Superman III and IV. They should have stopped with II, which was a rare sequel: better than the original.
Karate Kid III and IV. KK II was marginally okay.
Every single Police Academy movie. I kept hoping, but…
The only movie I ever walked out of (in a theater – I stop a bunch of movies at home before the end) was Matrix II (I think – the one with those albino motorcycle riders).
I must have been cursed, because after twenty minutes, I walked home without my wife and slammed the back door to our apartment so hard the glass pane broke and cut my face pretty good.
That was a bad movie, I tell you what.
While I wholeheartedly agree with your comment about “who in their right mind would think that this movie needed to be remade yet again?” I figured that the genre was done in by “Men in Tights.” But I have to say … I LIKED the Crowe Robin Hood. The fight scenes were really good. I liked tough-ass bitch Maid Marian. I liked the prince as an arrogant ninny who tears up the proto- Magna Carta. And the Normandy landing craft … who knew they were INVENTED by the Normans? Still, at the end of the day, it was just another retread of a very well known tale.
Re: Hancock. What, when? I don’t remember that.
The Dark Knight did have that multiple endings problem, I agree. It worked for me nonetheless.
I liked that movie too. I just with they would have called it Jerome Bartholomew, or Bob Kiwolski, or whatever. They didn’t really need to drag Robin Hood into the argument.
Owwwh! </Homer Simpson Wail of Despair>
Guess which movie I was told yesterday we were going to see tomorrow?
:mad:
Slooooooow. Nothing interesting happens until the very end when all the threads finally come together. Until then it was pretentious glacier-paced emptiness. The performances were great, but the film as a whole was bollocks.
I hated it too. I hated everyone in it within the first 15 minutes or so. The story struck me as silly. Also, I couldn’t see why we had to view the word C*NT in huge letters twice. It wasn’t offensive–just gratuitous.
Big Lebowski. Essentially everyone I know raves about it and threatened to terminate friendship unless I watched it.
It’s not crap, but I can’t figure out the love for it.
It’s worthless crap.
It it wasnt for Jeff Bridges’ portrayal of an aging pothead, the movie would have absolutely nothing going for it. As it is, it’s … not much.
I don’t know I just have to disagree here. The second the movie started I was engaged. The soundtrack mixing with the sounds made by the actors in order to move the scene along were amazing. The costumes were stunning and so was the cinematography. Some of those shots were breath taking and technologically impressive. I must watch that movie again.
I got two ‘kids’ movies, though I adore the originals and will watch them at the drop of a hat…Sequel to ‘Babe’, an abomination called ‘Babe : Pig In the City’. What it sounds like, a sequel with zero warmth, charm, or beauty. The 8 year old I took to see it in the theater told me half an hour in, “I don’t like this one bit”, and we walked out of the mostly empty theater. … The second? Sequel to “Homeward Bound, the Incredible Journey” called “Homeward Bound, Lost in San Francisco”. Fuck! It’s one thing to watch a story of pets bounding through the natural scenery, but to see them wandering around the city streets? Abominable, just appalling.
I ran across some film with Val Kilmer the other day, wherein he’s trying to escape from killers in a mistaken identity plot. First off, Kilmer is easily 40 pounds overweight in the film, which wouldn’t be a deal-breaker, but he’s shown performing athletic moves that not only wouldn’t be possible for someone of his girth and shape, but that are clearly being done by a stunt double. One scene that stands out to me is when he is sitting in someone’s office, discussing some aspect of his predicament. He speaks a bit of dialog, with the camera angle behind him, then the camera shows his face mouthing the words, but with no sound accompanyment. Apparently even the editors couldn’t bring themselves to care enough about this turkey to waste their time with continuity.
The 2009, Robert Downey version of Sherlock Holmes. A liberal re-imagining of the Holmes character.
Very liberal.
OK, it was a total slut…
I really liked the movie, except for the elements of the crime/mystery they were solving. I especially liked the relationship between Holmes and Watson. which I thought was much more equal and based on mutual respect than what’s usually portrayed. I reflexively compared this to the Basil Rathbone/Nigel Bruce movies, where Watson is shown as a doddering fool who I wouldn’t let treat a hangnail.
Hey, Babe: Pig in the City was BETTER than the first one! Seriously.
I agree 100%. The new film was rather true to the books, but it was nothing like the Rathbone movies at all, which is why many didn’t like it.
He was rather good about the one where he was a IRA agent whose life was being dictated by a author. But of course, he wasn’t doing his over-done man-child act.
I thought it played like “Jerry Bruckheimer does Sherlock Holmes”.
Show me a pugilism scene anything like the opening sequence of the movie in any of the books, however, and I will concede…