According to IMDB, Stomp the Yard is both the 24th worst movie of all time (as voted by IMDB users) and the number 1 movie at the box office.
What does this say about our culture? What message does this send to Hollywood? Who can blame the studios for putting out crap movies – apparently they sell!
Anyone see it and care to shed some light on this phenomenon?
(In fairness, I should note that the critics don’t have quite as abysmally bad a view of the movie – it’s got 25% on RottenTomatoes, which is bad, but nowhere near as bad as it could be.)
Well, I look at this way… there has to be a number one movie out at any given time; and when there are nothing but a bunch of shitty movies out, then a shitty movie will be number one. My wife and I have talked several times recently about how there are currently no good movies out to see. We almost went to see Stomp The Yard, because everything else looked worse (or we had seen it already). We finally came to our senses and watched a NetFlix video. I think a large number of people though, decide to go to a movie, and just pick one of whatever is showing.
But there aren’t just a bunch of shitty movies out! Look at the full top 10:
Stomp the Yard (2007)
Night at the Museum (2006)
Dreamgirls (2006)
The Hitcher (2007)
The Pursuit of Happyness (2006)
Freedom Writers (2007)
Laberinto del Fauno, El (2006)
Children of Men (2006)
The Queen (2006)
Arthur et les Minimoys (2006)
All of those are better rated than “Stomp the Yard.” Some of them are among the best movies of the year. So why is this apparently terrible movie outperforming them?
I think this gets to the divide which exists between Black America and the mainstream. It reminds me of when Tyler Perry’s movie (can’t remember the name) was number 1 at the box office and most of the newspapers hadn’t reviewed it yet. This is not to say that all “Black” movies are automatic gold (Soul Plane, anyone?), just that a good chunk of the audience has a different taste (I have aunts and uncles who loved Soul Plane. :shudder:).
Moreover, is IMDB really the best place to draw data from? Its’ a great website if you want to know who does the voice of Kairi from Kingdom Hearts*, but its’ members aren’t exactly Ebert and Roper. Have you seen its’ messageboards? Gamefaqs makes it look rational. Beyond all that, how many of the members actually saw the movie before voting? How many just saw the ads, said this looks dumb, and downvoted?
You have a point about Hollywood making crap and people licking it up, but its’ placement in such a weak argument doesn’t help the cause.
*Hayden Pantierre, better known as the cheerleader from Heroes.
Pan’s Labyrinth actually doesn’t ring a bell, but I haven’t been watching the movie news lately. And I was being facetious with my answers, of course. I’m looking forward to seeing The Pursuit of Happyness and Children of Men.
The rest, in all honestly, I couldn’t care less about. I’m sure The Queen has its merits, but I just don’t have any interest in stories from that time period.
> I’m sure The Queen has its merits, but I just don’t have any interest in stories
> from that time period.
Say what? You don’t have any interest in movies set in the past ten years?
Rodgers01 writes:
> What does this say about our culture?
Take a look at the range of the IMDb votes:
A little more than 20% of the votes are 10’s. A little less than 60% are 1’s. This is a really clear case where nearly everybody either loves or hates the film. Note that the ratings for females 19-28 are noticeably higher than other groups. This was a chick flick and a black culture flick. It’s (apparently) a fairly manipulative film. It has a lot to say about fraternities at historically black colleges. Apparently this was enough to interest a lot of viewers, even though it’s bad in so many other ways. That’s why it got so many people coming to it this past weekend.
I have no idea why you lend credence to the views of one set of completely anonymous individuals, i.e. the raters at IMDB over the views of another set of completely anonymous individuals, i.e. the movie-goers.
The movie is no more crap because IMDB says it is than it is good because people are going to see it.
Well, it’s not going to get voted the 24th worst movie ever made without a lot of votes. And, presumably, lots of people need to see it to vote on it. Sounds like simple math to me.
Seriously, though, how many of those movies are in general release, and how many are at arthouses? A lot of people wants to see a movie, so they go the octoplex and pick one. If everything there sucks, they pick the one that suckes the least, or is shortest.
I wonder is a lot of Americans find themselves in my predicament: there’s only a handful of movie theaters within a 65 mile radius. Sure, I’d love to see Children of Men, but it’s an hour there and back, so I’ll just wait for video. But what if one really, really wants to go out and see a movie? Do you settle for tripe like Stomp the Yard since there are so few choices? (I don’t, but then again, I’m not all that enthralled with the whole “movie theater experience.”)
I’m looking forward to seeing The Pursuit of Happyness and Children of Men.