Cliches that you can't believe are still used

See you at the party, Richter!

Hmmm, that’d be great if they had a bad guy say the line, then chuckle it off and tell everything to the askee. And then he kills them. But the audience now knows the plotline. That’s far better then telling Mr. Bond your whole plan right before he kills you.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned from movies and TV, it’s this: Let’s say you are a guy and you’re in a hot sexual relationship with a total babe. The two of you conspire to do some act of evil to the good guys. You’ve outlived your usefulness. DO NOT turn your back on your lover. She has a gun and she intends to use it. On you. Now.

And that is the only scene in any movie where a gun is not cocked. In every other scene, a person will point a gun at another. The other person will not take this seriously. Then the gun wielder will cock the gun, as if to say “And I mean it.” The other person will then back down. No gun ever handled in this way has ever actually been fired.

I *really * liked it when in School of Rock, the band of scrappy, plucky kids *didn’t * win the “Battle of the Bands” contest at the end of the movie.

When I saw this movie for the first time, I was getting all ready to roll my eyes when this overworked Hollywood cliche was going to rear its predicable head … and it didn’t!

Hooray!

I can sympathize. For some reason, during the first season, there was a dead zone which was simultariously fairly boring and had two massive cliches.

The first was the exploding car which was bad enough(even worse the daughter survived). The second was that Teri got amensia and was wandering around LA for a couple hours trying to figure out who she was

Fortunatly, It got much better after that.

Same with Shrek. When Shrek and Fiona kissed at the end, and she started that sparkly-floaty thing, I was sure she was going to change back to the pretty princess version. I was relieved she took her “true love’s form” and both she and Shrek stayed ogres.

Everyone knows that a blow to the head causes amnesia and another blow cures it.

Am I the only one who loves the slightly-nerdy looking girls? :o I mean, I think they look so much better before the stupid “makeover.”
Anyway, the all-time biggie: villains killing their henchmen. What kind of an idiot does this? Are you trying to ensure you never get any decent help?

Example

[spoiler]Mortal Kombat Annihilation, definitely a horrible, horrible movie, unlike the enjoyable campiness of the first. The super-powerful villain looks at his mighty generals and asks one if he killed his targets.

Guy says: yes, killed 'em dead and we’re on the trail of two more." (Keep in mind that this ordinary-looking ninja dude’s troop has apparently gotten more kills than the entire staff of super-powered death warriors serving the villain.)

Villain: Did you make them beg and suffer first?

Guy: Uhhh…

Villain: Die! (Kills guy, then makes his moronic undead girlfriend with a screechy voice his new general :rolleyes: )

Annie Xmas Posting#17
That’s the example I was going to use. (Mousey, priggish, demure female takes off glasses, lets down hair, etc)
Okay, when it comes to skewering cliches, the Zucker Borthers are quite good.

In the 1982 TV show “Police Squad”, Lt. Frank Drebin pretends to be the manager of a fighter who wants a chance to fight the champ.

Frank Drebin: My fighter says he can beat the living daylights out of you.
Champ: Wow, he must be pretty good !!

Cop investigating a murder brings a bag of evidence into the lab. A harried-looking lab tech takes the bag.

Cop says, “I need to know what that is.”

Lab tech: “I can try to analyze it and have the results by next week. We are buried under this backlog.”

Cop: “No, I need this now. Someone’s life is at stake.”

Lab tech hesitates.

Cop: “Come on. It’s for me. I’d consider it a favor.”

Lab tech (reluctantly): “I’ll see what I can do…”

Actually, coming in 2nd is an overused cliche in its own right.

“Turn it off.” Whenever a villain watches a bit on the news concerning his latest hijinks, he will always instruct one of his henchmen to turn the TV off in mid broadcast, but just after we’ve gotten enough information to move the story along.

“Did I say eight weeks? I meant eight seconds.”

Tech: “It’s a container holding material that may prove or disprove a stated hypothesis, but that’s not important right now”

Thereby giving the message that “if you are ugly the only other person who will love you is another ugly person.” OR “Stick with your own kind.”

Both FUCKED up messages. I hated that movie.

Now if she had changed back to the pretty pretty princess and had still loved Shrek then that would have been good
OR
Even better… if Shrek had turned into a handsome prince and Fiona had stayed an ogre and they still ended up together. NOW that would have been good.

It was an okay movie right up until the nature of Fiona’s curse was revealed, then dropped dead as soon as she used the phrase “love’s true form”. At that moment, the ending was telegraphed beyond the wildest dreams of Morse.

Man tries to do something with brute force.
Woman uses her intellect, finds the painfully obvious way of doing it (i.e. a door handle).

Main character discovering they have split personality and that they are also a secondary character (usually the killer). This is best accompanied by a revelation scene with people saying stuff off-screen, while we are alternately shown the main characters shocked expression and clips of the main character doing things we previously thought the other character had done.

Trailers that state the movie is “Based On A True Story!!”

I really doubt that Emily Rose (if such a character did indeed exist at all) actually was possessed and saw horrific demonic faces on random pedestrians as the trailer suggests. In all likelihood, the real ‘Emily Rose’ had schizophrenia.

Although I’ll probably still see the flick this weekend, mind you. (I’m a sucker for horror flicks.)

The hero cops’ partner reveals that he and his SO are about to get engaged/married/have their first child. Partner will almost ceratinly be killed off by the badguy within 30 minutes of making this announcement but not after several other references to said event, just to make things more ‘tragic’.

In the Line of Fire has a particularly blantent example of this. It as though the script writers Plot-O-Matic machine has only one setting for “2nd banana characterization & winning audience sympathy”

What about the horror flick cliche: When you’re in the spooky house, and you’ve been told that something bad is going to happen to everyone, why, why, why, does this signal everyone must split up to look seperately? This makes less sense to me than the guard checking on the prisoner. At least the guard has an assumed responsibility to keep said prisoner alive - why else bother to keep a prisoner, instead of choosing the simpler problem of disposing of a dead body?