Print Page | Close Window

Forum member reviews

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: General MOVIE & DVD Discussions
Forum Name: Movies in General...
Forum Discription: Dis and pan the movies with critics & moviegoers alike.
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5501
Printed Date: December 20 2014 at 5:07am


Topic: Forum member reviews
Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Subject: Forum member reviews
Date Posted: October 25 2011 at 3:13pm
Since the main thread is clogged-up with my reviews of movies that don't have forums, I've decided to give them their own thread. The thread will be open to anyone here who wants to do a review of a movie that doesn't have a forum as well. I'll kick it off with the Nightmare On Elm Street 2 later tonight.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html



Replies:
Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 25 2011 at 8:11pm
For the inaugeral review here, here's A Nightmare On Elm Street 2!
 
The good:
 
Robert Englund: Englund returns here as Freddy Krueger. This was when he was still intimidating and is the sole bright-spot here.
 
The bad:
 
Mark Patton: Patton is impossibly bland here. He plays Jesse Walsh, a teen that makes Liberace look like Ah-nuld!
 
The script: The script is bland and stupid. Apparantly, this was written to be deliberately homoerotic without the director or studio noticing. The problem with that is that they seemed to care more about the homoerotic sub-text than making a quality story.
 
The demon parakeets: There's a scene where, out of nowhere, the Walsh family parakeets turn into demon parakeets and fly around and then explode. We're given no explanation for why they do it and the dad's reasoning for the explosion was a gas leak. That's just dumb.
 
The ugly:
 
The disturbing homoerotic content: The problem isn't that it's homoerotic, it's that it ventures into disturbing areas. There's a scene where the leather-loving coach eyes Jesse as he's running laps around the gym and then makes him shower while he watches. Eww! In addition, the main plot revolves around Freddy entering Jesse's body. On its own this is already unnerving, but combined with the knowledge that the screenplay was intentionaly gay means that we're meant to see it as Freddy Krueger having gay-sex. Heterosexual Freddy Kruger sex would be just as disturbing though.
 
Other good contenders for worst ANOES would be the fifth and sixth ones. Grade: D
 
Next-up: The Hills Have Eyes Part II! (80s version)


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 26 2011 at 9:07am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

In addition, the main plot revolves around Freddy entering Jesse's body. On its own this is already unnerving, but combined with the knowledge that the screenplay was intentionaly gay means that we're meant to see it as Freddy Krueger having gay-sex. Heterosexual Freddy Kruger sex would be just as disturbing though.

Correct me if I'm wrong,but he didn't just killed kids and teens,he raped them.And it wasn't just girls.So isn't he bisexual?


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 26 2011 at 12:23pm
In the original movies, there's no confirmation that he's a pedo and only vague hints. The remake was the one that confirmed him as a pedo, but it's not in the same continuity.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 26 2011 at 7:33pm
Time to rip into The Hills Have Eyes Part II, one of the most maligned horror movies ever. The Hills Have Eyes 2 from 2007 was pretty bad, but wasn't at the same badness level as this one.
 
The good:
 
Michael Berryman: Berryman's back as Pluto, even though he likely died at the end of the first one. OK, he's not explicitetly shown dieing, but the dog had its way with him. Berryman is one of the two characters from the first one to have a big role (the other is Janus Blyth as Ruby) and he makes the best of his screentime.
 
The bad:
 
Janus Blyth: Blyth is bland in her returning role as Ruby or as she's called now Rachel. Instead of wearing rags, she wears a suit and, in all honesty, she looked better in the first one.
 
The new mutants: The mutants introduced in this are boring creatures. Papa Hades is such a blatant rip-off of Papa Jupiter from the first one, that the first time I watched this I thought that they were the same character! Another new character is called The Reaper, but I can't remember a damn thing about him he's so forgettable.
 
Wes Craven: Craven really dropped the ball here. He's aware of this and these words came out of his mouth: "I'm sorry for The Hills Have Eyes Part II. I was broke, and really needed the work. I would have made Godzilla Goes To Paris."
 
The ugly:
 
The script: The script for this is just dismal. Mainly because...
 
Gratuitious flashbacks: No joke, nearly 50% of the film is composed of flashbacks from the first one. And in one infamous scene...
 
The dog has a flashback: This is one of the most idiotic moments in film history and, arguably, the only reason why anyone remembers this.
 
Does anyone else want to see Godzilla Goes To Paris right now? Grade: F
 
Next-up: Uwe Boll's House Of The Dead!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 28 2011 at 9:24pm
Time for the first Rotten Asshole of Horror Movie Month and Uwe Boll's first foray into pissing-off video game fans! House Of The Dead is easily Uwe's worst movie and that's not easy to say.
 
The good:
 
N/A
 
The bad:
 
Clint Howard: Howard plays Salish, second-in-command to Jurgen Prochnow's Capt. Kirk and yes he's really called that. He's very annoying and you'll cheer when he's turned into a zombie.
 
The script: The script for this is just sloppy. The characters are one-dimentional cardboard cut-outs that not even good actors could save. The story makes no sense.
 
The game footage: Throughout the film, Uwe randomly inserts footage from the games into scenes. Usually scenes that don't feature zombies. It's idiotic to show something that has better special effects than your movie. It's like a clip from Jurassic Park showing up in a Carnosaur sequel!
 
The ugly:
 
Tyron Leitso: Leitso plays a vain model-type who gets himself covered in sh*t in one scene, accurately visualizing his decision to star in this! There's one hilarious scene where a zombie spits acid on his face and he starts whining like Kristen Stewart, except not as good to look at.
 
Castillo: Castillo is the Spanish zombie lead-villain who created the zombie serum somehow. He has a lot of Plan 9 style quotes. For example, Rudy: "You did all this to become immortal. Why?" Castillo: "To live forever!"
 
Uwe Boll: I don't think I have to explain this.
 
Tomorrow night, they're showing both of Rob Zombie's Halloween movies/abortions. Do I dare jump into the fire to get myself better acquited for my review of both on Monday? Grade: Rotten Asshole
 
Next-up: Psycho '98!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 29 2011 at 1:00pm
Time to review the worst remake of all time, Gus Van Sant's Psycho.
 
The good:
 
Julianne Moore: Moore is decent and cute as Lily Crane. Of course, maybe I'm just grading her this way because almost every other actor is worse.
 
William H. Macy: Macy is fine as Milton Arbogast, a detective who questions Norman about Marion's disappearance. The only complaint I have with him is his death scene and that's because Gus Van Sant had to be "edgy" and add naked women.
 
The bad:
 
Viggo Mortenson: Aragon gives a bland performance as Sam Loomis here.* His Southern accent is just bad.
 
The new additions to the movie: While Van Sant said that this would be shot-for-shot, he added a few things that stand out in pointlessness. I already bitched about the additions to Arbogast's death scene. During the shower scene, we see Anne Heche naked (eww!) and Vince Vaughn is clearly masterbating while watching her. (double eww!!)
 
The pointlessness: Seriously, did Van Sant think that this would work? If someone wanted to watch Psycho, why wouldn't they just watch the original with the better actors and directing?
 
The ugly:
 
Anne Heche: In his My Year Of Flops review of this**, Nathan Rabin mentioned that the character of Marion had a lot of secrets to hide and that Anne Heche can not keep things hidden. It makes the film feel odd.
 
Vince Vaughn: OK, how did he not get a Worst Actor win for this? Bruce Willis may have been crappy in Armageddon, but at least he didn't piss all over a great performance in that!
 
Gus Van Sant: You thought that this would be a good idea. You thought that Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche wouldn't disecrate acting legends. You thought it was a good idea to add scenes from a Marilyn Manson video into William H. Macy' death scene. You deserved that Worst Director win.
 
I wrote this early because I realized that I was behind schedule with Horror Movie Month. Grade: Rotten Asshole
 
Next-up: Jaws: The Revenge!
 
*When I review Rob Zombie's Halloween movies on Monday, Viggo won't be the only one criticised for giving a bland Sam Loomis performance.
**Link: http://www.avclub.com/articles/my-year-of-flops-case-file-103-psycho-1998,10024/ - http://www.avclub.com/articles/my-year-of-flops-case-file-103-psycho-1998,10024/


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 29 2011 at 9:07pm

Well, I'm back from my self-inflicted torture/viewing of Rob Zombie's Halloween movies. With that out of the way, here's Jaws: The Revenge. There will be no good here today.

The bad:
 
Michael Caine: Caine is bland here as Hoagie. I could go into detail, but this quote from Mr. Caine himself really somes it up: "I have never seen the film, but by all acounts it was terrible. However, I have seen the house it built, and it is terrific."
 
The dream scene: There's a scene where it appears that Ellen is being eaten by the shark, but it turns out to be a dream. Dream scenes like this really piss me off. Although, it's not as bad as in Zombieween II, where almost the first half-hour is a god-damn dream!
 
Joseph Sargent: Sargent is the director of this. After this tanked, he was sentenced to direct-to-cable hell.
 
The ugly:
 
Lorraine Gary: Gary was brought out of retirement to star in this. She should have stayed there! Gary is just awful here.
 
The special effects: It has the technical level of Plan 9, but none of the charm of it. During the scene where it attacks Thea, I swear to God that I saw a pole under it!
 
The (used) script: The script that they used for this is just moronic. The shark from the first comes back from the dead to kill off the family. Interestingly, there was an unused script that was turned into the novelization that was better. Not good, but not Top 10 Worst Movies Ever bad like what we have before us. In it, one of the Brody family insults a voodoo witchdoctor who places a curse on them. That's still dumb, but not as dumb as the shark coming back to life.
 
The original Jaws is one of my favorite movies. Grade: Rotten Asshole
 
Next-up: The Exorcist II!!!!!!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: jesse685
Date Posted: October 29 2011 at 10:06pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

The special effects: It has the technical level of Plan 9, but none of the charm of it. During the scene where it attacks Thea, I swear to God that I saw a pole under it!
 
 
OH MY GOD!!! WHERE'S THE POLE??????
 
See if any of you could figure this reference out.


-------------
"If you can't make it good, make it 3D!" Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
F**k Yeah/WTF Were They Thinking Awards Results Live-Tweet @jesse685


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: October 30 2011 at 3:17pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

The special effects: It has the technical level of Plan 9, but none of the charm of it. During the scene where it attacks Thea, I swear to God that I saw a pole under it!


I knew you would said a pole. I noticed that the pole was under the shark in this movie. I mean, does the shark look like a broken accordion?


-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 30 2011 at 5:51pm
Oh, Exorcist II -- the worst horror movie ever...and that's not an exxageration! Since this one is SO bad, I'll be reviewing it Superbabies style, as in the nine worst things about it.  
 
9.) Pazuzu: It's revealed that the demon from the first one is called Pazuzu. I know that that's a real demon name, but it just sounds goofy. If it was called that in the first one it probably wouldn't have been so goofy because that one wasn't all around terrible.  
 
8.) Linda Blair's wardrobe: Turning Regan into Ms. Fanservice here was a BAD idea! She's not all that good to look at and it's worse when you remember that in the original she was a minor.
 
7.) Louise Fletcher: Much like how Jaws: The Revenge came after Hannah And Her Sisters, Fletcher followed up her Best Actress win for Cuckoo's Nest with this. This is easily the biggest drop from Oscar win to bad performance in history!
 
6.) The flashbacks: The flashbacks are pointless, pad the running time, and, worst of all, lay the groundwork for Exorcist: The Beginning!
 
5.) The locusts effects: Not as bad as the shark-on-a-pole from Jaws 4, but still, VERY bad!
 
4.) Richard Burton: If IMDb is to be believed, Burton only did this so they would make Equus. His performance reflects how much he doesn't care about this film.
 
3.) The script: A monkey pooping on a typewriter would make something better than what was written.
 
2.) John Boorman: Boorman was clearly high when he directed this. No doubt about it. That is the only explanation for how bad and disjontled this feels!
 
1.) The synchronizer machine: If movie moments were comparable to TV moments, than this, not the fridge nuking, would be the jump-the-shark moment. It makes you realize that you weren't just watching a bad movie, but one of the worst movies ever. If you think that I'm blowing smoke out of my ass, during the premier of this, the audience turned against this movie when this scene came up. According to IMDb, it was literally laughed off screen, mainly because of this scene!
 
Just one more day of crappy horror movies left. Too bad I have two reviews planned tomorrow! Grade: Rotten Asshole
 
Next-up: Rob Zombie's Halloween! (or Zombieween!)


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 31 2011 at 11:16am
Hmmm...while I consider THE EXORCIST II among the worst movies of all times,I still think the 3rd is worse,and the 5th the worst of the saga.
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Linda Blair's wardrobe: Turning Regan into Ms. Fanservice here was a BAD idea! She's not all that good to look at and it's worse when you remember that in the original she was a minor.
I get what you're saying,but do you really think they did it on purpose?

By the way,I did think she was attractive in that movie...and in that women prison movie.But today...not so much.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 31 2011 at 11:21am
I don't think that she's ugly per se, just not Ms. Fanservice material.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: January 01 2012 at 7:00pm
Well, let's start off Awesomely bad modern movie week! This review will have one difference from the other reviews: instead of a section devoted to the ugly, the section will be for parts of the movie that are awesomely bad. So, without further adou, here's Daredevil!
 
The good:
 
Michael Clarke Duncan: Duncan's great as the Kingpin. Even people who didn't like Daredevil liked him.
 
Colin Farrell: Farrell is, also, good as Bullseye. I'd bitch about him not wearing his mask,* but everything about him is accurate.
 
The running-time: The film is an hour 43 minutes, just the right length to be awesomely bad without wearing on my nerves.
 
The bad:
 
Ben Affleck as Matt Murdock: As lawyer Matt Murdock, Affleck is bland. His acting is different as Daredevil, though.
 
Jennifer Garner: Although she and Affleck have decent chemistry, her acting is bad. She's better than she was in Elektra, though.
 
The soundtrack: The soundtrack is full of terrible Post-Grunge and Nu-Metal songs, two genres that I detest.
 
The awesomely bad:
 
Ben Affleck as Daredevil: Affleck is just hilarious as Daredevil. His faces are just to die for. Specifically...
 
Daredevil kills Jose Quesada: Early in the film, Daredevil murders an acquited rapist named Jose Quesada. That's not the awesomely bad part. The awesomely bad part is that he's named after Joe Quesada, then editor-in-chief of Marvel. Quesada is, let's be frank, an asshole. He tinkers with comics that don't need tinkering and makes fun of fans that don't like his tinkering. Seeing a guy named after him get hit by train was satisfying.
 
A.J. gets beat-up: Early in the film, a young Matt Murdock beats up a group of bullies. One of the bullies is played by Robert Iler, best-known as A.J. Soprano, the Wesley Crusher of The Sopranos. A.J. annoyed me immensly, and seeing the crap kicked it out of him was good.
 
Well, there's my gripes about two people I don't like mixed in with a review of Daredevil. Grade: C+
 
Next-up: The Core!
 
*Here's a picture of it


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: January 02 2012 at 9:59am

Bullseye!


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: January 02 2012 at 8:10pm
Time for The Core. Before I start, I should mention that a lot of people seem to think that this is a parody of stupid sci-fi films like Armageddon instead of an actual stupid sci-fi film. They support their arguments by pointing out that there were supposed to be dinosaurs in the movie even though the fact that dinosaurs aren't in the finished product point to stupid executives, not clever satirists. Also, Hillary Swank's interviews before the movie came out are a goldmine of stupidity that shows either she didn't know that it was a parody or it's just a silly, sci-fi movie.
 
The good:
 
Stanley Tucci: Tucci is decent as a douchey scientist. This is all that I can call honestly good about this movie. Everything else about it is either bad or awesomely bad.
 
