2001: year of the bad movie

S

suzanne

Guest
has anyone here seen the tv show "The Critic"? Where the animated Jon Lovitz reviews these sendups of Hollywood movies like King Arthur battles the ninjas?

I can't believe I've seen the @#!!!ing real life version of one of those movies. I don't remember the last time I've winced in embarassment as I did watching Moulin Rouge.

Now, before you say ANYTHING about "duh! we could have told you it was a steaming pile of dog turds" you must remember that I did NOT choose tonight's fare. For weeks and weeks, I had seen the cardboard marquees or snippets in newspapers and saying to myself, "dear god, this is something I have the good sense to avoid"

Yeah, non-social life Suzanne who sits in theaters alone says that. But let's ask bored, lonely, and timid Suzanne what she would like to do.

"sure...um, OK."

So, i then subjected myself to it. And since I hadn't really thought much about the movie, I really had no way of building up pre-conceived notions, but all the same, I was still thinking, "this is not what I expected."

I think I was stuck in musicals circa 1982 when Little Orphan Annie was out. Real life. Big mansions. Good songs, and enough of a plot line to take you to the next song. Instead, this is musical 2001: based heavily on the tourist trap that is Las Vegas/Broadway: make a production with a lame excuse to use flashy costume and things exploding and watch as people wearing backpacks shell out large bucks to see it.

The photography was disturbing, and not in a good way. The first 30 minutes play off like a music video. I can't tell you how painful it is to watch when something is being chopped together even quicker than a Jerry Bruckheimer movie. The whole aura of the supposed "moulin rouge" is supposed to be one of sexuality, but instead, you get these incredibly disturbing closeups of some very unattractive dancers (I swear to God for one of them, it looks like the put Mini-Me in a Can-Can outfit) that it looked more like a carnival of horrors.

OK, and this is the part where I'm reminded of The Critic the most: the music. They chopped in "Like a Virgin" and "Smells like Teen Spirit" and countless others in the idiotic music montages that ran through the entire film. At one point, yes it was funny, but the rest of the time, I was cringing at how bad it was, this storyline of Shakespeare in Love meets Pretty Woman weaving in and around it.

But even still, it's not as bad as Shrek. At least this movie, in the splendid glory of it's retardedness managed to grow on you on some level. Maybe it was Ewan McGregor. He's quite a nice looking boy. Maybe it's the fact that you are acknowledging how bad it is in the same way the film acknowledges how stupid it is....or the movie acknowledging how dumb you are as a member of the audience. I give up. A bad movie I don't want to see again, and something I easily forgot about 10 minutes after leaving (and am only bothering to remember because I'm irked that this is the best idea that the summer has yet to offer and I want movies. Real movies. I thought that if I saw yet another movie with some slightly dopey person of certain ethnic persuasions providing comic relief as they run across a mummy or a bug and their eyes bug out and they scream all girly like just like they did in Song of the South, that I was going to go nuts).

But I do want to see Planet of the Apes despite the fact that it's not the original. But I've got weeks to go.
 
I too was tricked by a plethora of reviews that praised it as a "must-see." I was just hoping Ewan would finally lightsaber Kidman and the rest of the horrible cast.

I haven't seen music used in a more inappropriate manner since
1. Heath Ledger's "Knight's Tale..or whatever"
2. ROn Jeremy's "World's Biggest Boobs3"
 
> But I do want to see Planet of the Apes despite the fact that
> it's not the original. But I've got weeks to go.

I plan on seeing it for three reasons (that I can think of at this moment):

1. I really like Tim Burton films
2. I really like the original "Planet of the Apes"
3. I love Tim Roth

But already I'm cringing at the trailers.
 
> I plan on seeing it for three reasons (that I can think of at
> this moment):

> 1. I really like Tim Burton films
> 2. I really like the original "Planet of the Apes"
> 3. I love Tim Roth

> But already I'm cringing at the trailers.

How, or rather, WHY are you cringing at the trailers? You don't think it looks incredible?
Or is it the storyline that has you cringing?




http://members.home.com/imacolata
 
> How, or rather, WHY are you cringing at the trailers? You don't
> think it looks incredible?
> Or is it the storyline that has you cringing?

It has "over-the-top Hollywood Blockbuster" written all over it. I guess I prefer my action films (and Tim Burton) to be a bit more subtle.

I'd hope that the storyline is - at least - in keeping with the original, somewhat.
 
> It has "over-the-top Hollywood Blockbuster" written
> all over it. I guess I prefer my action films (and Tim Burton)
> to be a bit more subtle.

> I'd hope that the storyline is - at least - in keeping with the
> original, somewhat.

When was Tim Burton ever subtle????

But I have to see it anyway. On the night that they showed previews for it in the X-Files, I had a dream where the Planet of the Apes had something to do with the birth of Scully's baby.

