|
The Tomato-meter on Rotten Tomatoes is a great tool to see the general consensus of a movie. It can, at a glance, tell you whether the film you want to see is worth your time or money or if it's so bad it will cause cancer. It's a wonderful film review tool, but is it always correct? We all have some movies that, despite how awful the reviews are and what most people believe, we still enjoy. So are there movies that the Tomato-meter rated unfairly? Was it a case of an unfair dog pile? Backlash from outside influences that effected reviewers? Or is it awful, but still with it's own charm? The idea of this thread comes from a podcast I've recently started listening to called Yeah It's That Bad, where the hosts watch films with bad Tomato-meter scores and discuss whether they deserved them or not. This thread has the same premise, every two weeks a film will be chosen, the first few I have already picked but if people in this thread have ideas for another film then we can do a vote for it, and a deadline will be given for when the film should be watched. After the deadline everyone will discuss the movie and decide whether the film deserved it's rating or not. Link to the podcast: http://www.yeahitsthatbad.com/ Most of the movies will be available on Netflix (streaming hopefully) so I won't pick anything so obscure that it would be nearly impossible to watch. The first film I've chosen has a 44% on the Tomato-meter and it has the wonderful claim to fame as being the single biggest bomb in box office history. I am, of course, talking about Cutthroat Island.  Cutthroat Island was released in 1995 with a budget of $98 million and finished out with only a measly $10 million. Such an incredible failure actually destroyed the studio of Carolco (though Showgirls also helped out in that department). It's even been thought that this film's massive failure is the reason for the dearth of pirate themed feature films unto 2003's Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl. Considering this is the very first film and I don't know how massive of a failure this thread will be the deadline for the film's reviews will be September 30th. I'm open to ideas for films for the thread, ideas on how to make this idea better and just comments on how this thread should operate. OldTennisCourt fucked around with this message at 15:51 on May 7, 2013 |
#
?
Sep 18, 2011 20:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:09 |
|
|
I actually watched it about a year ago or so because of the bad reviews. I can't remember it very well because it was honestly just a tremendously forgettable film. I've never seen so many explosions at completely inappropriate times. Everything is exploding all over the place non-stop during some of the action scenes and it makes no sense really. It's pirates, there aren't mortar shells everywhere and not everything all over the place is just a ticking timebomb. You wouldn't know watching this movie, however. To be fair I'm not a fan of pirate movies normally so I guess I was biased going in but I just found nothing in this film to redeem it. The action was sub par, the male lead felt like a lovely Cary Elwes and it was just all around boring. I'm all for giving films a second chance but gently caress me this one doesn't deserve it. Not this thread, I think this thread is a great idea, but I hope to God no one comes in and says Cutthroat is a good movie because I can't wrap my head around that. doctor 7 fucked around with this message at 08:27 on Sep 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2011 21:02
|
|
|
I'll write up the 1994 Street Fighter movie with Raul Julia and Jean-Claude Van Damme.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2011 21:37
|
|
|
Timby posted:I'll write up the 1994 Street Fighter movie with Raul Julia and Jean-Claude Van Damme. This made me look up the rating as well as the rating for Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li. I was very surprised to see that the latter out-rated the former 19%-13%. I'll leave the other review to you but Legend of Chun-Li is the worst movie I've seen in the last several years for sure, and possibly the worst movie I have ever seen. The action is stupid and poorly choreographed, the acting is below B-grade and it somehow lasted more than 90 minutes. The only entertainment I got in the entire movie was when I realized that Vega was being played by one of the Black Eyed Peas. In the name of this thread I might go rent Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever next weekend.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2011 21:50
|
|
|
The idea of the thread was to have the whole group review a single movie, but I actually think the idea of each member picking their own film may work better and give us more variety. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2011 22:06
|
|
|
I'm one of those gross people who enjoys bad movies regardless. However, Speed Racer is an amazing movie that has a 38% positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I'm going to write a review for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2011 22:09
|