The bad:
 
Hillary Swank: Swank is bland here as an astronaut who ends up piloting the drilling machine. Has she ever been in a good movie that didn't win her an Oscar?
 
DJ Qualls: Has this guy ever given a good performance? He plays Rat, a hacker who loves Hot-Pockets and Xena.
 
The special effects: Man, the effects for this movie sucked.
 
The awesomely bad:
 
Aaron Eckhart: It's obvious that Eckhart knows what a P.O.S. this movie was and his acting is pretty funny.
 
The science: According to Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics, The Core has the worst science in movie history. Let that sink in. The Core has worse science than Armageddon. But, much like Armageddon, the science is bad in a hilarious way.
 
That's probably, the longest intro I ever wrote. Grade: C
 
Next-up: The Happening!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: January 03 2012 at 6:48am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Hillary Swank: Swank is bland here as an astronaut who ends up piloting the drilling machine. Has she ever been in a good movie that didn't win her an Oscar?
INSOMNIA.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: January 03 2012 at 7:24am
Oh, yeah. I forgot Insomnia.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: February 15 2012 at 8:13pm
Time to review the worst Best Picture nominee in a while, possibly ever.
 
The good:
 
Max von Sydow: von Sydow is decent here as a mute guy who is obviously Oscar's grandpa. This is supposed to be a twist, but it's blatantly obvious. Not good enough to be an Oscar nominee though.
 
Viola Davis: She plays a housewife that Oscar meets first. She's decent in this.
 
The bad:
 
Tom Hanks: Hanks plays Oscar's dad. He tells Oscar of a burrow in New York that floated away from the rest of NYC, much like how Hanks' dignity floats away from him with this performance.
 
The script: The script is pretty bad, but it's more like Twatlight: the source material sucks.
 
Sandra Bullock: Bullock plays Oscar's mom and she's annoying.
 
The ugly:
 
Thomas Horn: Apparantly, Jeopardy Kids contestants don't make good actors.
 
Stephen Daldry: Daldry's directed this, The Reader, and The Hours. He's truely an evil man.
 
The falling body motif: There's many scenes where bodies fall from the Twin Towers. Yes I'm serious. In one scene that's so absolutely shamelessly tasteless that it almost becomes funny, Hanks himself falls from the towers.
 
There's one thing about this that disgusted me more than anything else: when the movie was over, everyone else in the theater clapped! Am I getting smarter or is everyone else getting dumber? Grade: F
 
Next-up: Underworld: Awakening
 
As promised, here's my new 10 worst movies of the year list!
 
1.) Jack & Jill
2.) Bucky Larson: Born To Be A Star
3.) Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close
4.) Zookeeper
5.) The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)
6.) Season Of The Witch
7.) Hoodwinked Too! Hood V.S. Evil
8.) Atlas Shrugged Part 1
9.) New Year's Eve
10.) Something Borrowed


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: February 16 2012 at 9:36am
Do you think it still would've been your #3 worst movie if it hadn't been nominated for Best Picture?

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: February 16 2012 at 10:40am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Time to review the worst Best Picture nominee in a while, possibly ever.
 
The good:
 
Max von Sydow: von Sydow is decent here as a mute guy who is obviously Oscar's grandpa. This is supposed to be a twist, but it's blatantly obvious. Not good enough to be an Oscar nominee though.
 
Viola Davis: She plays a housewife that Oscar meets first. She's decent in this.
 
The bad:
 
Tom Hanks: Hanks plays Oscar's dad. He tells Oscar of a burrow in New York that floated away from the rest of NYC, much like how Hanks' dignity floats away from him with this performance.
 
The script: The script is pretty bad, but it's more like Twatlight: the source material sucks.
 
Sandra Bullock: Bullock plays Oscar's mom and she's annoying.
 
The ugly:
 
Thomas Horn: Apparantly, Jeopardy Kids contestants don't make good actors.
 
Stephen Daldry: Daldry's directed this, The Reader, and The Hours. He's truely an evil man.
 
The falling body motif: There's many scenes where bodies fall from the Twin Towers. Yes I'm serious. In one scene that's so absolutely shamelessly tasteless that it almost becomes funny, Hanks himself falls from the towers.
 
There's one thing about this that disgusted me more than anything else: when the movie was over, everyone else in the theater clapped! Am I getting smarter or is everyone else getting dumber? Grade: F
 
Next-up: Underworld: Awakening
 
As promised, here's my new 10 worst movies of the year list!
 
1.) Jack & Jill
2.) Bucky Larson: Born To Be A Star
3.) Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close
4.) Zookeeper
5.) The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)
6.) Season Of The Witch
7.) Hoodwinked Too! Hood V.S. Evil
8.) Atlas Shrugged Part 1
9.) New Year's Eve
10.) Something Borrowed


Yes Steven Daltry is a bad man, but the academy keeps nominating his films, and critics praised Billy Elliot and the Hours. So I don't think he cares.

Also that was very egotistical of you, not every one's gonna think the same way you do


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: February 16 2012 at 12:29pm
To Vits, it would be on there even if it wasn't a Best Picture nominee.
 
To wtp, I haven't seen Billy Elliot, but a lot of people who said they hated his other movies say that it's actually a good movie. Also, I've never not said I'm an egomaniac.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: February 18 2012 at 9:34pm
Time to finish off Rob Liefeld week with a review of Alien 3. The movie is mostly known for two things today: it's teaser (which promises aliens on Earth*) and the biggest bridge-drop in movie history!**
 
The good:
 
Sigourney Weaver: Weaver's the sole bright-spot in the movie.
 
The bad:
 
Young David Fincher: Alien 3 is to David Fincher as Piranha II: The Spawning is to James Cameron. To be fair to Fincher, it's hard to direct a movie when the executives control your every move.
 
The script: The writing for this film is just sloppy. There's a reason for this though: executive meddling! This film had a hellish production***, with many, many re-writes. Some versions had Ripley, some didn't. One script had an alien rape Ripley. The less said about that the better.
 
The ugly:
 
The alien dog: Instead of the alien invasion on Earth, we get a single alien in this. An alien that sprang from a dog. Not helping matters, the alien dog is CGI. Really bad CGI. They should have just gone with anamatronics like the first two.
 
The executive meddling: This was mentioned several times in the bad, but it really deserves a mention.
 
The death of Newt: It's impossible to describe how infuriated I was when I watched the opening of this. Apparantly, this was done because the actress playing Newt got too old. If this is true, then why not set it at a later time: make it about Ripley looking for more alien eggs to destroy and then get stranded in the prison. Don't kill off a character that the previous centered it's last act around saving! Hicks, also, died, but at least Michael Biehn got a nice paycheck.****
 
Man, this was bad. Grade: F
 
*Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bk_x9W1xKng - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bk_x9W1xKng
**Bridge-dropping is slang for an anticliamtic death. It's named for Kirk's death in Star Trek: Generations. Other good examples are Gordon in 2012 and Cyclops in X3.
***Link: http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,310615,00.html - http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,310615,00.html
****He made the producers pay him the same amount of money he got for co-starring in Aliens for the likeness they used of him in the beginng.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: March 06 2012 at 5:25pm
Time to review the Dungeons & Dragons movie. Also, I'll reveal my next week of reviews after the review.
 
The good:
 
Jeremy Irons' angry face: Go to this link* (it's the fourth picture) and tell me that's not one of the most hilarious pictures ever.
 
The bad:
 
Jeremy Irons: Angry faces aside, his acting is disapointing. Apparamtly, he felt the same way: there were reports that he stormed off the set a couple times.
 
Courtney Solomon: Solomon got the rights to this movie in 1990 when he was 19. It feels like this was directed by a 19 year old! Solomon has directed only one other movie** and he's produced the Razzie nominated Captivity and the DTV Butterfly Effect 3.
 
Justin Whalin: Whalin plays Ridley Freeborn. His acting is bad, but he's not the worst actor here. Or the second worst.
 
The ugly:
 
Thora Birch: If any of you wondering why Birch's career didn't take off like people thought it would after American Beauty, then watch this.*** Her acting is stiffer than Natalie Portman in the prequels.
 
The special effects: If tou followed the link to the Jeremy Irons picture, you got a look at the special effects in this and you know it's bad. I was watching Terminator 2 this morning and when your effects don't come close to the effects in a movie from nearly a decade before, you know you've failed.
 
Marlon Wayans: Wayans plays a theif named Snails and yes, that's his name. Snails is, objectively, worse than Jar Jar!!!! Jar Jar was meant to appeal to little kids and the little kids in the theater that I saw Phantom Menace 3D in seemed to like him. Since this movie was rated PG-13, that means that Snails was supposed to appeal to teenagers.
 
Here's the theme for my next week of reviews: Platinum Dunes week!!! It starts next Sunday, the reviews will be released in order of their release dates, and there won't be a review on Tuesday. Grade: F
 
*http://www.agonybooth.com/recaps/Dungeons___Dragons_2000.aspx?Page=9
**That other movie was An American Haunting. If you listen to the Commentary Track, Solomon incorrectly describes what a plant is. So yeah, he's on par with Ralph Wiggum.
***Her creepy porn star dad helped contribute to her stalled career


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: March 11 2012 at 6:59pm
Time to kick off Platinum Dunes week. First up is the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake. It sacrifices gore for nuance, has several anachronisms, and is the only Platinum Dunes movie I'd call actually good. Yes, really.
 
The good:
 
Jessica Biel: She's incredibly hot and her acting in this isn't too bad.
 
R. Lee Ermey: Ermey plays a super corrupt "cop". His performance is good and he's scary in it.
 
Some of the scare scenes: There's some scenes that are scary like Leatherface's intro. It may not be as scary as the Leatherface intro in the first one, but still. Also, brownie points for not ripping-off the dinner scene.
 
The bad:
 
Eric Balfour: Has he ever been good as anything other than Milo Pressman? He plays Biel's boyfriend Kemper. He's annoying.
 
The ugly:
 
The gore overkill: As mentioned in the intro, this movie favors gore over nuanced violance. This is detrimental to the film's reputation. In addition, it, along with Saw, is often credited with starting the torture porn craze.
 
Apparantly, the next Texas Chainsaw movie, scheduled for January, the time of the year when the best movies come out, isn't being produced by Platinum Dunes. Grade: B
 
Next-up: The Amityville Horror!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 28 2012 at 11:57am
[TUBE]SsXJ_gjnA1M[/TUBE]
This includes a bunch of Oscar nominees and winners (not just from this year).


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: May 19 2012 at 2:24pm
Time to rip into Dreamcatcher. The movie is weird and crappy, that doing an full review would be nigh impossible, so we're doing a 9 worst things first. But first, let's do the things that I liked: Jason Lee and Timothy Olyphant. That's it.
 
9.) Killing of Jason Lee and Timothy Olyphant: Yeah, the only characters that are remotely interesting get killed off. Even worse, they get undignified and stupid deaths. Lee bites it when the sh*t weasel (yeah, the aliens are called sh*t weasels) he was trapping in a toilet gets out and eats him. It gets out when he gets off the seat to get some tooth-picks off the floor. Yes, you read that right. Olyphant dies when he's with his alien-possessed buddy and he tells him to bite his bag. The alien, named Mr. Grey, then eats him
 
8.) Donnie Wahlberg: Wahlberg shows up during the last half hour as Duddits, a mentally retarded man with cancer who's actually an alien. I wasn't lieing when I said this movie was weird. His acting is pretty bad.
 
7.) The special effects: The effects here are horrendous. If they used claymation, it would have been more convincing.
 
6.) Lawrence Kasdan: His directing is horrible and he should feel bad about it!
 
5.) The script: This was written by Kasdan and William Goldman, two people who should know better. I know the novel was weird, but they should have cut out a lot of things, like all the scatalogical stuff.
 
4.) Damian Lewis: Lewis plays Jonesy who gets possessed by Mr. Grey. In a move of absolute hilarity, he uses a British accent when possessed. A really bad British accent. Anne Hathaway in One Day bad.
 
3.) Morgan Freeman: It was hard deciding which actor to list as worse between Freeman and Lewis. In the end, I choose Freeman because he should know better! Sporting eyebrows bigger than my niece's fists, Freeman plays Col. Curtis,* a loony who's after the aliens.
 
2.) The alien designs: I'll say this about the creature designs: they're original. Of course, The Human Centipede was original, so originality doesn't automatically equal good. The aliens in this look like genitalia. The sh*t weasels look incredibly phallic and Mr. Grey looks like a giant vagina with teeth.
 
1.) The end: The movie ends with Duddits turning into an alien and fighting Mr. Grey. AFter a minute or two of fighting they explode into red dust. The end of the book was dumb, but the end here is both dumb and completely unforshadowed.
 
The book this was based on was written when Steven King was recovering from his car accident, while high on painkillers. That explains a lot! Grade: F
 
*In one of the few deviations from the novel, Freeman's character was called Col. Kurtz there. This is for he better.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: May 19 2012 at 2:58pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Damian Lewis: Lewis plays Jonesy who gets possessed by Mr. Grey. In a move of absolute hilarity, he uses a British accent when possessed. A really bad British accent. Anne Hathaway in One Day bad.
He is british. He said that he was doing a Malcolm McDowell impression.
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

The book this was based on was written when Steven King was recovering from his car accident, while high on painkillers. That explains a lot!
I don't think any adaptation would've been good. Based on what I know about the book, it's just a rehash of his previous novels. Die hard fans call it "a group of allusions".


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: May 19 2012 at 3:58pm
Damian Lewis is British? His decent American accent and the fact that his Mr. Grey accent is fake fooled me.
 
My mom tried to read the book, but it was too weird for her.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: May 20 2012 at 1:26pm
I know what you're feeling. After seeing THE TOWN, I couldn't believe Ben Affleck was from Boston, because his accent sounded so fake.

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: May 23 2012 at 7:12pm
One of the worst romance writers is Nicholas Sparks. Almost all of his stories follow the same plotline (two beautiful people fall in love, something keeps them apart, they overcome the odds anyway, and then (sometimes) something tragic happens completely from left field) and he's egocentric hypocrite. But, teenage girls seem to like him and most of the movies based on his bokks are hits. And since Hollywood is all about regurgitating whatever's popular, we got today's subject, The Vow. The Vow is craven attempt at immitating Nicholas Sparks that somehow manages to be even worse than anything Sparks has written.
 
The first half-hour of the movie is watchable. It's not good, but compared to what comes after it, I'll take it. The acting is a bit off, the side characters are annoyingly "unique", and it seems like the movie takes place in the '90's, but it's not terrible and Tatum and McAdams have decent chemistry. Then McAdams wakes up from her coma and the movie descends into the sh*t-fest that it is.
 
Channing Tatum sucks here. He's only good when he's playing an empty-headed lunk like in 21 Jump Street. That being said, he's not as bad here as he was in G.I. Joe or Nicholas Sparks' Dear John. Rachel McAdams is suprisingly stiff considering her performances in Sherlock Holmes and Midnight In Paris (and Nicholas Sparks' The Notebook!). Michael Sucsy shows no talent behind the camera.
 
The absolute worst part of the movie are McAdams' parents and her ex-boyfriend. The parents, played by Sam Neill and Jessica Lange who should both know better, are some of the creepiest characters in a romance movie of late. Anyone with a sane head would know better than to control their amnesiac daughter in such a creepy way. But, her ex is even creepier. Despite having a girlfriend he hits on her despite her being mentally 18. Since this is based on a true story, I gotta wonder if the parents and the ex were embellished. They're just too creepy. The script is incredibly sloopy with details. As mentioned above, the film feels like it takes place in the '90's. Until a modern day cellphone is pulled out, I honestly thought that this was a peroid piece. It's not like Batman: TAS where it deliberately feels like it takes place a few decades before hand; it's just stupid. One possible theory: Nicholas Sparks' "magnum opus" The Notebook came out in the '90's. Another epic problem is that Channing Tatum doesn't have chemistry with Rachel McAdams when she has amnesia. It just feels off.
 