I kept thinking, "this movie has gone on for 3 hours....where are the apes?"

Now I have curiosity factor involved.

Tim Burton might be the best choice for that sort of movie. He seems to have an appreciation for camp that other people don't.
 
Oh, and Memento is something I sorta did want to see, but haven't lucked out so far.
 
> It has "over-the-top Hollywood Blockbuster" written
> all over it. I guess I prefer my action films (and Tim Burton)
> to be a bit more subtle.

Yeah, I see what you mean, however I think that this movie is going to be one of the few that actually live up to the hype.
I think that if you were to throw a different director and perhaps a different director of photography then it would fall short.
The DP, Phillipe Rousselot, has been the cinematographer on pretty "good looking" films like Henry and June, The Emerald Jungle and Interview with the Vampire. (gah, that film is horrid, but visually its pretty damn stunning)
I think with an action movie of this caliber you need to have more than subtle effects.

Also, after looking up the editor on the film...he's done some pretty damn good editing work: Top Gun, Armageddon, Gone in 60 seconds and Pearl Harbor. and he's worked with Tim Burton on every film he's directed since Batman Returns...I think that's an excellent combination. Given the ideals and the imagery that Burton is famous for, this editor won't compromise any of his work.

Have you seen the Timex commercials that Burton has done?
http://www.timex.com/tradingcards/spot_all.html

> I'd hope that the storyline is - at least - in keeping with the
> original, somewhat.

From what I understand, the basic ideas are the same, man from earth lands on planet of the apes.
according to the website its:
"a brutal primal place where apes are in charge and humans scavenge for subsistence, hunted and enslaved by the tyrannical primates. The sudden appearance of one man...serves as a challenge to the status quo and a catalyst for revolutionary social change"

Same idea I think...

The only thing I'm unhappy about is that I don't think Marky Mark is gonna say "YOU DAMN DIRTY APES YOU BLEW IT UP! DAMN YOU! DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!!!!!!!"
hehe




http://members.home.com/imacolata
 
Nomination for "Pearl Harbour" also

"Pearl Harbour". Dear lord... Some Yankee pilot decides to help out the RAF by single-handedly taking on the might of Goering's Luftwaffe, then disappears mysteriously (in an escape scene which is ludicrously implausible) only to pop up in time to shoot down the Emperor's finest over in Hawaii. Oh yes. The Japenese. A noble warrior race, of course. They wave at the kids so they'll get away from the fallen bombs! Hmm. Sounds about right for a nation who attempted to commit genocide against the Chinese, enslaved Korean women in rape camps and treated so many Allied prisoners so badly that they died of privation... But Disney can't offend the Japs, right? It's a big market out there. Don't want to harm sales of Mickey's novelty ears do we?

Tossers.

Oh yeah, and of course, the attack on Pearl Harbour OFFICIALLY started WW2. What had been happening over in Europe for the previous 2 years was just some handbags involving, erm, "smaller" nations.
 
Re: Nomination for "Pearl Harbour" also

> "Pearl Harbour". Dear lord... Some Yankee pilot
> decides to help out the RAF by single-handedly taking on the
> might of Goering's Luftwaffe, then disappears mysteriously (in
> an escape scene which is ludicrously implausible) only to pop up
> in time to shoot down the Emperor's finest over in Hawaii. Oh
> yes. The Japenese. A noble warrior race, of course. They wave at
> the kids so they'll get away from the fallen bombs! Hmm. Sounds
> about right for a nation who attempted to commit genocide
> against the Chinese, enslaved Korean women in rape camps and
> treated so many Allied prisoners so badly that they died of
> privation... But Disney can't offend the Japs, right? It's a big
> market out there. Don't want to harm sales of Mickey's novelty
> ears do we?

> Tossers.

Remember these two words:

Jerry Bruckheimer.

To be a downright snob, I had learned early enough along to stay away from any movie bearing that quality seal of approval.

The Rock with Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage. Terrible, terrible movie. I will stop there.

But here are but just a few of his quality movies:

Armegeddon
Coyote Ugly
Pearl Harbor
Gone in 60 seconds

It always amazes me when people come out of the theater and are amazed at how bad the movie was. This is after I try to warn them. It does no good because they look at me like I'm an idiot. The idea of the auteur has not really sank into the minds of non-film buffs, so I have to sit back and watch as they waste $8, and then they come out and complain.

Not that I'm lumping you in, but as with me going to see Blair Witch 2, there are sometimes you want to see the subject matter enough that you are willing to risk the almost certainess of defeat

> Oh yeah, and of course, the attack on Pearl Harbour OFFICIALLY
> started WW2. What had been happening over in Europe for the
> previous 2 years was just some handbags involving, erm,
> "smaller" nations.

As Michael Jackson sang, "We are the world".
 
