Not when we go over to the ratings thread, or when you read the eight negative reviews by top critics on Rotten Tomatoes.
It's interesting that, since being out on DVD for awhile and on sale at nearly every store I visit in my area, there are still only 24 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and it's still rated rotten at 8% positive.
Besides, a "consensus" means everybody came to a general agreement. I don't think you have a general agreement when one of us (me) says without equivocation that, to borrow an idea from a different thread, yes, this was torture, of an unintentional cruel variety, being dressed as if to be charming, having good performances, but actually being like a tasty cherry with a worm growing around its pit.
My experience still is that this was one of the worst cinematic experiences I have ever had.
I finally watched this after a wait on Netflix, and I have to say that it's
probably one of the blandest(I checked the dictionary, and that is a
word) movies I've seen in a while.
There really isn't a plot, just a series of meandering events. The movie
could have started or stopped anywhere before, during, or after the
events shown on film and we really wouldn't care. The script's dialogue
reads like an outline of what the characters are going to say, and even
then there isn't a single authentically interesting character. As for the
acting, it's just okay, with nothing remarkable here, this isn't the best or
worst we've seen from these actors.
Overall, I can't really see this sweeping the Razzies next year; it's too
bland for that. A month from now, I'm not going to remember an iota of
what this movie is about or who's in it.
The F-this/that song was another pop culture parody, in which they didn't really change much. I dunno. I just can't possibly think of a worse and lazier way to make a buck than what Seltzerberg does. I'm still glad they attempted to make a good movie with WGU, even if they failed. At least they weren't just trying to milk you for money.
No, I've only seen the song at the end of Disaster Movie, which was all the characters talked about how they f-bombed all the other characters. I have watched Meet the Spartans and Epic Movie all the way through, though. The song at the end of Disaster Movie was actually funnier than anything I saw in the other two movies. None of them stuck in my craw and infected my thinking for a whole week with horrid plot entanglements and utter pointlessness in the name of making a point like What Goes Up did.
Well, I don't know if having seen it first had anything to do with it. For me, when I saw the first fifteen minutes with Campbell Babbitt going through his conundrum about fictionalizing the continuing life of Angela well after her death, I was thinking that this movie isn't all so bad. And then, from the moment his red Gremlin broke down outside of Concord (what Gremlin was even working by 1986?!) on, it was a constant back and forth between being lulled by the good acting and being yanked out of it by the awful script that kept breeding way too many storylines. By the end of the movie when the hero masturbator utters "Good!" at the sight of Babbitt and his everlasting Gremlin leaving town, I wanted to say "Good!" that the movie finally ended.
And then for the next week, the ridiculous plot twists and convoluted storytelling, not to mention the theme about illegal sex between adults and minors seeming to be okay (and what about the McMartin School fiasco which happened during this time?), not to mention an utter failure capturing the time period beyond mentioning the upcoming Challenger disaster, just kept churning inside my head. That's a bad feeling that not even Uwe Boll left in my craw. It was a different kind of low in bad movie watching for me, which is why I'm hard against it.
I've been wondering if it was because I saw it on the large screen, while you saw it on your home theatre?
It seems we agree the worst scene was Babbitt on the ladder outside of Lucy's window.
I actually felt the masturbator scene was appropriate. I mean, they were going for shock value, but I felt the point was he saved the kid's life doing something bad. The flawed hero theme.
The ladder stuff, yea, TOTALLY ridiculous. There was NOTHING funny about WGU, even when it wanted.
I think the issue we're arriving at right now is that you saw the movie first, and that was the reason you have nothing but bad to say about it. I think that if I had seen it first, the conversation would be the same with our roles reversed.
I guess that's the problem. For me, it was a complete mess, a "what-the-hell?" from the moment the reporter comes into town. However, as you mentioned with I Know Who Killed Me or The Happening, it lacks unintentionally funny scenes. I don't know if there's a one in the movie. I feel we're still looking for that kind of film among this year's releases.
The "pedophilia is cool" theme had to compete with the "peeping masturbators make good neighbors" theme, but I feel the "pedophilia is cool" theme won out, especially when Campbell puts the ladder on Lucy's balcony. That whole Romeo and Juliet thing got really creepy.
Ok, I just saw it. And yea, I have to agree to some extent, the sheer badness was a bit overhyped. It wasn't the filmmaking mess that I was expecting. But that's not to say that I don't agree about the majority of the rest. To me, it seemed like they were attempting to cram as many corny movie-style metaphors that they could. It was all fairly hack. They seemed to want to get these little tidbits of alleged "clever" out there, without making it tie into the plot.
But then again, sometimes it seems like it kinda did fit. I was expecting a 1/10, and I feel like it was a 3 or so. I wasn't really liking the whole "pedophilia is cool" theme, but they kind of got that "heroes are just normal, flawed people that become legends based on the way they're remembered" thing. Corny, maybe, but despite a LOT of deviations, they at least kept their core message in there.
One thing that really gets the movie off the hook for me though is that it at least tried. It failed, but it tried. I'm not trying to justify it, or defend it, but it wasn't the "I Know Who Killed Me" or "The Happening" that I was expecting (and secretly hoping for).
Well, based on the little dipitlow has said about why he feels it isn't really all that bad, he's basing it on the acting, particularly Hillary Duff's, but he doesn't say anything about the plot or how it all hangs together. I've said the acting in this movie is very good a number of times.
However, if you take a crappy script, and all the actors turn in excellent performances, don't you still have a crappy movie? And doesn't the excellent performances make the movie all the more crappier? That's my point, and that's why I'd like dipitlow to comment on what he felt about all these crazy, convoluted, contrived and often incomprehensible plotlines in this very bad movie, despite the good performances.
Originally posted by dEd Grimley
Oh the controversy of it all. I really hope it's at the video store tomorrow (I've had a busy week, or else I'd be all up ons).
And I did say the acting was good. But the plotline. . . . what line? There was no line. It was a plot fracture, into little tiny pieces, held together by a flimsy piece of celluloid. Maybe that's why they orignally were going to call this Safety Glass?
A second theatrical run for a movie that no one's heard of and has already been released for home viewing? Yea, it MIGHT get picked up by a cheap theater or two. I still plan on seeing this, but c'mon... This looks like one of those movies that are destined to obscurity long before it had even reached the theaters at all.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum