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.

How do!

With my exquisite erm…peculiar ok highly suspect fine, well known enjoyment of dodgy movies? I felt like doing a thread to explain what it is I get out of them.

I’m not talking about divisive blockbusters here. More often than not, a chunk of their offending is being merely Kinda Average.

No. I’m talking about stuff like my currently 56 volume collection of 70’s-90’s Slasher Flicks. My expanding collection of Dodgy Low Budget Horrors That Time Didn’t So Much Forget As Carefully Seal In Concrete And Dump In The North Sea. Even my genuine enjoyment of really quite awful exploitation flicks.

The sort that are sometimes referred to as “so bad they’re good”. Which is a misnomer. Because nothing can make those films good. But being Bad doesn’t mean something isn’t enjoyable.

A big part of it is my commitment to ever expanding my media literacy. I like to watch a film, and understand why I did or didn’t enjoy it. In doing so, I can usually find something to pique my interest or actively enjoy. I also find it fun to try to parse what failed.

Sometimes, it’s just a sheer, staggering, obvious Lack Of Talent. As in, the film has no redeeming features. It displays not even a glimmer of a hope of sense and effort.

Sometimes? It’s sheer budget constraints. There’s a lot to be said about working within your budget of course. But particularly for ropey horror nonsense, you get a sense of what they were genuinely trying to achieve, but just couldn’t afford to realise it.

Other times? You need to look at the censorship of the time. There, you can see the constraints being railed against. Not always successfully no. But sometimes you can see where brutal cuts have been made, and capitulation rather than compromise occurred.

Yet other times? It can just be fun to watch an incredibly shoddy flick and laugh unabashedly at the abject incompetence on display. Wooden acting. Crap script. A total and utter lack of effort from anyone involved.

Sometimes…just sometimes? You find a real gem. A film no doubt covered in poop, but with the glitter of something approaching gold under all the grime. Where you just kind of want to see an honest remake with a modest budget come in and polish up all the interesting ideas lurking just under the slop. Or you’ll find a key theme which, in other, more skilled hands, could be lifted and adapted into something quite special.

And it’s just a joy to me to explore the dank dark crevices of genre cinema. The camp is there to be enjoyed. The gore is there to tantalise alongside the Gratuitous Nudity. On occasion you’ll watch something and be certain a later and objectively Much Better Movie must surely have taken inspiration from the unsung potential.

Finally? For better or worse, it makes me a happy movie watcher. I’m incredibly hard to disappoint. There’s usually something, however meagre, that I’ll genuinely, unironically enjoy.

And when that doesn’t happen? (Section 31, Amazon’s War of the Worlds). I’m quite happy to be the horrid sludgy stuff at the bottom of Dakka’s Movie Quality Barometer. Because if I, who am quite happy scrabbling around the midden of cinema have absolutely nothing good to say about a movie? You dear reader can be reasonably confident It Really Is Cack.

I don’t think anyone questions why you love old schlock and gore movies. That is much more understandable than your love for The Rise of Skywalker.

Anyway, I was looking for a good opportunity to ask you if you have seen this movie. The trailer is so entertaining I worry there’s no way the movie could live up to it.

I’ve not, no!

I did have a look online but no joy. Only US Import, and I’m not buying a region free device just for that.

Rise of Skywalker I just genuinely enjoy! Dunno what to tell you beyond that.

But on that note? I received Words of Wisdom from FactFiend, a YouTube channel a few years back which I like to stick to. Whilst they don’t apply to Bob’s post there?

Every movie is someone’s favourite movie. Don’t make your criticism personal.

The unifying answer is passion. It's impossible not to get invested in something its creators were passionate about willing into reality in spite of the lack of budget or talent or knowledge or any of the other elements that lesser mortals would recognize as a "necessary". You can always feel something that someone put their heart into, even when the end result isn't good by conventual measures.

But on Rats/Werewolves? I have seen Frogs, where it’s not so much the Frogs but all the swampland creatures going a bit The Birds.

It’s a very silly film, but ideal for beer and pretzel watching.

Which oddly jogged my memory of the other reason I can and will sit through most movies, and find something positive to say?