Apparantly, The Lucky One is supposed to be worse than this. I find that hard to believe. Grade: F

Next-up: The Devil Inside!! (Oh God no!)


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 23 2012 at 8:45pm
I've experienced Return To The Blue Lagoon today. To say it deserved its Razzie nominations is to say that the sky is blue. Milla Jovovich is supposed to be deeply ashamed of this and for good reason. It's not as bad as Ultraviolet, but still. But, the review for that is for another day. Tomorrow to be exact. Why am I going over this at the start of the review? So that when this shows up on the front-page with the first few words showing up, it won't spoil the fact that the mystery Joel Schumacher movie is...
 
BATMAN FOREVER!!!!!!!
 
It's nowhere near as bad as the movie that came after it, but it's still a MASSIVE step in the wrong direction in terms of handling the franchise.
 
Before we get the knives out, let's talk about what the film does right. Jim Carrey is good here as The Riddler. He has fun with the role. There is one messed-up scene with him in the film. When he's throwing bombs throughout the BatCave, he has an erection in one scene. I'd like to believe that it was an accident that the editor didn't notice, but I just know that Schumacher and Akiva Goldsman thought it would add the quality of the film. In another plus Nicole Kidman has fun with her role as a cliched, sexy psychologist that Batman wants to get with. This was before she started coasting on her name recognition*. Some of the action scenes are decent like when Two-Face and The Riddler invade Wayne Manor on Halloween. Other than The Riddler's boner.Sick
 
Other than Carrey and Kidman, the acting is piss-poor. Ed Begly, Jr. has a terrible cameo as Riddler's boss. Fortunately, he dies quick. Tommy Lee Jones is uncharacteristically dull as Two-Face. Maybe if the cast another actor who credits himself with three names and has an affinity for Colt .45. Val Kilmer is impossibly bland. Unlike Michael Keaton, it's conceivable that he could beat people. Also unlike Keaton, he's as stiff as board. Batman creater Bob Kane said that Kilmer was his favorite Batman. Kane also wanted the Batsuit to be red. Kane may have created Batman, but Bill Finger was the one to make him the Batman we know today. So Kane's opinion doesn't mean squat. But worst of all is Chris O'Donnell. The kid can't act and his interpretation of Robin is whiny and annoying. To be fair to him, Robin's a flat character. There's a reason that Nolan and Bale didn't want him in The Dark Knight Rises.
 
Now, unto what everyone reading this wants: the part where I lay into Schumacher and Goldsman. The elements that made Batman & Robin the worst movie ever are present here is lesser doses. Now, on their own, Schumacher is a terrible enough director and Goldsman is a terrible enough writer, but when they time up... dear God. They bring out the worst in each other. They're like a Reese's Piece made out of cyanide and sh*t. The way Schumacher shoots the movie is gaudy and pure eye rape. And Goldman's dialogue (i.e. "I'll get drive thru", "Holy rusted metal", which, on the commentary track, Schumacher directly says Goldsman was responsible for, and "It's the car right? Chicks love the car" and, yes, they reuses that for Batman & Robin) is horrible. And Goldsman thinks he's smart! He mentions wanting to give the characters pathos. Yes because when I think of appealing to the audience's emotions I think of "Chicks love the car." Another culprit in this film's suckiness is... Warner Brothers!?! They cut a lot out of the movie which could have made it almost good. Why did they cut it? Because it was too "dark" and after Batman Returns pissed off parents (and McDonald's) they didn't want things too dark. One of the scenes was Two-Face's escape from Arkham Asylum and it's surprisingly well directed. This was meant to be the opening scene and actually improves the stupid scene at the end where Riddler's at Arkham. Another scene is Batman watching a news report imploring him to retire and he has a heart-to-heart with Alfred. There's, also, a creepy scene where Batman has a vision of a giant bat. Of course, they, also, deleted an incredibly retarded scene where Batman barges into a hair saloon, so maybe they're not completely dumb.
 
Despite being deleted, the scene with Batman and the giant bat was included in a trailer. Probably to trick fans into thinking that Man-Bat is in the movie. Grade: C-
 
Next-up: Return To The Blue Lagoon!
 
*and before she started looking like this: http://www.wwtdd.com/2012/05/can-you-even-tell-who-this-is/ - http://www.wwtdd.com/2012/05/can-you-even-tell-who-this-is/  Botox is a bitch.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 24 2012 at 7:34pm
Time to rip into Return To The Blue Lagoon, one of the most pointless sequels ever. It's notable only for starring Milla Jovovich. She got a Worst New Star nod for this and she's one of the only nominees to have an actual career.
 
The scenery in the movie is beautiful. It's not as good as the first one's scenery, which actually got a Best Cinematography nod. I'm only mentioning it so I don't have another review with no good section.
 
Brian Krause is terrible as the movie's Christopher Atkins character. He has no chemistry with neither Jovovich nor Sylvia Hilliard, a red herring/romantic false lead. If you're wondering how she gets to the island, wait for the next paragraph. Jovovich is bland in her second movie role. She plays the Brooke Shields of the movie. It's kind of funny too watch at times because her character is a weakling who needs Krause to protect her. If this was made today, she would pulled out a machinegun and blew away the bad guys.
 
Director William A. Graham is massively inept. The script is horrible. I checked Wikipedia, and despite the Blue Lagoon novel having a couple of sequels, this movie is mostly a crappy "original" story. Late in the movie, a group of pirates invade the island and the captain brings his daughter, who's Sylvia. Literally, they only exist for conflict and have no motivation. A half-assed fight sequence happens and then one of the sailors is eaten by a shark. Yawn. And it wouldn't be a Blue Lagoon movie without creepy child sexuality.
 
The only reason that Lifetime Movie Network showed this (and the first one) is because the made a new version that stars Razzie winners Denise Richards and the aforemented Christopher Atkins. Grade: F
 
Next-up: Man On A Ledge!!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: August 15 2012 at 7:22pm
Time for Jurassic Park, one of my favorite movies and books. Instead of talking about what's good, bad, and really bad about the movie, I'm doing something different. I'll go over one part of the movie/book and which does it better.
 
Alan Grant: This is Sam Neill's iconic role. When someone brings up Sam Neill, you'll probably think of him with a blue shirt and a red hankerchief. Spielberg didn't change up the role too much with one exception: in the book Grant likes the kids, while he doesn't care for them at first in the movie. This makes it more important that he's protecting them. This would put the ball in the film's court, but there's an awesome scene in the book were he jumps on a velocioraptor's back and injects her with poison. Winner: draw.
 
Ellie Sattler: Much like Grant, there's not a lot of differences between the book and screen characters, so there's not a lot to discuss. But, Sattler gets a lot more to do in the film. In the book, it's Grant who turns the power back on. This, and the fact that all the characters in the book have a semi-creepy attraction to her, gives the film the win. Winner: film.
 
Ian Malcolm: One of the changes for the better in the film was toning down Malcolm. Sure, he did a lot of ranting in the movie, but in the book 99% of his dialogue was ranting. And, since he was an avatar for Michael Crichton, he was given a lot of screentime. Not helping the book's case, Jeff Goldblum knocked it out of the park with his performance. Winner: film.
 
John Hammond: This is easily the biggest change in the adaptation. You may remember Hammond being a charming Walt Disney type in the movie. Well, in the book, he's a cold-hearted, narcissistic douche who gets eaten alive by compys. This causes a bit of a problem. See, all the safety problems in the book can by chalked up to Hammond (and, by extension, everyone else at InGen) being so egomaniacal to assume that they can control dinosaurs. In the movie, this doesn't make a lot of sense. Winner: book.
 
Lex and Tim: Michael Crichton had a lot of skills. One of them wasn't writing tolerable children. The kids are grating in the book, expecially Lex. At several points, she says "aminals". She's, also, a lot younger in the book. Winner: film.
 
Robert Muldoon: In the film, Muldoon is a massive disappointment. He gets so much build-up and then he gets killed by velocioraptors. This can by chalked up to Spielberg's anti-gun beliefs. I wouldn't have a problem with this except when a gun is needed in the film, like here. I can see not wanting guns in E.T. since that's for kids, but if you're on an island full of hungry dinosaurs, you need a gun. In the book, Muldoon is in the same situation, except instead of dying, he crawls into a drainpipe and shots any raptor that comes by. Winner: book.
 
Donald Gennero/Ed Regis: If any non-book reader is wondering who Ed Regis is, I'll explain. In the book, Regis was essentially Gennero. He acted like a tool, he was a creep, and a coward who abandons the kids. He has a humiliating death, like Gennero. This is a shame because Gennero was a brave character in the book. He went with Muldoon when he looked for the kids, helped him tranq the T-rex, and survives a velocioraptor attack! Winner: book.
 
The dinosaurs: When it comes to the T-rex, the film is the clear winner. He kicked ass, stole scenes, and saves the day, kinda. In the book, he stops being relevent to the plot halfway through. With the velocioraptors, it's a different story. As cool as they were in the film, the book raptors are better. They showed more intelligence and are scarier. The reveal that they've escaped is done better in the book. In the movie, we learn that they've escaped when we see the bars on their enclosure are bent upon. In the book, we learn that they've escaped when a juvenile ambushes Grant when he's fixing the power. Winner: draw.
 
"Life will find a way": The only really negative thing about the film is how it completely fumbles this part. In the film, life doesn't find a way until Newman turns off the fences. In the book, life finds its way before the book had even started. The beginning of the second film was actually in the first book. And it happened in Costa Rica. They're breeding at an alarming rate in the book. There's a scene in the book, where they learn the counting method of the park is inept. It looks for the expected number of dinosaurs and stops. When Malcolm tells them to look for a higher number of dinosaurs, they learn about their breeding. Winner: book.
 
Total: book-6, movie-5
 
Winner: book.
 
Next-up: The Three Stooges!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 01 2012 at 4:56pm

It's for Horror Movie Month 2!!! The inaugural movie is Troll, a movie more famous for its sequel than its actual content. Still, there's enough to make fun of with this.

 

I actually liked the animatronics in this. This could be my preference for animatronic effects shining through though. It works better for the actors, they can actually see what they're supposed to be reacting to. I did like the character of Eunice too. She's interesting and there's a nice casting gag: she's played by June Lockhart and when she turns herself younger, she's played by her daughter Anne Lockhart. I also liked Torok, the title character. He has some good scenes and is smarter than most movie villains.

 

Noah Hathaway is bland as the main character named, I sh*t you not, Harry Potter. Hathaway's mostly known for playing Artex in The NeverEnding Story and for good reason. There's a couple of weird appearances here. Sonny Bono shows up as a Quagmire type who gets turned into a mythical creature. A pre-Seinfeld Julia Louis-Dreyfus shows up as another neighbor. She gets turned into a wood nymph.

 

Harry Potter's dad, Harry Potter Sr., is one of the most annoying characters in film history. In one particularly weird scene, he rocks out to Blue Cheer's sh*tty cover of Summertime Blues. Jenny Beck is pretty bad as both Wendy AND Torok in Wendy form. Also, the parents don't seem to notice that she was replaced with a troll. Either she's a bad little girl or the writer's an idiot. I'm gravitating towards option two.

 

The director of this thinks that JK Rowling ripped him off. Yes because JK Rowling would have heard of this movie. Grade: C

 

Next-up: The 9 "best" things about Troll 2!!!

 

 



-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 02 2012 at 6:59pm
It's time for Troll 2, a movie that needs no introduction. The format for the review, on the other hand, does. Since this is my first top 9 list/review since I joined Twitter, here's the lowdown: I usually list the 9 worst things about a movie, but since Troll 2 is so hilariously inept, I'm doing the 9 "best" things about it.
 
9.) The lack of actual trolls: For reasons unknown to anyone, they called a movie with goblins Troll 2. Now turning unrelated scripts into a sequel isn't uncommon. For example, Die Hard With A Vengeance wasn't originally a Die Hard movie. But, the makers of Die Hard With A Vengeance actually made that tie in with Die Hard. There's no connection between Troll and Troll 2. The original Troll wasn't a mega hit. Hell, no one would give a crap about it if Troll 2 didn't exist.
 
8.) Drew's quest for milk/Sheriff Gene Freak: One of the weirdest things about Troll 2 is the milk subplot. Eliott's friend Drew goes on an oddly homoerotic quest for milk. Not helping is the fact that milk looks like a certain bodily function. Along the way he meets Sheriff Gene Freak and yes that's his name. His performance is hilariosuly over the top. He gets Drew to eat a Nilbog sandwhich and drink Nilbog milk and that's not helping with the creepy homoeroticism. BTW, the guy playing Gene Freak was a mental patient.
 
7.) Claudio Fragasso's direction: Part of the film's charm is that director Claudio Fragasso is convinced of its greatness. If you've seen Best Worst Movie you know that he thinks Troll 2 is on par with Gone With The Wind. Apparantly, the scriptwriter (his wife) doesn't speak English well and the script had several weird grammer errors. Hilariously, Fragasso made the cast read the lines as written, grammer errors included.
 
6.) Credence Leonore Gielgud: Credence is a druid and the big bad of the film. The actress playing her just knows how dumb this movie is. Also, towards the end, she turns really hot and she has one of the most hilariously bad sex scenes in movie history. I won't go into details, but I'll say this: corn is involved.
 
5.) The goblins attack Arnold: This is the first time that we see the goblins in action. We previously see them in a story that Grandpa Seth is telling Joshua and in a dream scene. The scene is hilarious inits ineptitude. Arnold goes up to the goblins, apparantly thinking they're midgets in costumes, and tries to reason with them. The goblins respond by hucking a spear at him. Comedy gold.
 
4.) Joshua (and his double decker baloney sandwhich) V.S. Credence: In the film's climax Joshua is able to defeat Credence and her goblin army by eating a double decker baloney sandwhich. Yes really. What else can I say that's funnier than that?
 
3.) Joshua pisses on hospitality: Despite his father not allowing it, Josh pees on the goblin food so his family won't eat it. See, if they eat it, they'll turn into plants and then the goblins will eat them and Claudio Fragasso's drug dealer is a very rich man.
 
2.) Grandpa Seth: Grandpa Seth is awesome. He can stop time, he tells Joshua to piss on hospitality, throw lightning bolts, pwn goblins with an ax, hand out double decker baloney sandwhiches, and he makes a nice molotov cocktail. But, his crowning moment of awesome occurs when he pimp slaps a goblin.
 
1.) "They're eating her! And then they're going to eat me!": Oh my Gooooooood!
 
This is my niece's favorite movie. That's not a joke. Quality grade: F. Entertainment grade: A+
 
Next-up: The 9 "best" things about Birdemic!!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 03 2012 at 3:51pm
Time for Birdemic, one of the most hilarious movies to ever exist. It's not as hilriously bad as Plan 9 or Troll 2, but that's like yelling at Looper for not being Citizen Kane.
 
9.) The songs: There's several songs in here that are just hilarious in their stupidity. The most hilarious are the ones that rip-off more popular songs. There's the rip-off of Vangelis' Chariots Of Fire them and the Imagine rip-off called Imagine Peace. Hilariously, Imagine Peace is played over a sex scene.
 
8.) The "orthologist": An ornithologist is featured in the movie. The funny part is that he calls himself an orthologist. An orthologist is someone who uses word correctly. That's too hilarious to not mention.
 
7.) Ramsey's guns: During the film, the main characters Rod and Nathalie come across a young couple named Ramsey and Becky. Ramsey is a former marine tired of all the killing. However, Ramsey has a sh*t load of pistols and a loaded M4 in his truck. And, considering how much the guns get used in the film, enough ammo to give Ted Nugent an orgasm. Why does he have the guns if he's sick of the killing?
 
