Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > FORUMS on NON-NOMINATED 2008 RELEASES w/LYNX! > X-FILES: I WANNA BELIEVE
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: X-FILES: I WANNA BE LEAVING...
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

X-FILES: I WANNA BE LEAVING...

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
langby View Drop Down
Berry New Comer
Berry New Comer


Joined: August 03 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5
Post Options Post Options   Quote langby Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: X-FILES: I WANNA BE LEAVING...
    Posted: August 17 2008 at 6:38am
While I can see your point that the X-Files movie was "lame" and that's why people didn't show up, I can also see Gillian Anderson's point: A movie like "The Mummy 3" may be 10 times lamer than the X-Files movie, but it's filled with excessive CGI and pointless action scenes...and made 4 times as much money as X-Files 2...   
Posted By Me
Back to Top
cvcjr13 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1190
Post Options Post Options   Quote cvcjr13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2008 at 12:52pm

Yes, the Mummy franchise makes one cry for Mummy, yet the audience keeps coming, and I'd say it has as much to do with Brendan Fraser as it does with the CGI or action scenes (neither of which helped Hellboy II cross the $100 million mark, and that was a far superior movie to either Mummy 3 or X-Files 2.  If anyone should cry about the success of The Dark Knight, it's Hellboy II). 

But let's compare apples with apples.  Sex in the City was a popular cable TV series, and based on what I've heard, the movie is just okay.  It kicked up over $150 million without any CGI or action scenes that I've read about.  It's just an extended episode of Sex in the City

So, why can SitC kick X-F:IWtB's butt despite stiff competition from Iron Man and Indy 4

I say it's the difference between an okay movie of a popular series and a lame movie of a popular series.

Shall we now compare X-F to Get Smart?

 

Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 18 2008 at 12:59am

Ah, but the "Sex in the City" movie was full of SEX, yet another thing in American movies Anderson was complaining about. Plus, it had a very strong female fan following, including those who would dress up for the screenings like old "Rocky Horror Picture Show" movie-goers would.

"Mummy 3" did okay because it was family-friendly. It's a breezy, light-hearted movie that any kid can go see while his/her parents shut their brains off for 90 minutes. "Hellboy 2" I think didn't do well because 1. its story was cliched and 2. it's about a demon that looks like the devil who fights other demons, ie. not as family-friendly as "Mummy 3".

There seriously needs to be a way for a movie to be "family-friendly" without being insultingly stupid and simple.

Back to Top
SchumacherH8ter View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 06 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2935
Post Options Post Options   Quote SchumacherH8ter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 18 2008 at 4:14am
They did make a "family-friendly" without being stupid; it was "Wall-E".
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
Up-next: Transcendence
Back to Top
cvcjr13 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1190
Post Options Post Options   Quote cvcjr13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 18 2008 at 3:42pm

Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

They did make a "family-friendly" without being stupid; it was "Wall-E".

Truth.

 

Back to Top
MiguelAntilsu View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: August 30 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1500
Post Options Post Options   Quote MiguelAntilsu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 20 2008 at 7:05pm
This does meet the qualifications for Worst Sequel, but HSM3 and The Clone Wars might leave it far behind.
Back to Top
langby View Drop Down
Berry New Comer
Berry New Comer


Joined: August 03 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5
Post Options Post Options   Quote langby Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 20 2008 at 4:28am
With all of the horrible sequels and remakes that came out this year, I certainly hope THIS wouldn't get singled out. I'm not saying it's great, but there's nothing really to hate about it. It has real actors, "real" special effects (meaning, it isn't loaded with cartoonish CGI), and there isn't one explosion or gunshot, which is usually mandatory for a summer film. No wonder it flopped. I think it was mostly a disappointment for fans of the show who were expecting something different, due to a lot of the pre-release press, and unwarranted "secrecy" concerning the script. Some of the better reviews came from critics who admitted to never having watched the show. As a stand-alone movie, it works well. As a continuation of the X-Files show however, it's dissappointing. High School Musical 3, Mummy 3, Star Wars: Clone Wars, The Punisher (seriously, how did THIS get a sequal?), Saw V, all aim for the lowest common denominator, and hit the mark. Hell, even Indian Jones was pretty bad. Oh, well. It was a crappy summer.
Posted By Me
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down