressed like a woman! OH MY! The hits just keep on coming! I'd like to hit the director, and then I'd like to hit Gwyneth Paltrow. In the spine. She'd shatter like glass. Or papier-mache, which is what I would imagine she's actually made of. Papier-mache and ectoplasm. Where it REALLY went wrong: This is actually my favorite part. Since the movie is about love, that automatically means that the main characters must begin fucking wildly. As nasty as Gwyneth Paltrow is clothed, she begins to make small children and the elderly stop believing in God when she strips naked. So with the image of a "Sally Struthers Won't Give Me a Sandwich" body frame with tiny little boobies swinging back and forth in your mind, remember who I went to see the movie with... Lynchburg, Virginia, is full of really God-fearing Christians. These are kids who listen to Christian Ska music. They buy little car decals with giant Jesus fishes devouring the Darwin fish...they have "LVNMYGOD" or "4U GSUS" on their license plates. They would rather drown themselves in Holy water and cut off their genitals in the heat of the moment than do something intentionally sinful. That's where the fun comes in. Go see a movie with lots of nudity in it with some God-fearing Christian teenagers. When the boobs swing onto screen they all cringe in their seats and cover their eyes, going "AAAAWW MAN GROSS" until the scene is over. This happened at least 4 times during my "Shakespeare in Love" viewing. Tiny boobies, cringe and scream. Tiny boobies, cringe and scream. It was like a bizarre scientific venture into uncharted fields of "wiener" study. Afterwards they all go to the International House of Pancakes and talk about how "sinful" the film was, and how it was "so unnecessary" for the tiny boobs to swing over and make them cringe. Then they whip out their expensive cameras and take humorous pictures of each other. THEN THEY LISTEN TO SOME ROCKIN TUNES OMG The only Christian music I like is the music that plays when he's wrestling without Edge. But I DO like that ONE song...that, "Our Goooood, is an awesome GOOOOODD..." That song makes me wanna heal the water and walk on some lepers. "Our Gooood reeks of awesome NESSSSSS!!!! Satan is a barfoid," and so on. Overall: What's worse - an insulting excuse for high cinema that makes one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) writer of all-time look like he should be making out with Julia Stiles in some slack-jawed dramedy, or a bunch of young people who are SO attractive that you want to hang out with them forever at the risk of losing your integrity and your mind? According to Jesus, you should see movies like this all the time. But all Jesus ever did was wander around in the Middle East with a bunch of dudes. So what does he know about movies? Jesus could shoot fire out of his eyes and turn handicapped kids into fish or whatever, I'm sure he wouldn't mind if the movie was rated "R" or not. Our God is an awesome God. Hollywood is just full of reekazoids. *high five* b |
"Welcome
to Whatever-Dude.com... the internet's first "Pop Culture" website. How can we
make such a bold statement? Simple."
Whatever-Dude.com was born in February of '01 and shut down in February of '03. The legacy will live on for years to come. Oh, and be sure to laugh at former W-D writer B trying desperately to attempt creative design and only ending up with a "brain tumor." -B |
Year of Release: 2000
Year of Release: 1999
Year of Release: 1997
Year of Release: 1997
The answer came to me in a chariot of fire from Heaven.
