Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:To be honest, I enjoyed it more than I expected.

The worst bit is the ending where it turns out that, (spoiler cut)

I’ve never really understood that complaint. It was painfully spelt out from the beginning that Cruise needed to let his son become his own man, and so when he let him go the only thing that could happen was for the boy to find his own way to Mum.

Not that I thought it was a particularly good movie…


And yeah, a version set in Victorian England would be very cool.

As for your 'Crap Horror Remake', I seriously suggest picking up the new 'remake' of Day of the Dead (If you can even find it). No, it is not a continuation of Zack Snyder's Dawn of the Dead (Which I rather enjoyed, despite some faults), even though Ving Rhames is still part of the cast (?). This is an entirely new animal, worthy of tearing your eyes out of your skull over.

Not only is it a bad remake, it's a terrible movie on it's own merits. And I mean terrible. And it's not one of those zombie movies that are terrible and campy on purpose, like Dead Alive (Where you get at least some enjoyment out of how cheesy it is). No. Simply awful.

To think of it in the first place, Day of the Dead wasn't that great to begin with (This is where Romero began his decline, into questioning wether or not Zombies would regain their human intelligence). But the remake will turn the original into a brilliant piece of art, I guarantee that much.

However, it may only be necessary to watch Day of the Dead before going to see the new Hellraiser. The new Friday the 13th really isn't too bad (Just really predictable, but you should be expecting that by now). A little juvenile (Tries really hard to appeal to a 'younger' age group), but there are much worse offenders there. Just be warned: Day of the Dead may cause ocular bleeding. Desired effect? Maybe. But don't say I didn't tell you so.

It's just such a disappointing ending. And sure, it's largely about letting his son become his own man. But doing what he does, and not becoming all dustificated? Thats stretches belief somewhat. Especially given the damn good lurking the Tripods get in when Tom Cruise is hiding in the basement.

Day Of The Dead Remake it is!

I rather enjoyed the original as well. The whole 'just how smart are they' bit was a very intriguing addition, and prevented it being 'same poop, different hidey hole'. Which would have been a shame, given the differences between the first two....

It was a rather terrible bait and switch, getting an actor from the remake of Dawn of the Dead (My favorite movie with 'running zombies') to headline the remake of Day of the Dead, when it does not have any similarities whatsoever, beyond being a remake of a movie from the same series. I know that's what they wanted though. With Ving Rhames secured, they could feel free to make the movie as terrible as they possibly could, and they would have some assurance that plenty of people would be at least renting it (even if it went straight-to-DVD...and that in itself should prove to you that it's a terrible movie).

In retrospect, I used to like the original Day of the Dead. Until I saw Land of the Dead. Then I blamed Day for setting up that horrible piece of trash. You can't scrape the images of zombies mowing lawns, collecting mail, and using assault rifles out of your mind. I don't think there is a worse offender for being a worse sequel (Even among the two Matrix sequels or the Star Wars Prequels) among a series of movies. Probably because Night of the Living Dead is an absolute masterpiece, untouched by nearly any movie.

What has been seen, cannot be unseen.

MDG: You actually have VHS tapes still? I threw mine out years ago, due to the death of the VCR and total lack of enthusiasm about buying another one, it being the 21st century and all.

Chrysaor686: Anybody who has sat through Biodome has 1000X more patience than me. I can barely sit through a trailer with Pauly Shore in it without wanting to scream and run away.

Also, I know the magical mantra that everybody needs to know. "It's just a movie, it's just a movie, it's just a movie." Most of the time that works.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:It's just such a disappointing ending. And sure, it's largely about letting his son become his own man. But doing what he does, and not becoming all dustificated? Thats stretches belief somewhat. Especially given the damn good lurking the Tripods get in when Tom Cruise is hiding in the basement.

Yeah fair point. It wasn't so much the son living, but knowing he was going to live, what he ran of into was silly.

Warpcrafter....VHS is great.

It's the Home Entertainment medium which you can beat an intruder to death with!

That and there is no way I'm getting all my Dr Who on DVD. Have you seen the prices? They are shockers!

Aeon Flux.....that is a soul destroyer, anything would be great after that!