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:The idea of the thread was to have the whole group review a single movie, but I actually think the idea of each member picking their own film may work better and give us more variety. Both seem interesting, the side discussion seems appropriate filler while people catch up on the OPs recommendation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2011 23:44
|
|
|
It's been a few years since I've seen Cutthroat Island, according to Netflix I gave it 4 stars, but that can't be right, I didn't think it was terrible, but I don't remember thinking it was great either. I'll try and revisit it for this thread, because now I want to know what I saw in it back then.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:I'm all for giving films a second chance but gently caress me this one doesn't deserve it. Not this thread, I think this thread is a great idea, but I hope to God no one comes in and says Cutthroat is a good movie because I can't wrap my head around that. I remember that I saw this in the theater, and at the time thought it was good. Of course I remember absolutely nothing that happened in it other than Geena Davis and Matthew Modine at one point dramatically had to do a high dive to escape one of the explosions. It is also a known fact that I had absolutely horrible taste in drat near everything when I was a Freshman.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 06:50
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:I'm one of those gross people who enjoys bad movies regardless. However, Speed Racer is an amazing movie that has a 38% positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I'm going to write a review for it. I will never understand why that movie polarizes people so. I watched it in a theater and had a boatload of goofy fun.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 10:12
|
|
|
I thought Speed Racer was a pretty good movie. It was beautiful to look at and listen too, what else is there to demand of it? Also, John Goodman's wrestling ring was the climax of the film for me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 12:34
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:I'm all for giving films a second chance but gently caress me this one doesn't deserve it. Not this thread, I think this thread is a great idea, but I hope to God no one comes in and says Cutthroat is a good movie because I can't wrap my head around that. I guess I'm going to be that one then. I absolutely adore Cutthroat Island. I have bought the DVD and have seen it many times. Explosions and swordfights and Geena Davis! Battle on the high seas and searching the treasure! What's not to like? I have never understood the hatred for this movie. It's an absolute thrill-ride. Here's the trailer. Seriously, watch it. Watch it now! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvzK7dz9qMI The course has been set, there is no turning back. Prepare your weapons and summon your courage! For tonight I will watch Cutthroat Island for the xxth time. Who's with me?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 13:37
|
|
|
Haggis McMutton posted:Here's the trailer. Seriously, watch it. Watch it now! Holy poo poo doctor 7 was not kidding those explosions were absurd. That pirate ship blew up like it had tons of C4 in it and those cannon balls must have been packed with plastic explosives for them to cause the massive explosions during that chase scene.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 14:03
|
|
|
I saw Ecks vs. Sever on TBS or FX late one night and it wasn't the worst cinematic crime ever committed. Like someone said about Cutthroat Island, it was just bland and forgettable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 14:14
|
|
|
We watched Cutthroat Island on crisp, shiny Blu-ray a few months ago (don't ask). My wife's a huge fan of Geena Davis, we both like older Pirate Movies, so why not? We lowered our expectations and gave it a try. I honestly found that it wasn't any worse or better than the recent Pirates of the Carribean franchise. Cheesy, corny, fun, ridiculous explosions and zany swashbuckling. Thanks to the added benefit that I don't *think* that they used much CGI at the time, if any at all, I rather liked it because I knew that everything was real (no green screen). There's definitely a charm to it. I also love it when great actors ham it up when they get to be a larger than life villains and Frank Langella didn't disappoint me (I mean, he's quite adept at chewing the scenery; he was SKELETOR for criminy's sake!). So final line: get some popcorn, a few beers sit down and get ready to laugh and cheer. It's a fun movie and I don't understand why it is so disliked. Well, I sort of do, but it is hard for me to NOT like a movie with high production values and so many practical effects.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 14:15
|
|
|
Rocket Ace posted:We watched Cutthroat Island on crisp, shiny Blu-ray a few months ago (don't ask). My wife's a huge fan of Geena Davis, we both like older Pirate Movies, so why not? We lowered our expectations and gave it a try. The thing that I find most fascinating about Cutthroat Island is how much of a gigantic bomb it was. Can we chalk that up to reviews? What happened to cause the film to fail in such a massive way? Was it a case of the budget being so big that the film could never recoup it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 14:19