6.) The doves: At the very end of the film, it looks like Rod and Nathalie are going to be killed by the egales and vultures. Then, a bunch of crappy looking doves come out of nowhere to save the day. Deus ex machina!
 
5.) The bus scene: There's a scene where the birds attack a bus full of civilians. It's up to Rod and Ramsey to save the day! Except they fail miserably and the birds douse the civilians and Ramsey with acid and they die. Diabolus ex machina! One hilarious part is that when Ramsey and Rod are shooting the birds, Ramsey doesn't hit anything and Rod seems to never miss. Ramsey had the M4 and Rod had a pistol. So a tech salesman with a pistol is a better shot than a former marine with a machine gun. Maybe Ramsey left the army not because of him have to kill people, but because everyone else was killing people and his aim sucked.
 
4.) The tree-hugger: Towards the end of the movie the main characters come across a tree hugger named Tom Hill. He reveals why the birds are attacking everyone. Then he has to go... he hears a mountain lion.
 
3.) The fumbled green aesop: When you're making a film about how you shouldn't piss of Mother Nature, it's best to make sure it makes sense. An important thing is have a protagonist that who pollutes and then learns the error of his ways. Like the faux-Dick Cheney in The Day After Tomorrow. Rod invents cheap solar power, thinks that An Inconvenient Truth is a great date movie, and has a hybrid Mustang. He's a massive mary sue who doesn't need to learn anything. This not only makes him a bland character, but it derails the green aesop. Also, there's some executives in the film and since most executives in a movie with a green aesop are usually amoral assholes on par with a Captain Planet villain, you'd expect them to be polluters. But, no: they like Rod's idea and would have implemented it if the birds didn't attack. In fact, I didn't notice anyone polluting in this movie. If you're making a movie about the evils of pollution and don't put any polluters in it, you're just making Mother Nature look like a bitch. Also, it's important to actually know what pollution will do. I'm 99% sure that global warming won't turn eagles and vultures into crappy gifs who vomit acid.
 
2.) The gif birds: If you've seen clips of Birdemic on YouTube or The Soup, you've seen how hilarious the birds look in this. Also, pay close attention to the background. Sometimes you can see actual birds flying around, not attacking.
 
1.) James Nyugan: Remember a few months ago when Snopp Dogg claimed that he's the reincarnation of Bob Marley even though he was alive when Marley died? I'm going to make a similar claim about Birdemic director James Nyugan: he's the reincarnation of Edward D. Wood Jr.! Sure Nyugan was 12 when Wood died, but the parellels match too perfectly to ignore. They use whatever they can get ahold of in their films (the hubcap flying saucer in Plan 9, the coat hangers in Birdemic), insert themselves into their plots (Glen Or Glenda, Nyugan is a tech salesman IRL) , they have no talent, and they are both completely oblivious to that fact. Someone sarcastically asked Nyugan why Birdemic was so awesome and responded with "sincerity". And when audiences laughed at the line "man is the most dangerous animal on Earth", he thought they were applauding.
 
Apparantly, James Nyugan is making Birdemic II... in 3D!!! Quality grade: F. Entertainment grade: A
 
Next-up: The 9 "best" things about Shark Attack 3!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: October 03 2012 at 5:48pm
Great review. To be honest, though I actually hated the Birdemic movie. Even before a user on YouTube, He11sing920, home of Reaction and Review, a movie, well, reaction and review, said it was terrible.

-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: jesse685
Date Posted: October 04 2012 at 3:18am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

One hilarious part is that when Ramsey and Rod are shooting the birds, Ramsey doesn't hit anything and Rod seems to never miss. Ramsey had the M4 and Rod had a pistol. So a tech salesman with a pistol is a better shot than a former marine with a machine gun.
 
Next-up: The 9 "best" things about Shark Attack 3!
 
Once again, someone proves that pistols can be so overpowered in films as well as games.
 
And you're actually reviewing Shark Attack 3? Oi vey!


-------------
"If you can't make it good, make it 3D!" Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
F**k Yeah/WTF Were They Thinking Awards Results Live-Tweet @jesse685


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 04 2012 at 6:06pm
Time for Shark Attack 3: Megladon! When I said I was reviewing this, you all probably thought I was either insane or joking. If you thought it was option 1, you're right! Give yourself a cookie. Like my last two reviews, this'll be a 9 "best" things review.
 
9.) The stupidity shown in the yacht scene: During the climatic yacht scene, most of the passengers have the very bright idea to jump in the water. The water with a gigantic f*cking shark that's almost as old as Larry King. If they lived, they'd be getting their MENSA cards any day now. I should mention that specific parts of the yacht scene will wind up farther up the list.
 
8.) Mr. Tolley: Tolley is the villain of the film and God is he hilarious. In a total "for the evulz" moment, he knows about the sharks and STILL wants to build a deep sea cable. Also, I don't know a lot about the scientific community, but wouldn't discovering that a prehistoric species thought to be extinct was still alive gain you a lot of money. Tolley shows up later on the list too.
 
7.) The science: It's explained that the megladons survived by hiding in a deep sea vent. In the process of researching this review I discovered something: megladons were shallow water predators. This means that they wouldn't be anywhere near a deep sea vent! Also, how did no one find them? There's three megladons in the film, so there's probably more. Also, one of them is still alive at the end and it's a male, so he could make some more megladon babies.
 
6.) The special effects: When making a shark movie, how you create the shark is important. You could use a robot like Jaws, use CGI like Shark Night 3D, or use both like Deep Blue Sea. Shark Attack 3 uses a unique approach: stock footage and green screen! When a shark's about to eat someone, the person is awkwardly green screened behind the stock footage of a shark opening its mouth.
 
5.) The amusement park scene: There's one scene that never fails to confuse the f*ck out of viewers. In it, two Spanish people are drunkedly walking around an amusement park and fall in the water. Then some stock footage of a shark eats them. Then a woman with a mask walks by and takes her mask off. None of this has anything to do with the rest of the movie. Before I continue, I should mention that 75% of the rest of the review will talk about specific scenes from the yacht scene.
 
4.) The dick executive gets eaten: In one scene, a woman's about to jump off the yacht with a safety vest. Then, her dick executive boyfriend steals it and jumps in the water. Just as he's about to lands shark stock footage pops up and eats him!
 
3.) The raft gets eaten: There's an emergency raft full of people that gets eaten by the stock footage. That may not seem as funny as the last one, but the way its shot makes it funnier.
 
2.) "What's say I take you home and watch I Love Lucy?": Anyone who's seen this movie on TV is confused by this line. However, if you see this on DVD, you can hear the actual line, and it's hilariously crude. Here it is, whited out to preserve the minds of younger forum members. Viewer discretion adviced. What do you say I... take you home and eat your pussy.
 
1.) Tolley's death: If you've ever seen a best of Shark Attack 3 video on YouTube, you know about this. He's driving away on his little jet ski laughing evilly and then he sees the shark and flails his arms like a dumbass. Then he drives the jet ski into the shark's mouth! There's nothing I san say that's funnier than that.
 
Deep Blue Sea would make a good choice for horror movie month 2. But, it's going to be on Saturday. If me reviewing this doesn't make you think I'm insane, then tomorrow's review will. Quality grade: F. Entertainment grade: A-
 
Next-up: The Wicker Man!!!!!!!!!!!!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: jesse685
Date Posted: October 04 2012 at 8:02pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Next-up: The Wicker Man!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
OH F*CK!


-------------
"If you can't make it good, make it 3D!" Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
F**k Yeah/WTF Were They Thinking Awards Results Live-Tweet @jesse685


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 06 2012 at 8:13pm
After watching the best animated film of the year (Frankenweenie) I'm going to review a film with a plot right out of a cartoon. Deep Blue Sea is a ridiculous, poorly made film that I love the Hell out of.
 
If Deep Blue Sea is great at one thing, it's its kills. Stellan Skarsgard's death is ludicriously awesome. His arm is bitten off and he's put on an emergency helicopter because Renny Harlin has a helicopter fetish. Then the sharks down the helicopter! Then they take the gurney he was attached to and smash it into a window underwater, flooding the research facility. Also, when the helicopter explodes, it takes out the radio tower and the woman running it. I wouldn't mention it, but the runner by Janice Soprano, one of the most annoying characters in a great show ever. Of course, talking about deaths in Deep Blue See wouldn't be complete without Samuel L. Jackson's. Everything that could be said about it has. For a postive that doesn't relate to the deaths, the acting is decent. With one British accented exception, the cast does the best they can. The standouts are Tom Jane as a shark hunter and LL Cool J as the Bible quoting cook. LL Cool J's character was so well liked that the audience in the focus group testing were pissed that got he killed off in the original cut. Their reaction is why he survives in the final film.
 
The CGI in the film is mostly crappy. The explosions suck, but it's the shakrs that suck the most. Especially since the mechanical sharks are really good. Hilariously, Renny Harlin bet audiences to spot the difference between the CGI and anamatronics. And speaking him, his direction sucks. When the sharks aren't raising Hell, the films get really boring.
 
Saffron Burrows is a British accented exception. Her performance was so bad, that the focus group audience demanded she be killed. In the original cut, she lives while LL Cool J died. The script doesn't do here favors. Seriously, why would scientists think that making sharks super smart is a good idea? Also, there's a bunch of plot holes. Like, for example, why does the research station have a big window? The only reason it's there if for Skarsgard's (admittedly awesome) death scene. They try to explain by saying it belonged to the military, but that makes even less sense. Why would the military give their station a big, conspicuous window?
 
Is this the only example of focus testing making a movie better? Grade: C+
 
Next-up: Chernobyl Diaries!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 07 2012 at 7:40pm
Time to review Chernobyl Diaries, a film that wanted to cash in on the found footage genre without actually being a found footage movie.
 
The first part of the film has actual tension. They wander around Pripyat and we don't see anyone there (except for a moronic jump scare), but we can sense that something's there. However, when the mutants actually show up, the film sh*ts itself.
 
I mentioned a moronic jump scare in the last paragraph and here it is. While looking through an apartment complex, a bear charges them. That's right, a frickin' bear. After it charges them, it disappears from the film. In retrospect, this makes me like the first half less because it shows that the makers were aiming for the lowest common denominator and all the tension was an unintended consequence. The acting in this is crap. The only actor that has had anything resembling a career before this is pop singer Jesse McCartney. Yes, he's in this and he has a positviely bad subplot regarding him proposing to his girlfriend.
 
Remember how NBC got a lot of flack for not airing the tribute to the victims of that train bombing in the Olympics? That reminds me a lot about this movie. Making a slasher movie about a tragedy is disrespectful. Judging by the science in this film, the film makers did all the research from episodes of The Simpsons. Hell, there's a fish in the movie that looks just like Blinky! The make up effects are just crappy. Especially funny is the mutant baby. But, the thing that pisses me off the most about his film is the attempts to make the film look like a found footage film. I thought it actually was a found footage film until all the main characters were on-screen together. Soon, it becomes apparent that the only reason they made it look like a found footage film was to get away with using a crappy camera.
 
Does anyone else think that this only exists because of Modern Warfare? Grade: C-
 
Next-up: An American Werewolf In Paris!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: jesse685
Date Posted: October 07 2012 at 7:55pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Does anyone else think that this only exists because of Modern Warfare?
A game from a franchise that got that right while its multiplayer is the same rehashed sh*t over again.


-------------
"If you can't make it good, make it 3D!" Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
F**k Yeah/WTF Were They Thinking Awards Results Live-Tweet @jesse685


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 08 2012 at 9:51am
SchumacherH8ter, I'm interested in people's thoughts on the CHERNOBYL DIARIES' ending, because I didn't know how to feel about it. How about you?
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

But, the thing that pisses me off the most about his film is the attempts to make the film look like a found footage film. I thought it actually was a found footage film until all the main characters were on-screen together. Soon, it becomes apparent that the only reason they made it look like a found footage film was to get away with using a crappy camera.

I don't know. I would understand that from any filmmaker. But why would the creator of PARANORMAL ACTIVITY do that (yes, I know he didn't direct it)? I took as experimenting by mixing styles.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: October 08 2012 at 3:50pm
I know why people wanted to go see Chernobyl Diaries. It's because Olivia Taylor Dudley is in it, and she starred in a way better project than this...




-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 08 2012 at 7:44pm
To Vits: The end of Chernobyl Diaries wasn't really an ending. It's like the usual found footage ending as in it's abrupt. Unlike The Devil Inside however, there was no middle finger after the ending.
 
To Grounder: Where does that gif come from? I must know!
 
Now to review An American Werewolf In Paris!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 08 2012 at 8:28pm
An American Werewolf In London is a horror movie that I have great affection for. It had great make-up, music, and a great mix of comedy and horror. An American Werewolf In Paris has none of those things.
 
The only good thing about this is Julie Delpy. Yes, you read that right, the star of Before Sunrise and Three Colors: White is in this. She gives a good performance as Serafine, another werewolf. The film doesn't deserve her performance. Also, she shows her boobs.
 
The rest of the actors in the film suck. Tom Everett Scott is bland as Andy, the title werewolf. His performance can't compare to David Naughton's in the first one. And if he can't compare to Naughton, then guess how well future Epic Movie star Vince Vieluf compares to Griffin Dunne. Also on hand is future Modern Family star Julie Bowen as a Jim Morrison obsessed girl who gets turned into werewolf chow.
 
Anthony Waller wrote and directed this. He has no talent whatsoever. The worst thing about his script is the fact that Andy and Serafine are cured. The first one wasn't afraid to end on a downer note. This is symbolic of Waller not getting what made the first film so great. But, the ultimate example of him not getting it is the gratuitous CGI. The original film's make-up was so good that the Oscars made the Best Make-Up Oscar just to honor it. The transformation scenes in the original are still disturbing to this day thanks to the make-up. The transformation scenes in this are just stupid thanks to the CGI. Not helping things, it's not just the transformations that are CGI; all the werewolves are CGI. Also, the CGI is terrible, but you probably already guessed that.
 
It goes without saying that any film associated with Skinny Puppy (they're on the soundtrack) sucks. Grade: F
 
Next-up: The 9 worst things about Captivity!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: October 09 2012 at 6:35am
SchumacherH8ter: If you must know where that gif comes from, here's the link: 

http://thechive.com/2010/10/07/2-2-gifs/ - http://thechive.com/2010/10/07/2-2-gifs/   

If you still don't know where I got that scene from, watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7GJEdlmmzE - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7GJEdlmmzE




-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 10 2012 at 8:11pm
Time for one of the most blatant rip-offs of all time. Seriously, they don't even try to make Orca not look like a Jaws rip-off.
 
There's nothing actually good about this movie. However, there's some so bad it's good things on display. The scenes were the whale goes on his rampage is hilarious. It blows up a fuel reserve. In one hilarious scene, it eats one of Bo Derek's legs. But, the height of trashy hilariousness is when the orca's mate miscarries on Richard Harris' boat! Ramping up the comedy, his crewmen just hose the baby off his boat!
 
Like any half-assed rip-off, Orca takes a pot-shot at the film it rips-off. In the opening scene, an orca eats a great white shark. In a form of retribution, an orca corpse is found eaten in Jaws 2. The acting on display here is crappy. Richard Harris is bland as the inadvertent killer of the orca's mate. Bo Derek is just terrible as his daughter. And Will Sampson squanders his One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest/Outlaw Josey Wales cred here as a stereotypical magic Native American.
 
