A conversation started about wretchedly bad films in the Fallout 3 thread, and I thought I'd comment here as it is closed.

 

I agree on Waterworld. It was so bad it actually ruined The Postman's chances of success, which is a film I thought was pretty good. He spent a ton of money on an epic, and it was just super meh.

 

I don't really get the 300 hate though, I thought it was a very fun stylized action movie. The over the top visuals and buckets of blood made it feel like a video game, and I thought it succeeded at what it wanted to be.

 

Transformers 1 = Good.

 

Transformers 2 = Bad.

 

But seriously, like GI Joe, any movie based on a toy line is aiming pretty low in terms of artistic merit, and so I never go in expecting an epic, so I wouldn't throw the wretchedly bad sticker on them.

 

The problem with GI Joe and Transformers is that while there are decades of great stories in comics and such, the people making the movies just see them as a toy line and pay no attention to the stories behind them.

Why would you expect anything from movies that are spinoffs of toys ?

Maybe my epectations for 300 were too high? I don't know; they were ground-scrapingly low to begin with.

 

I don't see much if any difference between Waterworld and 300.

 

About $100 million differences when it comes to budget. 300 was $70 mil, Waterworld was $175 mil. 300 also almost doubled the gross of Waterworld.

 

I know you are talking more about quality and taste, I'm just saying Waterworld was a fairly epic flop while 300 was a box office success.

The problem with GI Joe and Transformers is that while there are decades of great stories in comics and such, the people making the movies just see them as a toy line and pay no attention to the stories behind them.

 

Those are very small niche comics, it's not like they are huge properties like Batman and Superman. Seriously, the comic book audience for GI Joe and Transformers is miniscule, the toy line is the real appeal because most people are familiar with that.

lol. You mean you weren't so terrified that you crapped your pants and ran sobbing into the lobby?

 

Lol, nope, and Im the perfect mark for ghost/demon/evil spirit movies, they usually scare me silly. Slashers dont bother me, zombies or monsters dont bother me but something about spirits does. Also, the ending. It just ends right after the scariest part of the movie! The screen just went black and the lights came up. No credits or anything so everyone was just looking around at each other wondering WTF just happened. Im mean, Im sure there are credits at some point but we sat there for around 20 seconds before gathering our crap and walking out and still no credits had started rolling.

The movie has no credits aside from the disclaimers at the end.

The Road

 

Disneyfied bull****, ruined completely by the awful voiceover and cheesy violin soundtrack. What the hell Cave & Ellis? What the **** Hillcoat? The Proposition was such a masterpiece, how could you ruin one of the best books of this century? I was really looking forward to it, too.

 

Sucks.

Maybe my epectations for 300 were too high? I don't know; they were ground-scrapingly low to begin with.

 

I don't see much if any difference between Waterworld and 300.

 

About $100 million differences when it comes to budget. 300 was $70 mil, Waterworld was $175 mil. 300 also almost doubled the gross of Waterworld.

 

I know you are talking more about quality and taste, I'm just saying Waterworld was a fairly epic flop while 300 was a box office success.

 

 

Well if you insist on backing me into a corner, then OK, I will grudging agree that 300 was probably a bit better than Waterworld for a variety of reasons.

 

I also really liked what Zack Snyder did with the Dawn of the Dead remake.

lol. You mean you weren't so terrified that you crapped your pants and ran sobbing into the lobby?

 

Lol, nope, and Im the perfect mark for ghost/demon/evil spirit movies, they usually scare me silly. Slashers dont bother me, zombies or monsters dont bother me but something about spirits does. Also, the ending. It just ends right after the scariest part of the movie! The screen just went black and the lights came up. No credits or anything so everyone was just looking around at each other wondering WTF just happened. Im mean, Im sure there are credits at some point but we sat there for around 20 seconds before gathering our crap and walking out and still no credits had started rolling.

 

 

I haven't seen this yet, but it appears to be a bit like The Blair Witch Project, in that either the approach gets you or it doesn't. I actually enjoyed BWP quite a bit just because it was interesting watching a film made so far outside if the Hollywood system. But it didn't scare me in the least.

 

Did you see Blair Witch? If so, how would you compare them?

I didn't see blair witch but most people who I know say it is similar in style.

 

 

I enjoyed Paranormal activity. It wasn't really scary, but I did usually find myself waiting in anticipation for what was gonna happen next during "the parts."

 

 

The character's don't really act believably, which is the biggest gripe I have with the film.

Saw zombieland, went in with miniscule expectations and was pleasently suprised. As was my dad who thinks it'll be a cult favorite.

Haha, I really enjoyed zombieland.

 

Good for fun for sure IMO.

The Sequel

 

>_