You’ve GOT to be kidding...PLEASE!

Originally posted by Michaels Okay, what you're saying is that H-Wood is making this Hilary Duff version of "Bonnie and Clyde" so that we will better appreciate the Faye/Warrn version? You might be onto something there, because that makes no sense whatsoever, so it MUST be Hollywood's logic!

Not necessarily being made strictly to make the original version look better. More like, they make crap like that, so other movies look better. Let's take for example Warner Brothers. If I recall correctly, they distributed The Dark Knight, and Gran Torino, two of my favorite films from last year, but they were also distributors for Speed Racer, and Star Wars: The Clone Wars, which were two of the worst films I saw last year. I appreciate the former more, because I saw the latter. If we didn't have the crappy movies to compare them to, the good movies wouldn't seem nearly as good. This is not to say that they wouldn't still be good by their own merit, but that they seem better by comparison. Similar to how foods you like, taste so much better after eating foods you dislike....

It makes a sort of roundabout sense. And wouldn't it make sense for the studios to occassionally put out one of these stinkers intentionally?  To them, what is a multi-million dollar investment in crap, if it will increase the viewership of their other movies. Starve the public, and then even the most mediocre film will look like an Oscar-contender.

But you're probably right... in the end it probably makes no sense...

Well, Hollywood has some justification of their belief. I mean, most sane people who saw recent crap-fest "Street Fighter: The legend of the overly long title, that overly glorifies the main character, even though there is very little that is actually legendary about it," would agree that it was awful, if not approaching god-awful. In some cases people actually recognize it as a new brand of psychological torture. However, there are people out there that actually ENJOY this wholesale slaughter of cinema.

I take as an example a character that goes by the name of "Fluxboy" on the Rotten Tomatoes site. This individual has been leaving some fairly nasty, and borderline threatening comments on reviews that color the movie in a negative light. And has told the reviewer (in the two comments I have looked at-one of which has since been deleted, and reposted) to kill themselves...

This kind of violent fanboy-ism gives Hollywood Carte Blanche to do just about any horrible crime against the senses that they can conceive. A film like "The Producers" actually is kinda relavent to the topic. In their quest to make a gigantic flop, by purposefully choosing a completely and utterly offensive script, they actually manage to make a major hit. Sure that is do in no small part to the comically bad performance of the man they cast as Hitler, but still kinda relevant to the discussion.

Actually I suppose it is VERY relevent, since the Producers has been remade at least twice that I know of... From the Original to Broadway, and then from Broadway to the Big Screen again.... That kinda makes it a king among remakes, only because at least one of those remakes was very well received.

dEd, your last post is the best statement to date of why I'm personally very pleased that the Razzie membership voted The Love Guru as Worst Movie over the likes of Disaster Movie.

The late evolutionary biologist Dr. Stephen Jay Gould once did a fascinating lecture differentiating the difference between intentional fraud and bad research as the result of unintentional bias in science. I mention that only because I think there is a similar difference between intentionally bad movies and movies that turn out bad out of incompetance or whatever. Ed Wood Jr. didn't set out to make bad movies. The guy really thought he had talent, which is why his movies are such a hoot to watch. I hope that in the future, we have the wisdom as a group to continue to differentiate between deliberate trash and well intentioned trash. The latter is much more fun and interesting.

I understand this logic of we need bad movies to better enjoy good movies, but do we really need the BAAAAAAAD movies; the cheap, rushed, unwatchable, should be straight to DVD only, bottom of the barrell type movies? It boggles the mind that this stuff gets greenlighted while more talented artists are laughed at and have the door slammed in their faces.

Maybe I wasn't clear about what I was saying. See, I think the Batman and Robins and Disaster Movies have NO merit, while something like... well, I guess I don't know which way to take Love Guru... It had a semi-original plot, but it wasn't really not lazy, either. I still think DM was worse than a lot of the crap we had in my high school video classes. That movie really, really, really made me mad, in case you all haven't picked up on that yet.

Kicking yourself in the head hurts. I've almost broken my nose with my own knee before.

Well, it can't be any worse than
Bonnie & Clyde vs.
Dracula

Originally posted by dEd Grimley Bonnie and Clyde vs. Dracula is an awesome idea. Except it'd be better if there were ninjas for some reason.

OK... How About Bonnie & Clyde vs Dracula and Ninjas: 3D!