The script is terrible. I know that whales are supposed to be smart, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't know how to blow up a fuel line. Apparantly, whales aren't that attached to their mates and calves in real life, making the orca's behavior unrealistic. However, I'm not sure if this was known in 1977 so if it wasn't known, just ignore this complaint. Michael Anderson's direction is bad. He's mostly known for directing Around The World In 80 Days, one of the worst Best Picture winners ever. He has no eye for action or horror. The finale is monumentily boring due to that. In it, Harris and his foxy colleague played by Charlotte Rampling go hunting for the orca. Before I go on, I should mention that most of the film takes place in Ireland and the finale takes place off the coast of Canada. That seems like a long distance to go just for revenge. But I digress. The whale smashes Harris onto an iceberg and spaers Rampling. With its revenge done, the orca goes to the bottom of the ocean to kill itself. Despite this, Dino de Laurentiis wanted to make a crossover between this and King Kong.
 
If HeadRAZZBerry is to be believed, de Laurentiis was crying outside his theater when this came out. Grade: F
 
Next-up: Jeepers Creepers II!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 11 2012 at 9:48pm
Sorry for the lateness of this review. I was working on a school project. Today's review is going to be for Jeeper Creepers II, a bland sequel filled with plot holes, character inconsistancies, and enough homoerotic tension to thrill Tom Cruise.
 
The opening scene is done well. There's tension when it becomes apparant that the scarecrow is actually the Creeper, the main villain and the monster of the movie. Infant immortality is averted when he eats Billy. There's an awesome shot where the Creeper is on top of the bus.
 
The characters in the film are some of the dumbest ever. They make the brilliant decision to go outside the bus. They're teachers are missing and they decide to go outside the bus. Sure, they try to get back in the bus when they see the Creeper, but the fact they even considered getting out of the bus a good idea shows they're idiots. Billy's dad does the dumbest thing in the movie though, but that deserves to go in the ugly section. It goes without saying that tha actors are terrible. I checked imdb, and non of the young actors have a career now.
 
Billy's dad was a badass character who actually takes down the Creeper. Then, he does the dumbest thing ever. He stitches the Creeper back together and puts him on display in his barn. Why the f*ck would you do something like that? It's a dumb thing to do and inconsistant with how the rest of the film portrays him. But, the worst thing about this movie is Victor Salva. He has very little talent, but when you learn about his personal life it gets even worse. See, Salva is a child molester. Now remember, the film is about a monster that goes after young men. Put those two facts together and shriek like Donald Sutherland in Invasion Of The Body Snatchers.
 
Victor Salva wants to make a Jeepers Creepers 3. Noooooooooooooooo!!!!! Grade: D
 
Next-up: FeardotCom!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 12 2012 at 8:41pm
Time for FeardotCom, one of the many films about how the interwebz will kill you!!!11!!1!
 
Before I get into ripping this, let's talk about the good things in this film. That's what I'd say if there was something good about this movie.
 
Natascha McElhone's acting is almost as bad as her parents' spelling. She plays Terry Huston, a researcher for the Departmen of Health. She quickly determines that feardotCom is repsonsible for all the deaths. After determining this, she makes the brilliant decision to visit the website. A lot of supernatural horror films with mundane MacGuffins need to have it be used after we learn it's dangerous. The right way to do this is in The Ring. In there, Rachel's son watches the videotape without his mother's knowledge. It opens up the possibility that more people will get hurt without making the chracters look like idiots. Steven Dorff is also bad. He plays NYPD detective Mike Reilly. He learns from Terry that the website is what's killing people. And because he ate too many paintchips from the police department bathroom he visits the site too!
 
Director William Malone is a massive hack. The only other film of his that I've heard of is that crappy House On Haunted Hill remake, which gets a brief shout out in here. Moshe Diamant and Josephien Coyle's script is terrible. In addition to making the main characters look like idiots, it features bland scare scenes and one of the least intemidating horror villains on record. The villain is Alistair Pratt, or "The Doctor". He's one of the most one dimentional villains in history. Shockingly, he's played by Steven Rea, an actual actor. Why Rea needed to be in this is a mystery to me.
 
I will say this about FeardotCom: it's a little better than Untraceable. Grade: F
 
Next-up: The Hills Have Eyes 2 (2007)!!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 13 2012 at 12:18pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Shockingly, he's played by Steven Rea, an actual actor. Why Rea needed to be in this is a mystery to me.
Apparently, getting an Oscar nomination* doesn't guarantee you'll have a career. Look at his resume, and you'll find a lot of supporting roles in bad movies, including UNDERWORLD 4.

*Or win. Look at F. Murray Abraham.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 13 2012 at 9:14pm
Time for the 2007 version of The Hills Have Eyes 2. It's a really bad movie that just replays the previous Hills Have Eyes, but it's still miles better than the '85 version. Mainly because there's no doggy flashbacks.
 
Some of the make-up in the movie is pretty good. I especially liked the make-up on the mutant who blended in with the rocks. That's pretty much it for the good.
 
Director Martin Weisz shows little skill behind the camera. Before he directed this, he mostly did music videos. That makes so much sense. The actors are pretty bad too. Jacob Vargas and Jessica Stroup are the worst though.
 
The characters are impressively stupid. The family from the first film did a better job of fighting off the mutants. This wouldn't be so bad, but the characters in this are National Guardsmen! So in Hills Have Eyes land, ordinary family>National Guardsmen. This highlights the sloppyness of the script. Wes Craven wrote it with his son. He should have known better. Also, the film has a MAJOR misogynst streak. The first woman we see only exists to give birth to mutants and then get her head smashed in. The female National Guardsmen don't fare any better. Amber (Stroup) is attacked and is saved by an injured male Guardsmen. The other female (Missy played by Daniella Alonso) is handled even worse. She gets captured, raped, and rescued by a male marine.
 
Still better than the '85 one though. Grade: D-
 
Next-up: The Grudge 2!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 15 2012 at 8:35pm
Time for Alien: Resurrection, one of the most blatant cash grabs ever. However, it's actually better than Alien 3. Mainly because the makers of this just didn't care while the makers of Alien 3 seemed to outright hate the audience.
 
There's one really awesome scene in here and it's the basketball scene. To explain, Ripley is shooting some hoops when she gets interrupted by Ron Perlamn's gang. After beating them up in a crappy action scene, she throws the ball with the hoop to her back and she makes it. The cool part is that it wasn't special effects: Sigourney Weaver actually made the basket.
 
The acting is pretty bad. Ron Perlman and Brad Dourif are good and Weaver's never bad as Ripley, but aside from those three it's dire. There's only one truely horrible performance here, but that's for the next paragraph. Director Jean-Pierre Jeunet shows little skill for directing an action/horror/sci-fi movie. Considering his filmography, it's not surprising. And, like in Alien 3, the CGI aliens still suck.
 
There's only two reasons I decided to review this movie. One: I reviewed an Alien movie last year, so why not review one this year. Two: to show that not all practical effects are good. If you've read any of my recent reviews, you know I prefer practical effects to CGI. So, to show I'm not completely biased, I'm going to talk about the film's abysmal practical effects. ANd by that I mean the infamous newborn. The thing just looks terrible. The scene where it gets sucked out of the ship is just bad. And it wasn't done woth CGI.* Admittedly, the method they used to pull it off is pretty cool. But, it looks like crap on-screen. The one truely horrific performance is from Winona Ryder as Call, the Ash of the movie. Her performance is completely soulless. I know that her character is an android, but her performance is still bad. But, the absolute worst thing about this movie is the screenplay. It treats that characters like idiots, has dumb and terrible scenes (the infamous Ripley clones scene), and is just bland. Shockingly, the sole writer on the film is... Joss Whedon!!!! You'd expect that he'd know how to make a movie like this, but he just bungles it. He's ashamed of the movie as he should be, but Joss can be an egomaniacal dick sometimes because he blames the failure on everyone but himself. He claims that the executives changed his ending so he gets off the hook for that. He's still to blame for the first part of the movie though.
 
Apparantly, the newborn's original design had one major difference.** Grade: D
 
Next-up: Hellbound: Hellraiser II!
 
*LINK: http://www.cracked.com/article_19872_6-mind-blowing-special-effects-you-wont-believe-arent-cgi.html - http://www.cracked.com/article_19872_6-mind-blowing-special-effects-you-wont-believe-arent-cgi.html  (Scroll down to 4)
**LINK: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/Alien-_Resurrection_-_Newborn.jpg - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/Alien-_Resurrection_-_Newborn.jpg  (Warning image is kinda NSFW. And fricking hilarious!)


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 16 2012 at 9:35pm
Time for Hellbound: Hellraiser II a dumb movie with an even dumber title. It's not very scary and it has one of the most epic bridge droppings in history.
 
The only good part of the film is Ashley Laurence. She reprises her role of Ashley from the first film. Her performance is good and she makes you care about what happens to her character.
 
The character of Tiffany is annoying. Her actress (Imogen Boorman) is bland and it seems like she only exists because Clive Barker saw Aliens. Clare Higgins (the weak link fo the first film) reprises her role of Julia (sans skin). Her performance is even worse this time around. The gore level is increased and it makes the film cartoony. Instead of shocking us, it's makes us laugh at how dumb it is.
 
The Cenobites are ruined in this film. The start off decent and get a few good scenes, but when Kirsty reveals that they were once humans, they go downhill. They decide to protect her and Tiffany after learning this, making them completely uninteresting. The script is pretty bad. There's a reason for it's suckiness and it's not executive meddling this time. See, Barker wanted Andrew Robinson to return as Larry, but he didn't want to. This, apparantly, forced Barker to re-write the end of the script. But, the worst part of the script is Dr. Channard, played by Shakepearean actor Oliver Smith. He starts out passible, but when he turns into a Cenobite, he gets bad. He starts yelling stupid quips (i.e. "I recommend... decapitation!") and he kills the Cenobites! And he does it with ease. If you're wondering why the villains of the series are killed off so easily, Barker thought that audiences would want to see Julia as the villain of the next movie. Anyone who's seen Hellraiser III knows how well audiences wanted to see that.
 
If you saw a new Hellraiser movie at RedBox, Clive Barker wasn't involved. Grade: D-
 
Next-up: I Know Who Killed Me!!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: October 17 2012 at 6:42am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Next-up: I Know Who Killed Me!!!

AW, SNAP!


-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 18 2012 at 8:37pm
Time to begin the Resident Evil series. All five of the movies suck, but none of them suck the same way. Before I start with the first one, I should mention that I'm not whiteing out any spoilers until the fifth one.
 
About the only interesting thing about this movie is the Red Queen. She's a rouge AI that's out to prevent the T-virus from spreading to the outside world even if it means killing innocent people. I'm not sure if the film notices, but she's the only thing close to a hero here! While the other characters meander, occasionally fighting zombies, the Red Queen is actively protecting the human race. The film treats her trying to get Alice to kill Rain as an EVIL thing, but Rain's got the T-virus and she could easily spread it.
 
The special effects are crap. This came out nearly a decade after Jurassic Park and it looks nowhere near as good. The Licker looks expecially crappy. The score is pretty bad too. It's just generic metal riffs. Fun fact: the composer for this was Marilyn Manson. This might be one of Milla Jovovich's best perfromances. The fact that she's still in the bad category should tell you about her acting skills.
 
Almost all the film's shortcomings can be laid at the feet of Paul W.S. Anderson. He wrote and directed this piece of crap all by himself, so there's no one else to blame for this. He can't write interesting characters. He can't direct actors. His idea of a villain is actually a better hero than the ones we're given. He can't direct an action scene to save his life. His idea of scary is as scary as a five year old running around in a sheet. He thinks that hair and fingernails grow after death. And here's the kicker: Capcom (the maker of the Resident Evil games) rejected an earlier script by George A. Romero! And his script was actually faithful to the games, Chris being a magic Native American aside. This is especially dumb because Capcom based the Resident Evil series on Romero's zombie movies.
 
As bas as this was, it's actually one of the better video game movie. That should tell you how low the video game movie bar is. Grade: D+
 
Next-up: Resident Evil: Apocalypse!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 19 2012 at 1:06pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

He thinks that hair and fingernails grow after death.
To be fair, that has happened even in the best zombie movies and shows.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 19 2012 at 6:27pm
My issue with the fingernails and hair thing is that he had the Red Queen say it. A brilliant AI that's the only sane person in the film says that.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 19 2012 at 9:48pm
Time for Resident Evil: Apocalypse, a dumb as Hell movie that, like most movies I've reviewed this month, is a retread of the first film. However, unlike most movies I've reviewed this month, Resident Evil: Apocalypse is actually better than the film it's retreading.
 
One of the reasons this is actually better is because of director Alexander Witt. Unlike Worthless Sh*t Anderson, Witt doesn't f*ck up the action scenes. We may not care about the characters,* but the scenes are shot competently. Also, making the film better is Sienna Guillery and Oded Fehr who give good performances as Jill Valentine and Carlos Olivera, respectively. Guillery actually put a lot of effort into this movie, watching footage of Jill from the game to get the movement of her right. Shame she gets overshadowed by the personality-retardent Alice.
 
Jovovich still sucks here. Making things worse, she gets a lot more dialogue this time around. And she gets more dramatic scenes too. The film breaks it's own rules with the zombies. There's a scene were a bunch of zombies rise from a graveyard to attack the main characters. It was said in the first film that there has to be residual neural activity for the T-virus to take hold. But, the zombies in this scene have been dead for a while, so no residual neural activity for them. Also, how could the T-virus reach them if they were in their caskets? And if they already had the T-virus in them, why did it take them that long to rise?
 
Mike Epps gives a terrible performance as LJ. He's every crappy ghetto stereotype roled into one big annoying performance. But, again, the biggest of the film's flaws can be laid at Worthless Sh*t Anderson's feet. What he does to Nemesis is horrible. He was a badass in the game and here he gets his ass kicked by Alice in a few minutes. Alice's "God Mode Sue" tendencies start to shine through here. This is mainly because she has the T-virus in her. It turns everyone else into crazy zombies, but it turns the screenwriter's girlfriend into a badass. The film shamelessly rips-off Aliens with the relationship with Alice and Angie. The blandness of their relationship only highlights how James Cameron is superior to all of his imatators.
 
Angie's dad in wheelchair is played by a pre-Mad Men Jared Harris. Grade: C
 
Next-up: Resident Evil: Extinction!
 
*Not Witt's fault, he didn;t write the script.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 24 2012 at 10:00pm
Time for Hannibal, a good example of a film screwed over by constant re-writes. The film was re-written at least 15 times and Anthony Hopkins almost left the movie.
 
It's a good thing that Hopins didn't leave because he's the only good thing here. As crappy as this was, he's the lone bright spot. He's not as good as he was in Silence or even Red Dragon, but still.
 
Julianne Moore is an ill fit to play Clarice. She's not a bad actress, but she's out of her leagure here. Ray Liotta is crappy here as Paul Krendler. He has a bigger role than in Silence, were Krendler was played by Ron Vawter. I could go into details about his bad performance, but I have a feeling about what you want me to discuss about him so let's get to it: Krendler ets his own brain. It's one of the most jaw-droppingly bad, unintentionally hilarious scenes in history. It made Cracked's 10 Scenes of Brutal Violence Guaranteed to Make You Laugh list.
 
As I mentioned in the intro, the script went through a lot of re-writes. David Mamet is credited as a screenwriter, but all of his material was thrown out. The direction on this movie is very poor. Shockingly, the director is Ridley Scott:a man who should know better. Gary Oldman is horrible as Mason Verger. He plays a crippled child molester with no face. He has no face because Hannibal doped him up and told him to feed it to his dogs. In retaliation, Mason trains giant pigs to eat Hannibal. Why pigs? Dogs would be more appropriate considering what happened to him. The scene where Mason feeds Hannibal to the pigs infuriated me to no end and established that Thomas Harris had turned Hannibal into a Mary Sue. When Hannibal's with the pigs, they don't try to eat him. Ridley tries to explain it on the commentary by saying that it was either the lack of blood, Hannibal not screaming, or the pigs sensing an animal feel to Hannibal that lead to it. In the book, however, it was because the pigs respected Hannibal too much. Yes, really.
 