|
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:The first film I've chosen has a 44% on the Tomato-meter and it has the wonderful claim to fame as being the single biggest bomb in box office history. I am, of course, talking about Cutthroat Island. Wasn't Pluto Nash a slightly bigger bomb? According to wikipedia it cost just over $100M and made just $7M at the box office.  Also it's at 6% on RT.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 14:32
|
|
|
colonel_korn posted:Wasn't Pluto Nash a slightly bigger bomb? According to wikipedia it cost just over $100M and made just $7M at the box office. I used Wikipedia to find the information, it looks like Pluto Nash lost more, but when you adjust for inflation Cutthroat Island is the biggest bomb of all time. Interestingly, Mars Needs Moms is number 5 on that list, I knew it failed but good god I didn't know it failed THAT badly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 14:39
|
|
|
This is a very worthy thread. I find that the best film critics have to, at some point in their life, 'rehabilitate' a film. Take Zabriskie Point (1970 dir: M Antonioni). Completely bollocked by critics when it was first released. Now it's considered to be an amazing movie (which I think it is) thanks to critics rehabilitating it. This thread should do the same. When I get the time, I plan to rehabilitate Showgirls. It's just badly misunderstood by a hopelessly conservative society. E: Don't take this to mean I got dibs on Showgirls. If someone else wants to do it, shoot. It's just always been an ambition of mine to rehabilitate a reviled movie. Starshark fucked around with this message at 14:59 on Sep 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 14:42
|
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:I used Wikipedia to find the information, it looks like Pluto Nash lost more, but when you adjust for inflation Cutthroat Island is the biggest bomb of all time. Oh, fair enough, I hadn't considered inflation. Looking at that list on wikipedia, am I the only person who doesn't remember at all that a $240M movie called "Sahara" apparently came out six years ago?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 14:52
|
|
|
colonel_korn posted:Oh, fair enough, I hadn't considered inflation. Sahara was a weird case apparantly in that it performed reasonably well, just with no hope in hell of making back what it cost.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 15:09
|
|
|
My question about Sahara is simple: how the gently caress do you spend $240 million on that movie? It's not like Avatar where you're pouring giant piles of cash into new technology so you can make a whole goddamn movie out of special effects; Sahara was just a retarded Indiana Jones ripoff. The amount of sheer waste in that "budget" must have been beyond all comprehension. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 16:04
|
|
|
I'd love to watch Leonard Part 6. My only knowledge of this movie is from a Family Guy reference, and this amazing review from Siskel and Ebert: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCOf91smkXU
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 16:04
|
|
|
ArtieTSMITW posted:I'd love to watch Leonard Part 6. My only knowledge of this movie is from a Family Guy reference, and this amazing review from Siskel and Ebert: Gene Siskel has some good comic timing in that review. Boy, you're upset! ... And you know, I AM TOO! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 16:12
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:My question about Sahara is simple: how the gently caress do you spend $240 million on that movie? It's not like Avatar where you're pouring giant piles of cash into new technology so you can make a whole goddamn movie out of special effects; Sahara was just a retarded Indiana Jones ripoff. According to Wikipedia, some of the money went towards bribes for the Moroccan government. I'd like to read an account of the making of that movie, though, I bet it'd be interesting. Like Heaven's Gate where money was spent on fully decking out an entire train even though only one car was used in shot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 16:27
|
|
|
I have to say that Cutthroat island looks like it might be a lot of fun. I always assumed it was somewhat successful because I know they made a SNES game out of it. It was an ok brawler, but had an infuriating minecart level near the beginning that I could never beat during the rental period.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 16:28
|
|
|
Starshark posted:According to Wikipedia, some of the money went towards bribes for the Moroccan government. I'd like to read an account of the making of that movie, though, I bet it'd be interesting. Like Heaven's Gate where money was spent on fully decking out an entire train even though only one car was used in shot. I don't want to continue this derail too much, but wikipedia links to a fairly lengthy LA Times article about it: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-movie15apr15,0,6005119.story quote:ON an old studio lot outside London, a production crew began work on the movie "Sahara" in November 2003 by staging the crash of a vintage airplane. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 16:46
