There are hundreds of thousands of good movies out there. And then there are these. Be it terrible acting, a stupid plot, cheesy dialogue, or any combination of other factors, these movies define fail. Sometimes failing so hard as to be entertaining! So discuss. What bad movies have you seen? Are there any that you love despite their flaws? Are there any you love BECAUSE of their flaws?
Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:48 am
I'll start with the patron saint of bad movies, the Tommy Wiseau masterpiece The Room. A perfect storm of cinematic failure, everything that could've gone wrong with this movie did. ...And what resulted was one of the most beautiful things ever put to film. This movie changed my life. I am not even joking.
I'll start with the patron saint of bad movies, the Tommy Wiseau masterpiece The Room. A perfect storm of cinematic failure, everything that could've gone wrong with this movie did. ...And what resulted was one of the most beautiful things ever put to film. This movie changed my life. I am not even joking.
It's all true. This has rightly been called the Citizen Kane of bad movies. It inspired countless parodies, several of which are actually good. It is simply... Sublime, in it's awfulness. We can always come back to this one, but there are others that I hope to see, soon. I hear similar things about Troll 2, and I saw a trailer for "Nude Nuns with Big Guns" that also looks highly promising.
Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:18 am
The Room is epically terrible. And I would have never watched it without your nudges, Matasoga. It scarred me for life. And any time I hear an accent that I can't recognize from now on, it's a Wiseau accent. -shudders and hides-
The Room is epically terrible. And I would have never watched it without your nudges, Matasoga. It scarred me for life. And any time I hear an accent that I can't recognize from now on, it's a Wiseau accent. -shudders and hides-
That man had more than an accent going on. I'm fairly sure that both his vocal affectations and bizarre facial asymmetry are the result of a stroke (and not a stroke of genius).
Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:50 am
Matasoga
Sinful Nana
The Room is epically terrible. And I would have never watched it without your nudges, Matasoga. It scarred me for life. And any time I hear an accent that I can't recognize from now on, it's a Wiseau accent. -shudders and hides-
That man had more than an accent going on. I'm fairly sure that both his vocal affectations and bizarre facial asymmetry are the result of a stroke (and not a stroke of genius).
I'm never going to get the image of him humping that girl's stomach out of my head. >< He almost, ALMOST ruined guys with long hair for me.
I think I'm just not a movie person. That's why I don't watch a lot of them, so I don't get subjected to terrible, awful eyeburners.
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:34 am
Jess, Alex, and I watched Troll 2, recently... It was everything that I hoped it would be. About the quality, what can be said other than "Oh my Gooooooooood!"?
Good lord Video Brinquedo. For those who aren't familiar with them, their entire body of work consists of badly ripping off Pixar, Dreamworks, and Disney. Here's a review of Ratatoing, in which they take a beloved Pixar film and piss all over it. PRECISELY!
And I posted this in the other movie thread, but it bears repeating here. I don't even know what the worst thing about this is. The graphics that don't even meet the standards of a decade ago? The blatant and shameless product placement? Or the fact that this garbage had a $65 million dollar budget?
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:12 am
Matasoga
Jess, Alex, and I watched Troll 2, recently... It was everything that I hoped it would be. About the quality, what can be said other than "Oh my Gooooooooood!"?
Oh god this got like a thousand times better after reading its Wiki page. No wonder this movie turned out as masterfully terrible as it did. Some highlights:
Quote:
Although produced under the title Goblins, United States distributors were skeptical about the film's ability to succeed as a standalone picture and renamed it Troll 2 in an attempt to market it as a sequel to the 1986 Empire Pictures film Troll.[2] The two films, however, have no connection, and no trolls are actually depicted in Troll 2.
Quote:
The script—originally titled Goblins[3]—began as a way for director Claudio Fragasso's wife, Rosella Drudi, to express her frustration with several of her friends becoming vegetarians. Drudi told the makers of the documentary Best Worst Movie that "Some of my friends had recently become vegetarians...and this pissed me off."
