Author |
Message |
zennier
htm
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:38 pm Posts: 10316 Location: berkeley
|
Zingaling wrote: Did anyone else think the Lord of the Rings spoof was horrible?
Right about then I contemplated a walk out.
|
Sun Feb 19, 2006 12:03 am |
|
|
Mr. Reynolds
Confessing on a Dance Floor
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 12:46 am Posts: 5567 Location: Celebratin' in Chitown
|
I sneaked into the movie after watching The New World. Maybe I just needed a good laugh after that but I thought this movie was entertaining. It wasn't the funniest movie ever and some parts were lame but I had fun identifying the movies it was making fun us and I thought overall it was funny.
The crowd I saw it with was totally digging it. They laughed at almost everything. I cracked up hysterically at the cat taking a crap, kill bill, mr. and mrs smith spoof, and some others.
B/B-
|
Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:52 am |
|
|
Jeff
Christian's #1 Fan
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 8:25 pm Posts: 28110 Location: Awaiting my fate
|
Sam Nasty wrote: I sneaked into the movie after watching The New World. Maybe I just needed a good laugh after that but I thought this movie was entertaining. It wasn't the funniest movie ever and some parts were lame but I had fun identifying the movies it was making fun us and I thought overall it was funny.
The crowd I saw it with was totally digging it. They laughed at almost everything. I cracked up hysterically at the cat taking a crap, kill bill, mr. and mrs smith spoof, and some others.
B/B-
<3
_________________ See above.
|
Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:57 am |
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm Posts: 15197 Location: Planet Xatar
|
yoshue wrote: You guys could have been relieved of a lot of pain and boredom (not to mention save some money) if you had just sat down, watched a commercial for this thing, and realized the level of idiocy this nonsense is playing on.
I would honestly rather die a horrible death engineered by whoever the fuck was killing people in Saw II than ever sit through something as obviously devoid of wit, intelligence and talent as this. If you think that sounds somehow overdramatic or silly, let me just say that my mere 1 viewing of Scary Movie 3, surrounded by people laughing (!), sent me into a spiraling existenial crisis from which I am still not fully recovered. yoshue wrote: *Slaps Mr. X with one of those nifty white gloves*
Sir, I demand satifsfaction!
Actually, point taken, as I do know that some of my posts do indeed come off as more than a bit...snobbish, you could say.
That said, I don't think pointing out the stupidity inherent in this crap sundae is snobbery in the least.
As to accusations that I don't 'appreciate' the genre, the the movie parody has been a good genre for decades. Hell, even Scary Movie (the first) was pretty funny. You know why? It was actually satire, at least to a degree. Useless satire, as Scream had already mined that territory, but satire nonetheless; the idea was still to poke fun at modern slasher films. This and its Scary Movie sequel brethren (8 Mile! Signs! That's actually all I remember!) are more like Greatest Hits albums, no actual comedy required.
So, all of your "review" of this movie is based on "watching a commercial" for it?
Seems like a lot of effort went into writing about a movie you would rather "die a horrible death" than see...
|
Sun Feb 19, 2006 10:16 am |
|
|
The Dark Shape
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:56 am Posts: 12119 Location: Adrift in L.A.
|
Zingaling wrote: Did anyone else think the Lord of the Rings spoof was horrible?
Yeah (especially the "my precious" bit), but I got a good laugh because the actor playing Frodo was a major nerd on Buffy the Vampire Slayer... who loved The Lord of the Rings.
|
Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:08 pm |
|
|
Goldie
Forum General
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:38 pm Posts: 7286 Location: TOP*SECRET ******************** ******************** ******************** ********************
|
The Dark Shape wrote: Zingaling wrote: Did anyone else think the Lord of the Rings spoof was horrible? Yeah (especially the "my precious" bit), but I got a good laugh because the actor playing Frodo was a major nerd on Buffy the Vampire Slayer... who loved The Lord of the Rings.
I did think it was bad but I did like Gandalf screaming at the end of it.
|
Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:11 pm |
|
|
STEVE ROGERS
The Greatest Avenger EVER
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 4:02 am Posts: 18501
|
Interestingly enough, I was watching EBERT and ROEPER this morning and they were supposed to review DATE MOVIE, but the studio responsible for this didn't allow them to screen it saying they were afraid they'd give it Thumbs Down, so Ebert gave this movie "The Wag of Shame" shaking his finger at the studio for not giving them a chance to review it for themselves.. Not sure whey they didn't let them review it, especially when the movie opened to 19 Million this weekend.. Pretty good for a movie not reviewed..
|
Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:28 am |
|
|
zennier
htm
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:38 pm Posts: 10316 Location: berkeley
|
BKB_The_Man wrote: Interestingly enough, I was watching EBERT and ROEPER this morning and they were supposed to review DATE MOVIE, but the studio responsible for this didn't allow them to screen it saying they were afraid they'd give it Thumbs Down, so Ebert gave this movie "The Wag of Shame" shaking his finger at the studio for not giving them a chance to review it for themselves.. Not sure whey they didn't let them review it, especially when the movie opened to 19 Million this weekend.. Pretty good for a movie not reviewed..