|
|
|
Starshark posted:When I get the time, I plan to rehabilitate Showgirls. It's just badly misunderstood by a hopelessly conservative society. I don't think it has anything to do with conservatism, it's just not a very good movie. Even if you interpret it as a satire the story and acting still sucks. The only reason to see it is Gina Gershon's performance.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 17:39
|
|
|
If you haven't already seen it, My Year of Flops is an ongoing take on the same theme and is probably my favorite thing to come out of the AV Club.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 17:47
|
|
|
A personal favorite flop story is that during the filming of Waterworld a loving gigantic floating set was built with no bathrooms, so that whenever anyone had to take a leak, they had to get on boats, go to a nearby area with actual bathrooms, and then ride back. Also, Costner fired the director near the end and finished the film himself. By all accounts he was a gigantic douche on set, with Joss Whedon saying that the time he spent on set were "Seven weeks in hell"
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 18:12
|
|
|
Farbtoner posted:If you haven't already seen it, My Year of Flops is an ongoing take on the same theme and is probably my favorite thing to come out of the AV Club. I adore this column, and predict that we'll tread a lot of the same ground in this thread. Since Superhero arcana seems to stick in my head more solidly than almost anything, I'll take it upon myself to start my contributions to this project with Ang Lee's Hulk, another flick covered in "My Year of Flops." If I find the time and can do a truly decent write-up I might extend my scope to other bad superhero flicks, of which there are absolutely no shortage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 18:21
|
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:A personal favorite flop story is that during the filming of Waterworld a loving gigantic floating set was built with no bathrooms, so that whenever anyone had to take a leak, they had to get on boats, go to a nearby area with actual bathrooms, and then ride back. Pissing off the side wasn't allowed? Was the set in an actual natural body of water?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
BobKnob posted:Pissing off the side wasn't allowed? Was the set in an actual natural body of water? Here's a good summary of the issues that says it much better than I can. cracked.com posted:
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 20:18
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Since Superhero arcana seems to stick in my head more solidly than almost anything, I'll take it upon myself to start my contributions to this project with Ang Lee's Hulk, another flick covered in "My Year of Flops." Weird that they covered this, since it didn't flop financially or criticially.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
colonel_korn posted:
I spent six years trying to forget that, you bastard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 20:38
|
|
|
Every time I remember that the first time we meet our swashbuckling hero he's drinking his own piss I laugh a little bit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 20:38
|
|
|
colonel_korn posted:I don't want to continue this derail too much, but wikipedia links to a fairly lengthy LA Times article about it: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-movie15apr15,0,6005119.story Honestly, this is not a bad thing. It doesn't matter how hard it was to get a shot or how much it cost, if a scene ends up not working in the final cut you junk it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 20:43
|
|
|
I was kicking around the idea for a thread like this at the start of the year but never found time, I'll happily join in this one. I really want us to do Howard the Duck at some point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 20:50
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Honestly, this is not a bad thing. It doesn't matter how hard it was to get a shot or how much it cost, if a scene ends up not working in the final cut you junk it. A major part of directing is getting the most out of your budget and having some foresight. A $2 million scene is a major setpiece that costs a lot of time and money. Not including it because "in context it didn't work" means that you made a major mistake.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 21:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:09 |
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:A major part of directing is getting the most out of your budget and having some foresight. A $2 million scene is a major setpiece that costs a lot of time and money. Not including it because "in context it didn't work" means that you made a major mistake. Well, I've got a thread above where a $5 million dollar sequence got cut completely, so it makes sense to me that sometimes, something looks great on paper but plays terribly. It doesn't necessarily make you a bad producer/director, it's just that you can't forsee everything.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2011 21:02
|
|