On a related topic, I am sure I must have seen a number of films so unmemorable that they were never worth watching at all. However, having forgotten I watched them, there is a danger I might watch them again.

Watch 'Requiem for a Dream' before you watch any comedy even 'Biodome'.
I'm sure it will improve your mood dramatically!

Alex Kolodotschko wrote:Watch 'Requiem for a Dream' before you watch any comedy even 'Biodome'.
I'm sure it will improve your mood dramatically!

That's a little different. That's a good movie that I'd never want to see again. It's on
the list with Leaving Las Vegas.

Righty dokey!

Off to see Watchmen at the 5:00GMT today.

Time to find a suitable film to put this theory into practice. Now, where is that Punisher Film?

And remember folks, this theory is only rated to turn a mediore film into a good film. It cannot save a film from being truly crap.

how can you say a film is mediorce if you've never seen it?

G

It's the mixed reviews it's received.

Some love it, some slate it. So by deliberately lowering my expectations, the chances of me finding it agreeable go up, thus reducing the risk of wasting money and time. It's nigh on £10 ($15) at my local theatre, and a lot of fannying about just to get there. Thus I need to ensure maximum enjoyment is garnered from my investment.

Of course, this isn't a quantifiable theory. You cannot prove it's success. But I still thinks it worth giving it a whirl! :p

MDK. as per my post in the other Wathcmen thread it all depends on your expectaions.

If you think your going to see and action packed X-Men type flick, prepare to be disapointed.

If you think you are going to see a very character driven film with lots of dialog and a strong focus on the nature of the films 'heroes', as opposed to lots of pummenting of the baddies, I think you will be plesantly suprised.

If you want a truly rotten action film, look no further than "Ultraviolet". I've never seen it all the way through, only in chunks. I don't hate myself that much.

How about Apollo 13 1/3?

A friend of mine is notorious for liking horrible movies, and even he turned that one off 15 minutes into it...

On a similar note,
Meet the Spartans
Superhero Movie (never saw it, but the concept of spoofing so many movies has been zombified too much now).

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:My friend, I have sat through all one and half hours of 'Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things'.

Sadly that is bad enough it put me off Movies for a month, so it's a tad strong for this little trick.

You're exaggerating. CSPWDT is bad, but not that bad. It was "Sextette" that made me doubt the sanity of filmmakers everywhere.

Battlefield earth.

A better trick is to convince yourself the film will be total spank before you go and see it. Worked with Waterworld for me, I sat through it all.

Ultraviolet...would've been a great choice.

Good call, kged.

It's like they tried to turn Equilibrium into a terrible movie (Even if it was based off of source material).

Back from seeing Watchmen.

I think the theory works. Either that or it's a kick arse film!

Hee. Glad to hear you liked it mate.

G

What did you end up watching beforehand?

Just curious.

Stigmata. However, I did make £500 flogging off all my 2nd hand GW stuff to one person today, so it's kind of hard to dent that sort of mood.

Right, we shall treat this as a spoiled experiment. Which should be the next test subject?

I think any of the Rambo squeals tend to fit into the 'technically utter crap but still very watchable' action flicks. The upside being that even a Michael Bay movie seems intelligent and well made afterwards.

In fact either Bad Boys or Bad Boys 2 are good for lowering your standards before watching an action movie, or almost anything starting Jason Statham. I think I am the only person I know who owns a copy of Crank and doesn't regret it!

Highlander 2 is a winner in any contest.

But the explanation of the revised Laws of Immortality is a classic.

How about White Chicks?

I kind of enjoyed White Chicks. Doesn't take itself too seriously, and doesn't try to milk it's jokes the way some comedies do.

Not brilliant, just distinctly mediocre. And as I think I mentioned earlier, if we didn't have the three levels (suck, meh, cool) how would we know something was cool? You got to have suck to have cool, just as you have to have evil to have good. Without their opposites they become completely meaningless.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Highlander 2 is a winner in any contest.

But the explanation of the revised Laws of Immortality is a classic.

Don't know what your talking about. They never made a squeal to highlander. No they didn't. No, nope, nien, non. No sequel and certainly not a TV series! Can't hear you, la la la la la la la!