Brett Ratner directed a better Hannibal Lecter than Ridley Scott. Where is your God now?!? Grade: D-
 
Next-up: Book Of Shadows: Blair Witch 2!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 25 2012 at 9:07am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

When Hannibal's with the pigs, they don't try to eat him. Ridley tries to explain it on the commentary by saying that it was either the lack of blood, Hannibal not screaming, or the pigs sensing an animal feel to Hannibal that lead to it. In the book, however, it was because the pigs respected Hannibal too much. Yes, really.
I'm confused. Which of those explanations would you have prefered?


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 25 2012 at 2:04pm
I prefer Scott's because it less Mary Sue-ish than Harris's. What's less dumb: man-eating pigs sensing a kindred spirit in a fellow man-eater (Scott's explanation) or man-eating pigs respect someone they've never meet before (Harris's explanation)? The only good thing to come out of the pigs wwas that it helped inspire the best episode of South Park.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 26 2012 at 2:33pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Krendler ets his own brain. It's one of the most jaw-droppingly bad, unintentionally hilarious scenes in history. It made Cracked's 10 Scenes of Brutal Violence Guaranteed to Make You Laugh list.
They've updated that list. It includes one of your favorite movies:

http://www.cracked.com/article_20137_6-unintentionally-hilarious-moments-in-famous-scary-movies.html -


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 27 2012 at 5:02pm
Time for my triple review of Book Of Shadows: Blair Witch 2, Jaws 3-D, and Jason Goes To Hell: The Final Friday. Since this is the first type of this review that I've done, I'll explain my plans for it. I'll do three basic reviews with intros for each film, but I'll save the grades for the very end of the review.
 
Before I begin ripping into Blair Witch 2, I have a confession that may very well cost me my respect ariund these parts: I aboslutely love the first Blair Witch Project and consider it one of my favorite movies. But, it wasn't always like that. When I first saw it, I hated. Then I saw it again, and I hated it less, but still didn't like it. Then I saw it a third time, and I thought it was OK then. Then a saw it again and thought it was great. The last time I saw it was a few weeks ago where I decided I absolutely loved it. The sequel, on the other hand, gets worse every time I see it.
 
There's one scene that comes close to brilliance and that's the very first scene. It shows Burkittsville, the town from the first film, overrun by tourists looking for the Blair Witch. It's a funny parody of the first one. The whole movie should have been like this. It should have been about a bunch of idiotic teens going into the woods and dieing of starvation, videotaping themselves so they can be like the first one. After they're all dead, the actual Blair Witch should show up, laugh, and say it an evil voice: "Stupid kids. They make my job WAY easier." But, alas, the film goes in the opposite direction, by being a shameless rip-off of the first one, sans video footage.
 
The first major problem is the actors. They all suck horribly, with Kim Director being the worst. Say what you will about the actors in the first film, but at least you could buy them as teenagers stuck in the woods. The actors in this are nothing more than actors. You don't care about them and hope that they die. Another problem is the ambiguity of the characters. The film tries to make the characters' moral status ambiguious, but they fail miserably. It's obvious that they're killers. And we don't need to see reversed footage to know this.
 
Director Joe Berlinger shows no talent with narrative features. He's good with documentaries like the Paradise Lost series or Metallica: Some Kind Of Monster, but he falls on his face with this one. Another major problem is the executive meddling. Artisan wanted to make another Blair Witch while the iron was hot, while Haxan Films wanted to wait and make a good story before making it. Artisan ignored them and went ahead with what we have today. The biggest indicator of the movie's failings, however, comes from a source that you may not have noticed: the soundtrack. There was no soundtrack for the first one and it relied on its creepy atmosphere. The soundtrack for this is loud, sh*tty, and abrasive metal music. It's a good example of the dichotomy between the films. One's quiet and reserved and  makes the film creepier while the other is loud and makes the film silly.
 
Moving on, we have Jaws 3-D, a shameless cash-in with obvious 3-D, bad acting, and the fakest looking shark until 1987.
 
There's one well directed scene and that's the scene where the shark smashes through the observitory window. Sure, it's ruined by the special effects (this is the worst the shark looks in the movie) and the fact that the black guy gets eaten first makes me suspicious of the casting director, but, compared to the rest of the film, it's good for what it is.
 
Dennis Quaid is pretty bad in this. Amusingly, this came out the same year as The Right Stuff, which helped put Quiad on the map. Quaid isn't very proud of this; he once said this in an interview: "I was in Jaws what?" Lea Thompson isn't very good in her debut role. It's still better than Howard The Duck though. The actor playing Sean Brody is terrible. Let's check who he is. Okay, it's John Putch. Oh, he's a director too, let's see what he directed. Atlas Shrugged Part II.
http://www.gifbin.com/983372">Donald Sutherland pointing (Invasion of the Body Snatchers)
 
Joe Alves direction is terrible. Aside from that one scene mentioned above, he shows no flair for visuals or suspense. I checked imdb, and this was the first movie he ever directed. And the last movie he ever directed. As I mentioned several times in this review, the shark looks terrible. The story for this is terrible. How the f*ck did a 35 foot shark get into Sea World with no one noticing? However, there's an explanation for this: re-writes. See, the film was written by three people and one of the names should stick out: Carl Gottlieb, Richard Matheson, and Guerdon Trueblood. I think you can figure out the name that doesn't belong. The film changed concepts several times. Originally, the film was a parody that involved the shark eating people associated with the franchise, but Spielberg got it shut down. Killjoy. In one version, the 35 foot shark gets stuck in a lake, which makes more sense than Sea World. I'm not goy why I think they went with Sea World, but let's just say it rhimes with loduct racement.
 
The final movie I'm talking about today Jason Goes To Hell, the final Friday The 13th film (for a decade). Unlike the other two movies today, this film goes in a completely different direction compared to the other films in the franchise. However, the new plot is actually worse than the regular FT13th plots.
 
There's one incredibly awesome scene in here and it's the opening one. It shows a comely woman showering when Jason attacks her. However, this is a trap as commandos start shooting at Jason and succeed at killing him. This could have been an intersting idea if strecthed to feature length. It would turn the franchise forumla on its head. Instead of Jason hunting helpless teens, it would be a bunch of commandos hunting a helpless Jason.
 
But, the film doesn't go in that direction. In one of the dumbest scenes in Friday The 13th history, the coroner working on Jason sees that his heart is still beating and his idea is to eat it! What would compell him to do that? This allows Jason to possess him. From here the film turns into a demonic possession movie with some slashing violence thrown in. So, it's a rip-off of The Exorcist III. The film uses the Necronomonicon from the Evil Dead movies. This pissed off Sam Raimi and he demanded an adead dog eye pussgy from the makers. This doesn't have any bearing on anything. I just think that what Raimi said was awesome.
 
At the end of the movie, we see Jason's true form. And it's a rip-off of the Chestburster from Alien. Seriously, it looks dumb. There's one weird scene were Jason shaves the beard of a man that he's possessed. It only exists to pad time and shows how thin the script is. But, the main failing of the film is the same reason why Friday The 13th: A New Beginning sucked: the lack of Jason action. The thing that made people back in the '80s want to see the Friday The 13th films was Jason. They thought he was cool. He had an awesome mask, he had some great kills, he was nigh unstoppable, and he had a tragic past. Making a Friday The 13th film and not having Jason in it is just dumb. They assumed that it was the brand that got people in the seats, but it was actually Jason.
 
If any of you steals my Blair Witch Project parody idea, I'll be pissed. Grades: Blair WItch 2 and Jaws 3-D: F, Jason Goes To Hell: D
 
Next-up: Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation!!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 27 2012 at 5:24pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

the fact that the black guy gets eaten first makes me suspicious of the casting director
Dude, that's one of the main rules in Horror Movies.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 28 2012 at 9:26pm
Time for The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation, one of the weirdest and dumbest horror movies ever.
 
About the only thing I can recommend about this is the novelty factor of watching two future A-listers in a terrible horror sequel. Renee Zellweger and Matthew McConaughey play a whiney high school student named Jenny and a cyborg, respectively. Since Matthew's last name is hard to spell, I'm going to type his character's name. It's Vilmer Slaughter. Yes, really. Both of them sued to try and supress this movie and I kind of wish that they were successful.
 
This was a very cheap movie. So cheap that they couldn't get Gunnar Hanson to reprise his role of Leatherface. Instead, he's played by Robert Jacks, who scored the movie. So the film's similar to an Ed Wood picture in another way. Of the film's terrible performances, Renee Zellweger's is the least bad. Of course, she's still bad enough to be here. She whines her way through most of her lines. Vilmer is a very annoying character. Although, there is some unintentional comedy when he needs to be re-charges. He's a cyborg remember.
 
Kim Henkel shows little talent as a director. The film looks terrible and has no visual flair. But, far worse is the screenplay. He wrote the first one with Tobe Hopper. Judging from his work on this one, you'd think that he'd never heard of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre movies. One annoying thing that pops up a lot in here is the constant homages to the first one. The dinner scene is ripped off completely, but at least the the re-charging scene happens here. Also, the grandpa is now a mummy. Leatherface ends the movie the same way he ended the first one: swinging his chainsaw in futility. I think they did this because they couldn't think of anything interesting to do, so why not rip-off of the first one. But, the absolute worst thing is Vilmer's death. He and Leatherface are chasing Jenny when a plane appears out of nowhere and hits him. That's not a joke, a plane really appears out of nowhere and hits him.
 
The second Texas Chainsaw Massacre gets a bad rap. It doesn't rehash the first film, Dennis Hopper is good, and it has chainsaw dueling! Grade: F
 
Next-up: Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 29 2012 at 8:47pm

Time for my Nightmare On Elm Street double feature! When I review A Nightmare On Elm Street 2 last October, I thought it was the worst Nightmare On Elm Street. When I re-watched Freddy's Dead a few months ago, I realized I was VERY wrong! And when I re-watched Dream Child this afternoon, I realized I was wrong again. I'm starting with Dream Child because that came first.

 
There's one cool death scene in here. And that's Dan's. In the dream, he's on a motorcycle and Freddy slowly fuses Dan with it. It's a pretty cool effect and most of the $8 million budget probably went towards it. Also, it should be noted that this Nightmare On Elm Street is the only one to feature an actual responsible parent. Alice's dad respects her intelligence and doesn't try anything dumb.
 
Stephen Hopkins, future director of Predator 2, Lost In Space, and The Reaping, does a crappy job of directing. His direction shows no visual flair, something even Renny Harlin, director of the fourth Nightmare On Elm Street, had. There's a pretty big plot hole in here. See, Freddy's plan to return is to be born as Alice's baby. If something happens to the fetus, Freddy's plan would fall apart. The solution here is very obvious: get an abortion. She doesn't want to do this because the writers were lazy she wants to remember Dan (he's the father). I'm pretty sure that Dan would like the person who killed him to not be reborn. And it goes without saying that the acting sucks.
 
It's time for another edition of "Re-writes f*ck up movies!" The film has three credited writers (Leslie Bohem, John Skipp, and Craig Spector) and, apparantly, everything Skipp and Spector wrote (except for the line "it's a boy") wasn't in the movie. David J. Schow and William Wisher, jr. did some re-writes and Michael de Luca pieced it together days before shooting began. This can explain the stupidity of the plot and especially the ending that made no sense. I get the feeling that the ending was supposed to make sense, but because of all the re-writes, we ended up with the Gainax ending we have before us. But, the worst thing about the movie is the non-Dan death scenes. Erika's death scene makes no sense. Or, more accurately, the reaction makes no sense. See, while she's being killed, she's at a boring dinner party and she fell asleep. While she's dieing, everyone else doesn't check on her, they just stare at her. But, Mark's death is the dumbest. I could go into explicit detail about it's dumbness, but I'll just say this: it starts with Freddy on a skateboard talking like a sk8r dude and it only goes downhill from there.
 
Dream Child ended up disappointing at the box-office. Seeing the writing on the wall, NewLine Cinema decided to end the Nightmare On Elm Street franchise with one more to send the franchise off. And they choose the worst send-off that they could. It's so bad, that a 9 Worst Thinsg review is in order.
 
But, first, here's the one thing I liked about the movie. When Freddy tells his daughter about his plans to start killing outside of Springwood, she refutes it. In response, he says: "Every town has an Elm Street." It may not sound much, but when compared to the rest of the film, it's one of the best lines ever. It helps that it's the only time where Robert Englund gives a crap about his acting.
 
9.) The cameos: Several famous people show up here and it's distracting. Johnny Depp's cameo isn't too bad because it kind of makes sense for him to be there (the first Nightmare On Elm Street was his debut). Alice Cooper's cameo as Freddy's foster father is weird. But, the worst of all is Roseanne's cameo. She plays a mother whose kids were killed by Freddy. She treats the main characters like her kids. And then Tom Arnold shows up...
 
8.) The make-up: As crappy as some of the other Elm Street sequels were, at least Freddy looked like Freddy there. In this one, almost no effort was put into making Freddy look good. The make-up in the remake was better than this one.
 
7.) Lisa Zane: Billy's sister is pretty bad as Maggie Burroughs/Krueger. When she sees Spencer bouncing around the house she has a look on her face that looks more like she watched paint dry than a teen she's looking after get killed.
 
6.) Rachel Talahay: This is Talahay's directorial debut and it shows. The kills are poorly shot and similar to something someone who never heard of Nightmare On Elm Street would have done. So, it's shocking to learn that she's worked on all the previous Elm Street films in one way or another.
 
5.) Freddy's escape plan: To get out of Springwood, Freddy has to get his daughter to come there. To get his daughter to come, he gives a kid amnesia and sends him out of Springwood. Somehow, he finds himself at the same youth shelter that Freddy's daughter works at. Before he kills the kid near the end, he talks like this was his plan the whole time. His completely coincidental plan.
 
4.) The dream demons: It turns out that Freddy gets his powers from a group of demons. Remember how Michael Myers became less scary when we learned that Laurie was his sister? It's like that. Explaining things is good, but if you're explanation is bad, keep it ambigious.
 
3.) The special effects: The dream demons are rendered in some of the worst stop-motion you'll ever see in a pre-CGI movie.
 
2.) The script: The script for this is just awful. It's main flaw is that it's very comedic and the comedy is really, really, really bad. Adding insult to injury, Peter Jackson wrote a script for this and it was rejected.
 
1.) The Power Glove scene: In one of the dumbest scenes in horror history, Freddy kills a video game addict (played by a young Breckin Meyer) with a Power Glove. Yes, really. I hate it; it's so bad!
 
Apparantly, they tried to get Frank Miller to write Dream Child. This is late '80's Frank Miller (around the time he did The Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One), not modern day Frank Miller. So, it could have been good. Grades: Dream Child: D-, Freddy's Dead: F
 
Next-up: The Exoricst: The Beginning!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 30 2012 at 8:25pm
I'm almost done with Horror Movie Month 2. Today's subject is Exorcist: The Beginning, the second worst prequel ever!!* The film has a very interesting production history. Paul Schrader (writer of Taxi Driver) made his version, but Morgan Creek Productions fired him because it didn't have enough bloody violence. Because when you think of The Exorcist, you think of bloody violence. Apparantly, only 10% of Schrader's version is in the final version. Schrader was replaced by... Renny Harlin!! We all know my opinion of Renny Harlin. Before I start my review, here's a very awesome quote from William Peter Blatty: "After a slam-bang opening sequence, Harlin's prequel deterioated into what was surely the most humiliating professional experience of my life, particularly thr finale. I don't blame Renny Harlin, for he gave Morgan Creek, I promise you, precisely what Morgan Creek demanded: not shocking obscenity, but shocking vulgarity."
 