It’s my upbringing. 4 terrestrial channels. VHS still kinda expensive. Rentals cheap, but rare enough you’d get your money’s worth by at least watching them. Just an era where you could either watch Crap, or watch Nothing. Or worse than nothing? Late night sports recaps *visibly shudders*, because nothing else was on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:
The unifying answer is passion. It's impossible not to get invested in something its creators were passionate about willing into reality in spite of the lack of budget or talent or knowledge or any of the other elements that lesser mortals would recognize as a "necessary". You can always feel something that someone put their heart into, even when the end result isn't good by conventual measures.

I broadly agree here. I always award Points For Trying. But sometimes there’s no effort, passion, or skill involved. And I can still find something to broadly enjoy - even if it’s a hypothetical award for “deepest dental impression in scenery by a villain”.

Though it’s not just me, is it? Deepest Dental Impression In Scenery By A Villain should be an actual award. Nic Cage disqualified so someone else has a shot.

I remember those days. I really got into reading.


Apologies for getting personal. I liked to think I was tweaking your preferences in a friendly way, but I can see how my posts come across much worse:

Not taken personally, no harm done

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:
The unifying answer is passion. It's impossible not to get invested in something its creators were passionate about willing into reality in spite of the lack of budget or talent or knowledge or any of the other elements that lesser mortals would recognize as a "necessary". You can always feel something that someone put their heart into, even when the end result isn't good by conventual measures.

I broadly agree here. I always award Points For Trying. But sometimes there’s no effort, passion, or skill involved. And I can still find something to broadly enjoy - even if it’s a hypothetical award for “deepest dental impression in scenery by a villain”.

Though it’s not just me, is it? Deepest Dental Impression In Scenery By A Villain should be an actual award. Nic Cage disqualified so someone else has a shot.

There's little that requires as much passion as downing sheetrock. Any idiot can nibble on the drywall, but there's few examples of giving it your all as clear as a villain eating the stage bare.

In the old days, part of the charm was hunting down and sourcing some of the weird, obscure, and niche schlock.

For a time, the Streaming Age made some of these films too available. This reduced my joy in hunting down and watching some of these types of films.

Now, I find I have less tolerance for schlock because the hunt is not the same as it used to be. Nersdsploitation has also made many of these films more main stream and less "punk" to have seen. Before, having seen some of these films meant you were part of something bigger, a community of schlock watchers with their own secret codes, jokes, and lingo. Now, not so much.

Despite this, everyone needs to go see The Apple. In these modern days of craziness, it explains so much about the world.

There’s also the issue of people intentionally trying to make that sort of movie.

Now. I’ve nothing at all against Spoofs, not even Bad Spoofs. There’s a skill to writing a Spoof. As an example? The comedian Les Dawson was an excellent pianist. But as part of his act? Well.




To play that badly, but still produce a recognisable tune takes incredible skill and understanding of music. And so it is with Spoofs. If you don’t understand what you’re trying to spoof, all you get is a loose collection of knob gags at best. But knob gags are inherently funny.

But when you seem to be making them because making an actually decent film is hard work? I’ll judge you harshly for it.

There needs to be a earnest effort made, however pathetic, for it to be even remotely worthy. Which for me, precludes “we meant it to be trash, because that’s funny, right” stuff like Sharknado and its ilk.

I was recently relieved to find out that direct-to-tv quality movies were back in force, I suppose thanks to streaming services throwing money at anything that looks like new content.

I also just now finished watching Meg 2, it's pretty goodbad.

 Easy E wrote:
In the old days, part of the charm was hunting down and sourcing some of the weird, obscure, and niche schlock.

For a time, the Streaming Age made some of these films too available. This reduced my joy in hunting down and watching some of these types of films.

Now, I find I have less tolerance for schlock because the hunt is not the same as it used to be. Nersdsploitation has also made many of these films more main stream and less "punk" to have seen. Before, having seen some of these films meant you were part of something bigger, a community of schlock watchers with their own secret codes, jokes, and lingo. Now, not so much.

Despite this, everyone needs to go see The Apple. In these modern days of craziness, it explains so much about the world.

I remember the days of stumbling on something so bizarre that other people would refuse to believe you were talking about a real movie. Movies like Zardoz and Knightriders and Freaked and Lady Terminator and Frogtown and The Killer Condom sound made up. There was a sort of triumph in finding something so ridiculous you had to share it.