> I too was tricked by a plethora of reviews that praised it as a
> "must-see."

Let me guess:

"This camp genius Baz Luhrmann is finally getting his due as he smartly sends up the musical genre with a love for the gaudiest of broadway spectacle while giving a knowing wink to his audience while proudly parading the trashiest of popular culture within the last 30 years in a clever and amusing way. No one is sacred enough to escape his biting wit."

yeah............z.

>I was just hoping Ewan would finally
> lightsaber Kidman and the rest of the horrible cast.

"whoa...she's dead. does this mean the movie is finally over?"

> I haven't seen music used in a more inappropriate manner since
> 1. Heath Ledger's "Knight's Tale..or whatever"

"It STINKS!"

> 2. ROn Jeremy's "World's Biggest Boobs3"
 
Re: Nomination for "Pearl Harbour" also

Oh Jesus ... I thought it belonged to the category "fiction"?
All this *really* happened? (*bewilderment in the eyes, transpiration in the armpits*)...

... the Japanese ah yes. Yes, why not insult them again with the Yanks as 100% good, and the Japs as 100% bad.
The inhabitants of Nagasaki and Hiroshima will be grateful.

We know the American film machinery isn't very subtle. Where's Vivien Leigh when you need her?
 
Re: Nomination for "Pearl Harbour" also

Well Suzanne, of course I haven't actually seen the film. I wouldn't want to waste my money. I form my opinions from reading reviews in newspapers, written by critics who haven't seen the film either.

...and they can't even spell "harbour" properly.

VP Hell
 
Re: Nomination for "Pearl Harbour" also

> Oh Jesus ... I thought it belonged to the category
> "fiction"?
> All this *really* happened? (*bewilderment in the eyes,
> transpiration in the armpits*)...

> ... the Japanese ah yes. Yes, why not insult them again with the
> Yanks as 100% good, and the Japs as 100% bad.
> The inhabitants of Nagasaki and Hiroshima will be grateful.

> We know the American film machinery isn't very subtle. Where's
> Vivien Leigh when you need her?

Insult the Japanese? I love revisionist history! Just how do the Japanese become the victims in WWII in your world?

As to the dead of Hiroshima and Nagaski, I'm sure they are no more dead than the people of Kobe and Osaka.

I hear the Nazis were really nice too.
 
Re: Nomination for "Pearl Harbour" also

> Insult the Japanese? I love revisionist history! Just how do the
> Japanese become the victims in WWII in your world?

by bombing innocent people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. What's revisionist about that, good lord??
Is any point that mentions victims on the "other" side revisionist? Whew...

> As to the dead of Hiroshima and Nagaski, I'm sure they are no
> more dead than the people of Kobe and Osaka.

hmm. What would you prefer if you live in San Francisco: a big earthquake, or a H-bomb?

> I hear the Nazis were really nice too.

no they weren't. But is every German soldier a bastard?
 
Re: Nomination for "Pearl Harbour" also

> Well Suzanne, of course I haven't actually seen the film. I
> wouldn't want to waste my money. I form my opinions from reading
> reviews in newspapers, written by critics who haven't seen the
> film either.

> ...and they can't even spell "harbour" properly.

> VP Hell

Yeah...fine *zing!* Then you should also rail on the producers of the movie as well as every 2nd grade teacher in america who taught the rest of us who spells it "harbor" as well.

But truthfully, why should you?

Do you know how many people at newspapers and news programs work for the parent company of somebody else?

I've seen it in action.
 
Helloooo?...

> Oh yeah, and of course, the attack on Pearl Harbour OFFICIALLY
> started WW2. What had been happening over in Europe for the
> previous 2 years was just some handbags involving, erm,
> "smaller" nations.

I wouldn't say it was official, however I do think it was pretty damned near 'official,' wouldn't you? And I wouldn't put it the way you have by making it seem like what was already going on in Europe WAS small potatoes UNTIL the US was finally a part of the fighting.
Umm, yeah...it wasn't officially a World War until ALL the nations were involved...that would have included the US. You know, that slightly influential place stuck in the northern hemisphere?...

Laura
 
Re: Nomination for "Pearl Harbour" also

> by bombing innocent people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. What's
> revisionist about that, good lord??

I seem to remember in my history lessons that our men, women and children were ALSO 'innocently' bombed and attacked. Let's all try to remember one thing, little kiddies: War is NOT an innocent action. It is one of the most selfish things to ever have to be involved in.

> no they weren't. But is every German soldier a bastard?

No, of course not...why must this start?

Laura
 
Re: Nomination for "Pearl Harbour" also

Go to a video store and rent "Tora Tora Tora" the classic factual movie of the 1970's on Pearl Harbour and compare. "Tora Tora Tora" good, "Pearl Harbour" bad.
 
Back
Top Bottom