There's only two good things about this. One is Stellan Skarsgard. That's not really surprising considering he's the only actual actor in this. He plays Father Merrin, the role originated by Max von Sydow in the Exorcist. Amusingly, Skarsgard is a hardline atheist in real life. The other is the cinematography by Vittorio Storaro of Apocalpyse Now fame. Insultingly, Harlin described his style as just "red equals evil."
 
Izabella Scorupa is pretty bad as Sarah, the doctor of the expedition. Interestingly, she wasn't in Paul Schrader's version, being created wholesale for this version. This was presumably to add sex appeal. The script for this is pretty dumb. I hear that the script for this and Schrader's version are mostly the same, but that still doesn't excuse it. Fun fact: one of the writers is William Wisher, jr. the same guy who re-wrote Dream Child.
 
Renny Harlin still has no talent for directing. The only one his films that I really like is the least good Die Hard. But, as bad as he is, we have to blame the people who put him here: Morgan Creek. Remember, they wanted bloody violence and that's what we have. In one grotesque scene, an African child is ripped apart by a hyena. In another, a woman gives birth to a maggoty baby. The big problem with scenes aren't that they're violent, but because of how exploitive it feels. It feels like Harlin was going "you want bloody violence, I'll give you bloody violence!" Adding insult to injury, both of those things are rendered with terrible special effects. On the commentary, Harlin defends the CGI hyenas because real ones are hard to work with.
 
A year after this bombed at the box-office, Schrader's version was released. I've never seen it, but this apparantly, Blatty thought the film was "a handsome, classy, elegant piece of work." Grade: F
 
Next-up: The 9 worst things about Halloween: Resurrection!
 
*The worst prequel is Dumb And Dumberer


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 31 2012 at 7:45pm
Time to finish up October and Horror Movie Month 2 with Halloween: Resurrection. I was either going to do this or The Curse Of Michael Myers, but I went with Resurrection because A.) Resurrection is slightly worse, B.) Curse Of Michael Myers is an interesting trainwreck while this is just a boring one, and C.) Curse's failings are due to dumbass executives and I've done enough films ruined by dumbass executives. Oh, and D.) Curse had a young Paul Rudd. Since Resurrection was so bad, it's another 9 worst things review.
 
9.) Katee Sackhoff: Anyone familar with my Twitter account knows I'm a big Battlestar Galactica fan. So imagine my surprise to see a pre-BSG Sackhoff here. She's only on hand as fodder for Michael. If she was playing Starbuck here, Michael wouldn't be standing at the end.
 
8.) Tyra Banks: Banks plays the assistant of Busta Rhymes' character. Watchering her act is almost as painful as watching her talk show. Disappointingly, she had a death scene, but it was cut out.
 
7.) The webcast plot: The "hook" of the movie was that Michael would kill people on an in-universe camera. So yes: this is kind of a found footage movie.
 
6.) Rick Rosenthal: The director of Halloween II returns to the franchise and shows even less skill than he did there. The way he shoots is bland and the kills are poor.
 
5.) The kills: Even if Rosenthal shoot the kills well, they'd still be boring and derivative. The only kill that was interesting was Tyra Banks' and, as mentioned above, it was cut out.
 
4.) The sequel hook: At the end of the movie, a coroner unzips Michael's bodybag and he wakes up. This was a transparant attempt to make more money. Thankfully, we didn't get any more sequels. Unthankfully, we did get a crappy remake that got a sequel that was one of the worst movies ever made.
 
3.) The retcon: At the end of Halloween H20, Laurie decapitates Michael. At the beginning of this, we learn that that was actually an ambulance worker that Michael traded clothes with. OK, why didn't Michael just kill the ambulance worker? It's a shameless ploy to get more sequels made.
 
2.) Michael kills Laurie... in the first 15 minutes: Michael's quest to kill Laurie has been the driving force of three of the previous seven movies and one of the seven doesn't count. And so, he goes after and kills her. In the first 15 minutes. This is an utterly disrepectful way to end a massive plotline in a successful horror series. This shows how little the makers truely cared about the Halloween property.
 
1.) Busta Rhimes V.S. Michael Myers: Busta Rhimes gave a very annoying performance as an internet entrapeaneur. But, the nadir of his performance, the film, and the franchise (until Michael eats that dog on-screen in Zombie's Halloween II) is when he fights Michael... and wins!!! Granted, Michael was completely ruined during the crying scene in Halloween 5, but still. Maybe that's why they never made another sequel: people couldn't Michael seriously after he got beaten up by Busta Rhimes.
 
I'm finally done!!! Grade: F
 
Next-up: Atlas Shrugged Part II!!!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: jesse685
Date Posted: November 01 2012 at 6:09pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Unthankfully, we did get a crappy remake that got a sequel that was one of the worst movies ever made.
 
Does Wrath of the Titans ring a bell?


-------------
"If you can't make it good, make it 3D!" Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
F**k Yeah/WTF Were They Thinking Awards Results Live-Tweet @jesse685


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: November 01 2012 at 7:15pm
Wrath Of The Titans was indeed terrible, but it can't compare to Zombie's Halloween II in terms of badness.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: January 27 2013 at 10:35am
My review of THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN:

[TUBE]uJZ6tQ7kqvM[/TUBE]

Any thoughts?


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: February 02 2013 at 11:45am
My review of THE VOW (it includes a comparison between a bunch of SNOW WHITE adaptations):

[TUBE]dvbDp7iDf5I[/TUBE]

Any thoughts?


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: May 13 2013 at 6:36pm
It's time for my first review in half a year. And it's of two of the worst films ever. Two films that tied for Worst Picture here back in '86. They are Howard The Duck and Under The Cherry Moon. You know you're in for a rough review when the better film features duck breasts!! Both of the reviews will be 9 worst things. We'll start with Howard.

9.) Dark Overlord: Now, I will say this, Dark Overlord has a cool design. Seriously look at it.
Suposedly, Clive Barker (the guy who came up with Hellraiser) sat through the whole film just to see the design. However, that cool design only shows up in the last part of the film, where he gets quickly defeated by Howard. For most of the film, Dark Overlord is trapped in the terrorfying form of...

8.) Jeffrey Jones: Yes, for almost all of the film, Dark Overlord is Principle Rooney. Not very scary. And I'm going to end this section early before a make a disgusting joke about him being a pedophile.

7.) Tim Robbins: The first time I saw this was not long after I watched his Oscar-winning role in Mystic River. The contrast is shocking and kind of funny. Robbins plays an unfunny scientist who's obviously based on Thomas Dolby who's most well-known for one hit wonder She Blinded Me Science. Also, he wrote the music for this film with George Clinton*. Because of this film, Green Lantern isn't the worst comic book movie in Tim Robbins' resume.

6.) Lea Thompson: Thompson plays a New Wave musician named Beverly Switzler. She seems to have an attraction to Howard, even though he's an alien duck. She had less creepy chemistry with Marty McFly. Apparantly, '90s alt-rock singer Tori Amos auditioned for the role. Back then, she was the lead singer of synthpop band called Y Kant Tori Read.

5.) The special effects: Other than Dark Overlord's true form, the special effects are awful. Howard looks more like a midget in a duck suit than an alien duck.

4.) Howard himself: Howard is one of the most annoying movie characters of all time. He rivals Jar Jar Binks at times. His annoying voice, supplied by Chip Zien, is grating.

3.) Willard Huyck and Gloria Katz: Huyck and Katz are the husband and wife time responsible for this mess. This movie killed their careers, there's only two movies on their resumes after this. A made-for-TV movie and Radioland Murders, which was written in the '70s. There's two specifically awful things about their script are the two worst things.

2.) The disturbing sexuality: As mentioned in the section about Lea Thompson, there's bestiality undertones in this film. In the original comic, Howard and Beverly are dating as well, but the comic was an edgy comic deliberately made for adults. The movie is a summer blockbuster wannabe made for (presumably) children. This makes it standout horrifyingly. Also, as mentioned in the intro, there's duck breasts.

1.) All those f*cking duck puns: During the first few minutes of the film, we're assaulted by insultingly dumb duck puns. Howard reads Rolling Egg and Playduck. Get it? It's like Rolling Stone and Playboy, except with duck puns!

What could be worse than a misguided attempt to turn an edgy adult comic into a crowdpleasing summer blockbuster? An pretencious, egomaniacal star vehicle! Before I rip into the movie, I should note that the cinematography (by Scorsese pro Michael Ballhaus) and production design (by Richard Sylbert, who also did Chinatown and Dick Tracy) are beautiful.

9.) Prince's behind the scenes meddling: Prince had complete control over the production and the film could be less awful if he didn't. For example, Mary Lambert was the original director for this film. She, also, directed Pet Semetary, which was an actual movie. Prince got her fired and replaced her with himself. I should mention that this was his directorial debut.

8.) The soundtrack: The soundtrack for the film is filled with boring and unmemorable songs. The only exception is Kiss, which went on to be a Billboard Number 1 hit.

7.) The script: In an avergae bad movie, this script would be near the top of the list of bad things. But, since this isn't an average bad movie, it's stuck at the bottom.

6.) Kristin Scott Thomas: The future star of The English Patient badmouthed this movie back in 2005. "When I left drama school I was more afraid of not working than not working at all than the actual material being offered. And if you look at my very first film, you'll understand exactly what I mean." Yes, I know exactly what you mean.

5.) The romance: Prince and Thomas have a half-assed romance in the film. Her father opposes it and we're supposed to infer that it's because he's racist and uncool. But, remember, he's playing a pimp. If your daughter wanted to marry a pimp, you'd act the same way. I know I would.

4.) The anachronisms: There's a lot of weird anachronisms. At one point, someone holds up a boombox. Computers and answering machines are brought up. Sam Cooke is referenced, despite being less than 10 when this movie takes place.

3.) Prince, the actor: Prince's performance in Purple Rain was a decent enough first performance. His performance here is just awful. He deserved his Razzie many times over. Also deserving of his Razzie many times over is...

2.) Jerome Benton: Benton plays Tricky, Prince's sidenick. He's more annoying than Jar Jar Binks and Howard The Duck combined.

1.) Prince, the director: Prince said he was inspired Fellini's 8 1/2 when he made this film. Fellini died a couple years after this movie was made, and I'd like to think that his corpse could have made a better film than this.

It's good to be back. Grades: F for Howard The Duck and Rotten Asshole for Under The Cherry Moon

Next-up: The 9 worst things about The Oogieloves!!!

*Fun fact: I think I saw George Clinton at an airport one time. I'm not 100% sure it was him and this isn't really relevant, but when you're faced with a movie this awful, reminding yourselves of better things is recommended.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: May 13 2013 at 7:32pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

An pretencious, egomaniacal star vehicle!
Is that the right term? I mean, isn't that used for actors rather than characters?
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

The soundtrack for the film is filled with boring and unmemorable songs. The only exception is Kiss, which went on to be a Billboard Number 1 hit.
And a lot of people prefer (myself included) the Tom Jones version, so the joke's on him.
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Prince and Thomas have a half-assed romance in the film. Her father opposes it and we're supposed to infer that it's because he's racist and uncool. But, remember, he's playing a pimp. If your daughter wanted to marry a pimp, you'd act the same way.
Depends. Is he a "I'm gonna slap this bitch if she doesn't shut her mouth" pimp? Or just a "Play that '70s soul song when I'm walking" pimp?
LOL
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

There's a lot of weird anachronisms. At one point, someone holds up a boombox. Computers and answering machines are brought up. Sam Cooke is referenced, despite being less than 10 when this movie takes place.
That sounds like it was on purpose. Are you sure they weren't like the ones Wes Anderson or Jared Hess use?
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Prince said he was inspired Fellini's 8 1/2 when he made this film
Yes, and also by Abbott & Costello. What a perfect mix!
LOL


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: May 13 2013 at 8:31pm
1.) The film was tailored to star Prince, so it counts as a vehicle.

2.) The Tom Jones version actually made a list of worst Rock records, argueing that his baritone is wrong for a lustful song. Here's the link: http://www.rocklistmusic.co.uk/steveparker/slipped_discs.htm (it's number 29).

3.) It's somewhere in between those two kinds. Either way, you don't want your daughter seen with one.

4.) The anachronisms were probably on purpose, but they're handled so bad, that it's annoying.

5.) Fellini and Abbott And Costello seem like an odd combination. That's probably why the tone is off.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: jesse685
Date Posted: May 14 2013 at 4:46am
SchumacherH8ter: It's good to see your reviews again.

-------------
"If you can't make it good, make it 3D!" Peter Travers, Rolling Stone
F**k Yeah/WTF Were They Thinking Awards Results Live-Tweet @jesse685


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: May 14 2013 at 7:16am
Thanks jesse.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: May 14 2013 at 9:14am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

The film was tailored to star Prince, so it counts as a vehicle.

Sorry, I thought you were talking about HOWARD THE DUCK.
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

The Tom Jones version actually made a list of worst Rock records, argueing that his baritone is wrong for a lustful song. Here's the link: http://www.rocklistmusic.co.uk/steveparker/slipped_discs.htm (it's number 29).

That list blows! The lyrics to AMERICAN PIE and MOON SHADOW are supposed to sound ilogical. That's what poetry is about.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: June 02 2013 at 4:58pm
Well, I got my reviews on the Wiki User Wiki, if you guys wanna check out. A couple of my reviews are unfinished, so I'll finish them later.
http://wuw.clamburger.org/wiki/TVB_Goes_to_the_Movies


-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 04 2013 at 5:49pm
It's true that many great films were hated in their time. Just look at the most recent Sight & Sound poll: Vertigo: box-office bomb, Citizen Kane: box-office bomb, Tokyo Story: box-office bomb, The Rules Of The Game: box-office bomb, Sunrise: box-office bomb, 2001: A Space Odyssey: critical bomb, The Searchers: critical bomb, The Passion Of Joan Of Arc: box-office bomb, only Man With A Movie Camera and 8 1/2 didn't need vindicating. I say this because today's review subject was hated in its time and many people now consider it a misunderstood masterpiece. After watching Heaven's Gate, I must say that the critics from 1980 were 100% right. It's a disaster, too long by at least an hour, and features some truely awful acting. The only good things in this mess are Christopher Walken and Jeff Bridges. I would say that the cinematography's good, except that...

9.) Everything's too brown: Any enjoyment that can be gleaned from the cinematography is negated by the fact that almost everything in the film is an ugly shade of brown.

8.) The love triangle: The main thrust of the first couple hours of the film is a love triangle between James Averill (played by Kris Kristofferson), Ella Watson (played by Isabelle Huppert), and Nathan D. Champion (played by Walken). The love triangle is uneventful as none of the performers have any chemistry whatsoever.

7.) The Harvard scene: The first 30 minutes of the film are devoted to James and Billy Irvine (played by John Hurt) graduating from Harvard. And good God is it boring. It's a pointless and boring scene that doesn't need to exist, like a lot of the scenes in here.

6.) Kris Kristofferson: Kristofferson earned a very well-earned Razzie nomination for his truely rancid performance in here. The box-office disaster of this film pretty much killed his leading man career, but he seems to be proud of it for some reason.

5.) The length: The "restored" cut of this is nearly four hours long!! The cut that came out in 1981 (and got Razzed) was two and a half hours long. I actually prefer the '81 version because of its length.

4.) Isabelle Huppert: Huppert gives an awful performance as Ella Watson. One of the most baffling things about the film is that her character is supposed to be American. This is baffling because Huppert has an incredibly thick French accent and her dialogue is hard to understand most of the times. Apparantly, the executives wanted a different (presumably one who could pass for an American better) actress for the role. However, Cimino, misunderstood genius that he is, maturely told the executive to: "go f*ck yourself."