Quote:
The production crew was made up almost entirely of non-English-speaking Italians brought to America by Fragasso; the only fluent English speaker on set was costumer designer Laura Gemser, who had built a reputation in the 1970s and '80s for her roles in various notorious Italian grindhouse movies and erotic films. Fragasso and his crew largely relied on a broken pidgin English to communicate with the cast, who recalled not being able to understand much of what went on.[5]
Quote:
The cast had few experienced actors, and was primarily assembled from residents of nearby towns who responded to an open casting call. George Hardy was a dentist with no acting experience who showed up for fun, hoping to be cast as an extra, only to be given one of the film's largest speaking roles. Don Packard, who played the store owner, was actually a resident at a nearby mental hospital, and was cast for—and filmed—his role while on a day trip; after recovering and being released from the hospital, he recalled that he had smoked an enormous amount of m=marijuana prior to filming, and he had no idea what was happening around him, and that his disturbed "performance" in the film was not acting.[6]
Quote:
As neither Fragasso nor Drudi spoke fluent English, the shooting script was written in the same broken pidgin dialect in which they both spoke; the cast would later recall that the script was only given to them scene-by-scene, and that they had difficulty understanding their dialogue as written. Some of the cast members offered to correct their lines to sound more grammatically and syntactically correct, but said that Fragasso demanded they deliver their lines verbatim.[7] Despite the majority of the cast ascribing to the same story, Fragasso has vehemently denied their version of events; he angrily interrupted a panel discussion for the filming of a making-of documentary, calling them "dogs" and accusing them of lying about how much of the script the cast had access to.[8]
Quote:
Despite the poor reception, Fragasso maintained that the movie was a "masterpiece" and that it addresses important social issues. He has become hostile when confronted with the reality of the film's reception in America; during a videotaped Q&A session, he responded to a fan's question "Why aren't there any trolls in the movie?" with an angry "You understand nothing!"[11]
Never Ending Story 2 and 3 cant even compare to the first one talk2hand
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:00 pm
Shanderaa
Matasoga
Jess, Alex, and I watched Troll 2, recently... It was everything that I hoped it would be. About the quality, what can be said other than "Oh my Gooooooooood!"?
Oh god this got like a thousand times better after reading its Wiki page. No wonder this movie turned out as masterfully terrible as it did. Some highlights:
Quote:
Although produced under the title Goblins, United States distributors were skeptical about the film's ability to succeed as a standalone picture and renamed it Troll 2 in an attempt to market it as a sequel to the 1986 Empire Pictures film Troll.[2] The two films, however, have no connection, and no trolls are actually depicted in Troll 2.
Quote:
The script—originally titled Goblins[3]—began as a way for director Claudio Fragasso's wife, Rosella Drudi, to express her frustration with several of her friends becoming vegetarians. Drudi told the makers of the documentary Best Worst Movie that "Some of my friends had recently become vegetarians...and this pissed me off."
Quote:
The production crew was made up almost entirely of non-English-speaking Italians brought to America by Fragasso; the only fluent English speaker on set was costumer designer Laura Gemser, who had built a reputation in the 1970s and '80s for her roles in various notorious Italian grindhouse movies and erotic films. Fragasso and his crew largely relied on a broken pidgin English to communicate with the cast, who recalled not being able to understand much of what went on.[5]
Quote:
The cast had few experienced actors, and was primarily assembled from residents of nearby towns who responded to an open casting call. George Hardy was a dentist with no acting experience who showed up for fun, hoping to be cast as an extra, only to be given one of the film's largest speaking roles. Don Packard, who played the store owner, was actually a resident at a nearby mental hospital, and was cast for—and filmed—his role while on a day trip; after recovering and being released from the hospital, he recalled that he had smoked an enormous amount of m=marijuana prior to filming, and he had no idea what was happening around him, and that his disturbed "performance" in the film was not acting.[6]
Quote:
As neither Fragasso nor Drudi spoke fluent English, the shooting script was written in the same broken pidgin dialect in which they both spoke; the cast would later recall that the script was only given to them scene-by-scene, and that they had difficulty understanding their dialogue as written. Some of the cast members offered to correct their lines to sound more grammatically and syntactically correct, but said that Fragasso demanded they deliver their lines verbatim.[7] Despite the majority of the cast ascribing to the same story, Fragasso has vehemently denied their version of events; he angrily interrupted a panel discussion for the filming of a making-of documentary, calling them "dogs" and accusing them of lying about how much of the script the cast had access to.[8]
Quote:
Despite the poor reception, Fragasso maintained that the movie was a "masterpiece" and that it addresses important social issues. He has become hostile when confronted with the reality of the film's reception in America; during a videotaped Q&A session, he responded to a fan's question "Why aren't there any trolls in the movie?" with an angry "You understand nothing!"[11]
Remember me making mention of that documentary? I think that we should see that, too... As should everyone else that saw the movie.