The internet didn’t completely ruin it for me. In some ways it made it better, since now I can talk about movies like Hausu and Mad God that I could never show most of my friends and family with people who also enjoy weird ass movies.


Also, I 10000% second The Apple. It’s amazing.

Watch it on SPEEEEEEEEEED.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To defend the Sharknado movies, we found them really funny. It took a while to click, but I think the scene that got me was the really bad Indianapolis Monologue as given by a bikini bartender describing her grandparents inflatable raft capsizing.

The second and third movies were the best, with just the right amount of self aware ham. David Hasslehoff gave some Starship Troopers-level line readings to some of the most absurd sentences written by man or possibly beast.

Re; Sharknado

Adam West died too early!

As far as movies that are so bad they're good, I've got a soft spot for Street Fighter (the one with Jean-Claude Van Damme and Raul Julia) and the first Mortal Kombat (haven't seen the others, or the new-ish remake). Both of those movies are fun to watch when I'm feeling silly.

Also @MDG, there is one thing I'll say in defense of The Rise of Skywalker: in my opinion, it wasn't as bad as The Last Jedi. In fact, had TLJ not been as bad as it was, TROS would have been better, as then they wouldn't have been having to do as much damage control/correcting mistakes as they did.

An example of when bad media goes really wrong?

The Halo TV show. I went into it knowing nothing about Halo, other than it’s a now long running X-Box game series, largely well regarded. I could never get into it myself, as only ever played it at my friends - and very badly at that.

But they’d assured me the series had really strong lore and background.

The TV Show disavowed me of that notion, as it seemed turgid and singularly uninteresting.

On the flip side? Never read any Tolkien. Never gonna. And I enjoyed Rings of Power well enough, and sometimes wonder what all the fuss is about.

Both are examples of me coming to something with no real preconceived notions or expectations. Which has allowed me to Watch Them For What They Are, rather than what I hoped them to be.

I get both are bad adaptations. But Halo seems worse, as it’s made me think my mates are liars about the quality of the game stories.

I can assure you, the wider Halo universe outside the show is a lot better written than the show was. The show is doing its own thing and doesn't follow established canon other than the major factions (UNSC and Covenant) and characters (some of whom were changed in a big way). Ditto with Lord of the Rings, and you're doing yourself a disservice if you never read the books at least. They are amazing!

I’m curious why you never plan to read Tolkien. Would you be willing to explain?

While I’ve never played Halo, I’ve read one or two to the novels that were quite fun. I’m surprised they didn’t mine the books for story material.

I agree LotR should be read at least once but I disagree that it is "amazing". For some, sure, but for others they will recognize the writing style as plodding and wasteful. Bunch of boring songs with not one banger among them. Shame.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I’m curious why you never plan to read Tolkien. Would you be willing to explain?

While I’ve never played Halo, I’ve read one or two to the novels that were quite fun. I’m surprised they didn’t mine the books for story material.

Just not interested. I’ve enjoyed the LotR trilogy, didn’t take to the Hobbit at all, and find Rings of Power fine. Just…no interest in the source material.

 Ahtman wrote:
I agree LotR should be read at least once but I disagree that it is "amazing". For some, sure, but for others they will recognize the writing style as plodding and wasteful. Bunch of boring songs with not one banger among them. Shame.

Or you could read some real Sword and Sorcery by Robert E. Howard.

Nothing against Tolkien, but Howard is a lot more readable.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
I agree LotR should be read at least once but I disagree that it is "amazing". For some, sure, but for others they will recognize the writing style as plodding and wasteful. Bunch of boring songs with not one banger among them. Shame.

Or you could read some real Sword and Sorcery by Robert E. Howard.

Nothing against Tolkien, but Howard is a lot more readable.

It is because of all the Frank Frazzeta art, for some reason.

Mostly just happy with my Gotrek & Felix and Discworld fantasy wise.

Haven’t and won’t read the Harry Potter books, despite really enjoying the main movies. I was hardly the target audience when they came out as I was in my early 20’s. But they’re just comfort movies.

Can’t stand the Fantastic Beasts things. There’s only so much Eddie Redmayne gurning I can tolerate. Turns out? It’s about 0.3 seconds.

I create..... LIFE!


- Eddie in Jupiter Ascending IIRC