3.) Animal cruelty: Several animals were killed during the making of this film. Four horses were killed, with one being blown up, cows were disembowled out, and cock fights were held. Now, some of you are probably wondering why I'm criticizing this film for animal cruelty when one of my top 10 favorite movies (Apocalypse Now) featured an actual water buffalo getting slaughtered on camera. Well, the tribe that they shoot the movie with was going to sacrifice the buffalo anyway and Coppola (who, let's remember, was hopped up on cocaine) thought that it would make for an interesting scene to juxtaposition the slaughter with Willard killing Kurtz. The animals killed for Heaven's Gate probably would have lived if they weren't in the film.

2.) Michael Cimino and his misguided quest for "realness": Cimino won an incredibly well-deserved Worst Director Razzie for this. Cimino's main goal for the film was to be as real as possible and this film shows why that's not always a good thing. See, Cimino cared more about if a scene was realistic then if it was any good. Take, for example, the infamously awful roller-skate scene. Yes, the scene has historical precedence, but it's also a terrible scene. In another infamous scene, Champion writes down a letter before leaving. I should mention that he's in a burning cabin at the time!! This scene is accuarate to history, but it's seems so off, that it would have been better to not include it at all.

1.) Protection from editors: I've criticize a lot of examples of executive meddling gone wrong, but Heaven's Gate is one of the few films were the executives should have meddled! The only instance of the executive's advice being implemented was the length. See, it was originally supposed to be over 5 hours long!!! The lack of executive meddling is the reason why I think so many people have considered a misunderstood classic. It's the director's pure vision. If so, then why hasn't Under The Cherry Moon been subject to critical re-evaluation? That was Prince's pure vision, what's the difference? If the executives interfered, then this film would be shorter, have Americans without thick French accents, no dead animals, and no f*cking roller-skating!!

When I saw this a few months ago, I gave it a D-, after going over it, I relaize now that it deserves a different grade. Grade: F

Next-up: I don't have anything planned, but if any of you have any suggestions, I'd be open.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 04 2013 at 6:10pm
I haven't seen HEAVEN'S GATE, but if most people hated the movie at the time of its release and still hate it decades later, then it's not a misunderstood masterpiece.
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

The first 30 minutes of the film are devoted to James and Billy Irvine (played by John Hurt) graduating from Harvard. And good God is it boring. It's a pointless and boring scene that doesn't need to exist, like a lot of the scenes in here.
Is it like the wedding scene in THE DEER HUNTER?
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

I don't have anything planned, but if any of you have any suggestions, I'd be open.
How many Worst Picture nominees/winners haven't you reviewed yet?


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 04 2013 at 8:10pm
1.) To a lot of people, it's a misunderstood masterpiece. ENough people to get it ranked the 535th greatest film ever according to They Shoot Picture Don't They? http://www.theyshootpictures.com/

2.) It's similar to the wedding scene with one massive difference: the wedding scene in The Deer Hunter contrasts how happy they were compared to how miserable they are during the war. The Harvard scene is just pointless and crappy.

3.) There's a lot of Worst Picture nominees/winners that I haven't reviewed.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: June 08 2013 at 3:56pm
I remember when the old Z Channel showed the 4 1/2 hour/uncut version of Heaven's Gate -- I just sat in front of my TV, marveling in it's sheer inane badness!

-------------
GIVE KIRK CAMERON THE RAZZING HE DESERVES!!!!!!


Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Date Posted: June 08 2013 at 4:47pm
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I, too, remember sitting through the "Director's Cut" of HEAVEN'S GATE when it was shown on Z Channel. It was about 70 minutes longer, but had no more substance than the version Michael Cimino insisted UA had "butchered," which ran 2 hours and 29 minutes. That 149-minute version had been nominated for 5 RAZZIE® Awards, including Worst Picture (and had "won" as Worst Director for Cimino).  

I had heard (or maybe read) somewhere that the Harvard commencement speech given by John Hurt's character had originally set the tone and theme for the entire film, and that its being cut down had done irreparable harm to Cimino's "vision." In the Z Channel "uncut" version, this scene (like the movie itself) was longer...but had no more substance at 20 minutes than it had at 4 minutes in the theatrical version I had seen several years earlier. 

It was at that point that I realized Cimino's movie had a lot in common with what Gertrude Stein once said of Bakersfield: "There is no there there..." 

P.S. I highly recommend the fascinating book about the debacle that was the making of HEAVEN'S GATE, written by Stephen Bach (one of the studio executives who was fired for letting the film get "out of control"). It's entitled "Final Cut" and is available in various paperback versions from Amazon.com ( http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Final+Cut+Bach -




-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry


Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: June 08 2013 at 10:43pm
Was it 1982 (?) when Z Channel premiered the full version of Heaven's Gate? Am I right that before the movie started, Charles Champlin spoke about it for 20-30 minutes? Been so long ago. Brings back memories of how I loved Z Channel and the bittersweet memories of Jerry Harvey.

-------------
GIVE KIRK CAMERON THE RAZZING HE DESERVES!!!!!!


Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Date Posted: June 10 2013 at 1:43pm
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: WikiPedia (which is not always the most reliable source for such things) claims that the "Uncut HEAVEN'S GATE" debuted on Z Channel in 1982, and that the version they aired was actually the cut that had premiered (to disastrous response) in Manhattan in late 1980 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavens_Gate_%28film%29 -




-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 11 2013 at 10:28am
With the news that Andrew Dice Clay is going to be in Woody Allen's next movie, I've decided that my next review will be of his Razzie-winning star vehicle The Adventures Of Ford Fairlane.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: June 12 2013 at 8:24pm
Head Razz, I was living with Grandma Bacon in South Gate at the time. South Gate just installed cable TV and I bought the basic package for her and I added the Z Channel. It was 36 channels in the basic tier. Loved Z, very eclectic mix of movies and Z sent out a slick magazine each month. The only drawback--Grandma never let me watch any of those "Nite Owl Movies" at her house Cry

I can't remember exactly when I saw the "uncut" Heaven's Gate on Z, but it had to be in the mid 80s. 


-------------
GIVE KIRK CAMERON THE RAZZING HE DESERVES!!!!!!


Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: June 15 2013 at 9:41pm
Look what was just released on DVD and Blu-Ray by the Criterion Collection - http://www.amazon.com/Heavens-Gate-Criterion-Collection-Blu-ray/dp/B008Y5OWMK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1371357569&sr=8-1&keywords=heavens+gate+blu-ray - LINK ! Dead





-------------
GIVE KIRK CAMERON THE RAZZING HE DESERVES!!!!!!


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 15 2013 at 10:11pm
I'm usually a big fan of the Criterion Collection, but Heaven's Gate is easily the worst movie they offer. And remember, there are two Michael Bay titles in there, too!*

*Admittedly, one of those movies is The Rock, Michael Bay's only movie to have a positive RT rating and a good review from Peter Travers! 




-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: moviecritic1994
Date Posted: June 18 2013 at 8:37pm
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (2012)

Now a lot of people either love or hate this film. Like a lot of my friends who have seen the original Spider man films say that this one is a rip off of sorts. Or maybe people hate it because a lighthearted superhero now has a darker tone. Well I managed to see The Amazing Spiderman on DVD and I must say... I love this movie. I might love it even more than the original films with Tobey McGuire. Though I do see the flaws everyone talks about. So let us explore the wonder that is "The Amazing Spiderman".

I must start with the "flaw" everyone talks about. We have to explore Peter Parker's origin story again. Now I must admit it's rather tiring to see how Peter Parker became Spiderman again. Just watching the first 35 or 40 minutes of the film you can tell the screenwriters really struggled with it because they didn't want to copy the 2002 film. So I do commend the writers for trying their best to be original with the beginning of the film.

A big trend that is going on with superhero films now a lot of them now have darker tones and darker characters. Of course, we can thank Christopher Nolan for that. I think the darker tone works for Spiderman and Batman. It might not work for other hero's like Aqua-man or Superman but it definitely works for them. Another thing I like about this film is that we actually get a little more back story of what happened to Peter's parents. In the Tobey McGuire films, his parents are just not around. We don't know if they died or just left him behind. But in this film, they are hinting that his parents might be in danger or have already died because of some part of conspiracy at Oscorp. Andrew Garfield does an excellent job in the role of Peter Parker. This time around, Peter seemed like a character we can all relate to. While Tobey's version character seemed a little too over the top and a little too perfect.

I also liked the supporting Cast. Sally field was great as Aunt May and I liked Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy. While Gwen Stacy was sort of a throw away character in Spider man 3, Emma's Gwen was more developed and likeable. Another problem everyone had I think was Kurt Connors. A lot of people thought he was a boring villain and his motivations weren't that interesting. While the Lizard has never been my favorite villain, I think the screenwriters really gave him a good motivation. He thinks we as humans are weak and would be stronger if we were all reptiles. It makes sense to me at least.

As a whole, I really love the film. Yeah we have to sit through another origin story we've seen a thousand times in comics, TV shows and the original films. But again, that's not the whole movie. It has a great cast, great story, excellent writing, wonderful direction by Marc Webb and a well put together villain. I would totally recommend to anyone.  




-------------
If you care to find me, Look to the Western Sky :)


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 19 2013 at 8:04am
Good review! Would you be so kind to check out http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-amazing-spider-man.html -
Originally posted by moviecritic1994

In the Tobey McGuire films, his parents are just not around. We don't know if they died or just left him behind.
They say they died. But there's nothing behind that.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: moviecritic1994
Date Posted: June 19 2013 at 10:59am
VITS, your review was great! I agree with almost everything. My problem with the first three is that they seemed cheesy to me. Almost like I was reading a comic book instead of watching a movie. I guess that was the point, but movies and Comic books are two completely different mediums. They should be separate from each other, at least in some ways.

-------------
If you care to find me, Look to the Western Sky :)


Posted By: moviecritic1994
Date Posted: June 19 2013 at 12:36pm
THE INCREDIBLE BURT WONDERSTONE (2013)

The Incredible Burt Wonderstone is more like the "Okay" Burt Wonderstone. To start with, the Critical consensus on Rotten Tomatoes is pretty dead on. Yeah the film can be funny, but at other times it's rather predictable and you know what's going to happen about 40 minutes in. I had high hopes for this film, but I wasn't impressed. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it either.

Let's start with the story. The Concept for this film is actually solid and does hold a good message. Burt and his friend Anton are celebrity magicians that perform in Vegas. After 10 years of performing the same show, Burt has become rather full of himself and obsessed with Fame. But a new Magician shows up and starts to upstage both Burt and Anton. When he's close to losing everything, including his career and best friend, Burt must find the passion and wonder that made him want to be a real magician. The overall message is this film is rather simple but effective and real. Don't lose passion on the thing you love and want to be. So, I thought the story and message of the film was pretty good.

As for the characters... that's where the film loses me. The title character played by Steve Carell seemed a little too full of himself and vain. Like even when his character started to grow from his mistakes I still had issues with him because of how he was acting throughout half of the movie. I guess the issues I had with the character are the same issues I had with Sandra Bullock's character in "All About Steve".. I had no idea if I was supposed to root for Burt Wonderstone or not.

The supporting characters were overall okay. Steve Buscemi and Olivia Wilde were okay in their roles but nothing special. Jim Carrey was fantastic in his role as Steve Gray. His character is mainly making fun of modern Magicians of today. I saw a lot of Criss Angel in Steve Gray mostly. But the one liners and wild antics he does is so funny and enjoyable. Any time he was on screen I just was grinning and any time he opened his mouth to say something I started laughing. I was highly impressed with Jim Carrey and he made this film very enjoyable.

Now I won't give away the ending for you. However, I must say the last 25 minutes or so of this film are not really wonderful either. The "romance" (if you can even call that) between Burt and Jane (Wilde) seems to be really forced and not really believable. To me, the Screen Writer probably threw in the romance between the two characters at the last minute. Also, the ending in itself is way too predictable that it seems a little too easy. There are no real or big obstacles for our Protagonists. Well there is one, but it's forgotten surprisingly quickly. So to close this, I will say this film was "okay". But it's definitely flawed in really big ways. Should you see it? Sure, if you want to. But I'll just say this film is one I wouldn't watch again.  




-------------
If you care to find me, Look to the Western Sky :)


Posted By: moviecritic1994
Date Posted: June 20 2013 at 3:00pm
THE PURGE (2013)

This was one of those movies I was very nervous about. A lot of people both critics and audience members have said this movie was terrible and just god awful. I had to see this movie because it was so different from other horror movies that are being made today. What did I think? I might get a lot of hate for saying this but... this movie was fantastic, scary and really insightful. How did I come to this conclusion? Well let me explain.

To start with, this movie actually has a fresh premise. It's not a Remake or reimagining of another horror film. One night a year. all crime including murder is legal. Basically, it's survival of the fittest. Whoever is strongest mentally and physically will survive the night. Yeah the home invasion concept has been done a lot, but there are new barriers for our protagonists. Cops, Ambulance, Fire fighters and other emergency services are cut off while The Purge is going on. Everyone is on their own and have to survive on their own.

Now let's talk about the family aka our protagonists. The Sandins are a wealthy family who seem completely normal. Ethan Hawke and Lena Heady play the parents of their two children Zoey and Charlie. Every year during The Purge, they lock down the house with metal barriers around the doors and windows. But when a homeless man is running from a gang of mask wearers, Charlie disarms the home to let them inside their home. But it comes at a terrible price when the mask wearing gang comes to the home and demand their target. If the man is not returned in the next hour, the gang will kill all of the Sandins.

The acting is very superb in this film. Rhys Wakefield (polite leader) is absolutely terrifying whenever he grins or even speaks in that menacing voice. Ethan Hawke was good, not great but good. His character is very complex. He says he has no urge or desire to kill anyone even on Purge Night. But when push comes to shove, he will do anything to protect his family even torture and kill people. Lena Heady was surprisingly great in her role. Going into this movie, I thought maybe she would be a damsel in distress or something like that. But she does become a badass in time. I was even surprised how well Charlie and Zoey were portrayed.

Of course, this movie had flaws. I think the big flaw was the way the movie ended. Now I didn't hate the ending, but it could've been a lot better. To me, it felt like somewhat of a cop out. Though I did like the few surprises this film had, there wasn't much of a twist or turn in this movie. I must admit though, I was scared out of my mind. A lot of the negative reviews for this film say it isn't scary at all. YES IT WAS! I had no idea what was coming next or anything.

This film was unexpectedly scary and terrifying. The reason why it was so scary is because it could really happen. Not a lot of people like to admit it, but this premise can come true in real everyday life. I wouldn't put it pass our congressmen if they decided we need a Purge like night where we could do whatever we want. Another reason why I think a lot of people didn't like this movie was because there were some political undertones. I won't go too much into it, but there seem to be shots at the republican party. This gang looks like rich respectable looking people who just happen to be going after a Homeless person. Now this is coming from someone who doesn't delve too much into politics, but I really didn't see anything too offensive in this film.

All in all, this is a great film. Not a Masterpiece, but it was a well put together film. Great Acting, Great writing, realistic premise and truly scary to watch. I highly recommend it to real Horror fans and people looking for a fresh film with a fresh concept.  




-------------
If you care to find me, Look to the Western Sky :)


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 20 2013 at 4:39pm
I've decided to make next week a review week. There's no theme to this week, just reviewing crappy movies that I feel like reviewing. Here's the schedule:

Sunday: The Adventures Of Ford Farlane
Monday: Armageddon
Tuesday: Kangaroo Jack
Wednesday: Lady In The Water
Thursday: Last Action Hero
Friday: The Spirit
Saturday: Either Star Trek: Insurrection or Star Trek: Nemesis (I'm leaning more towards Insurrection because I hate that one more)

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 20 2013 at 7:11pm
Why not review both, like you did with HOWARD THE DUCK and UNDER THE CHERRY MOON? 

Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Either Star Trek: Insurrection or Star Trek: Nemesis (I'm leaning more towards Insurrection because I hate that one more)


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile



Print Page | Close Window