Jess, Alex, and I watched Troll 2, recently... It was everything that I hoped it would be. About the quality, what can be said other than "Oh my Gooooooooood!"?
Oh god this got like a thousand times better after reading its Wiki page. No wonder this movie turned out as masterfully terrible as it did. Some highlights:
Quote:
Although produced under the title Goblins, United States distributors were skeptical about the film's ability to succeed as a standalone picture and renamed it Troll 2 in an attempt to market it as a sequel to the 1986 Empire Pictures film Troll.[2] The two films, however, have no connection, and no trolls are actually depicted in Troll 2.
Quote:
The script—originally titled Goblins[3]—began as a way for director Claudio Fragasso's wife, Rosella Drudi, to express her frustration with several of her friends becoming vegetarians. Drudi told the makers of the documentary Best Worst Movie that "Some of my friends had recently become vegetarians...and this pissed me off."
Quote:
The production crew was made up almost entirely of non-English-speaking Italians brought to America by Fragasso; the only fluent English speaker on set was costumer designer Laura Gemser, who had built a reputation in the 1970s and '80s for her roles in various notorious Italian grindhouse movies and erotic films. Fragasso and his crew largely relied on a broken pidgin English to communicate with the cast, who recalled not being able to understand much of what went on.[5]
Quote:
The cast had few experienced actors, and was primarily assembled from residents of nearby towns who responded to an open casting call. George Hardy was a dentist with no acting experience who showed up for fun, hoping to be cast as an extra, only to be given one of the film's largest speaking roles. Don Packard, who played the store owner, was actually a resident at a nearby mental hospital, and was cast for—and filmed—his role while on a day trip; after recovering and being released from the hospital, he recalled that he had smoked an enormous amount of m=marijuana prior to filming, and he had no idea what was happening around him, and that his disturbed "performance" in the film was not acting.[6]
Quote:
As neither Fragasso nor Drudi spoke fluent English, the shooting script was written in the same broken pidgin dialect in which they both spoke; the cast would later recall that the script was only given to them scene-by-scene, and that they had difficulty understanding their dialogue as written. Some of the cast members offered to correct their lines to sound more grammatically and syntactically correct, but said that Fragasso demanded they deliver their lines verbatim.[7] Despite the majority of the cast ascribing to the same story, Fragasso has vehemently denied their version of events; he angrily interrupted a panel discussion for the filming of a making-of documentary, calling them "dogs" and accusing them of lying about how much of the script the cast had access to.[8]
Quote:
Despite the poor reception, Fragasso maintained that the movie was a "masterpiece" and that it addresses important social issues. He has become hostile when confronted with the reality of the film's reception in America; during a videotaped Q&A session, he responded to a fan's question "Why aren't there any trolls in the movie?" with an angry "You understand nothing!"[11]
Remember me making mention of that documentary? I think that we should see that, too... As should everyone else that saw the movie.
If we can find it somewhere... don't think its on Netflix. gonk
Reply