Because it's a terrible movie.
|
Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:10 pm |
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm Posts: 15197 Location: Planet Xatar
|
lennier wrote: BKB_The_Man wrote: Interestingly enough, I was watching EBERT and ROEPER this morning and they were supposed to review DATE MOVIE, but the studio responsible for this didn't allow them to screen it saying they were afraid they'd give it Thumbs Down, so Ebert gave this movie "The Wag of Shame" shaking his finger at the studio for not giving them a chance to review it for themselves.. Not sure whey they didn't let them review it, especially when the movie opened to 19 Million this weekend.. Pretty good for a movie not reviewed.. Because it's a terrible movie.
I don't think that is the only reason that studios skip the early release these days - take Underworld: Evolution for example - a pretty good movie not pre-screened for critics. I think marketing is transcending traditional reviewer channels with some movies these days, because they simply don't need them. Especially with the genres of horror and comedy, the audiences are set to go see certain movies regardless of whether they get a good or bad review. Not only that but when I see a terrible review from Roger Ebert for a low comedy, I know then that I'm virtually assured of a hilarious time at the movies that night.
So why should studios waste their time and money screening a film for a bunch of unappreciative critics, especially when they have no impact on the subsequent box office.
I think we'll be seeing a lot more of this trend in the near future...
|
Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:23 pm |
|
|
zennier
htm
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:38 pm Posts: 10316 Location: berkeley
|
bradley witherberry wrote: lennier wrote: BKB_The_Man wrote: Interestingly enough, I was watching EBERT and ROEPER this morning and they were supposed to review DATE MOVIE, but the studio responsible for this didn't allow them to screen it saying they were afraid they'd give it Thumbs Down, so Ebert gave this movie "The Wag of Shame" shaking his finger at the studio for not giving them a chance to review it for themselves.. Not sure whey they didn't let them review it, especially when the movie opened to 19 Million this weekend.. Pretty good for a movie not reviewed.. Because it's a terrible movie. I don't think that is the only reason that studios skip the early release these days - take Underworld: Evolution for example - a pretty good movie not pre-screened for critics. I think marketing is transcending traditional reviewer channels with some movies these days, because they simply don't need them. Especially with the genres of horror and comedy, the audiences are set to go see certain movies regardless of whether they get a good or bad review. Not only that but when I see a terrible review from Roger Ebert for a low comedy, I know then that I'm virtually assured of a hilarious time at the movies that night. So why should studios waste their time and money screening a film for a bunch of unappreciative critics, especially when they have no impact on the subsequent box office. I think we'll be seeing a lot more of this trend in the near future...
Oh, I agree 100%. But if the film where decent, you know they'd be offering screenings to get out the word in the press.
|
Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:39 pm |
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm Posts: 15197 Location: Planet Xatar
|
lennier wrote: Oh, I agree 100%. But if the film where decent, you know they'd be offering screenings to get out the word in the press.
Evolution: Underworld was better than decent - yet they still snubbed the critics. I say it's a new marketing strategy - "too cool to review"...
|
Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:48 pm |
|
|
zennier
htm
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:38 pm Posts: 10316 Location: berkeley
|
bradley witherberry wrote: lennier wrote: Oh, I agree 100%. But if the film where decent, you know they'd be offering screenings to get out the word in the press. Evolution: Underworld was better than decent - yet they still snubbed the critics. I say it's a new marketing strategy - "too cool to review"...
Evolution? That crappy movie with Julianne Moore and that B-actor from X Files? Oh, right, you were talking about U:E
Movies like Underworld aren't as cerebral or relevant as critics might hope. They get their panties in a bunch because movies - as the become more mainstream - tend to correspondingly get worse. It upsets their anal retentiveness; their addiction to Almodovar and the like I bet
|
Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:51 pm |
|
|
zingy
College Boy Z
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:40 pm Posts: 36662
|
It's not a sign of a bad product to not screen it to critics. It's a waste of money if you screen it to critics just to get nothing but bad reviews from people who aren't the target audience.
|
Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:51 pm |
|
|
zennier
htm
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:38 pm Posts: 10316 Location: berkeley
|
Zingaling wrote: It's not a sign of a bad product to not screen it to critics. It's a waste of money if you screen it to critics just to get nothing but bad reviews from people who aren't the target audience.
True comedy is entertaining to pretty much everyone. Usually critics can spot the above average, worth-your-time comedy. Date Movie isn't one of those.
It's a smart business move on behalf of Fox, considering *most* critics don't go for gross out satire.
.... but to say it isn't an indicator of a mediocre - or worse - movie is to be in denial.
Not that critical reviews for Date Movie matter. It'll still drop like a rock.
|
Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:56 pm |
|
|
getluv
i break the rules, so i don't care
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 4:28 pm Posts: 20411
|
did anyone else think this was long, even for 80 mins.
|
Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:31 pm |
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm Posts: 15197 Location: Planet Xatar
|
lennier wrote: True comedy is entertaining to pretty much everyone. I've definitely gotta disagree with you on that point. I find only the most mediocre comedy appeals to everyone. Comedy that any one individual finds the funniest is often pretty far out for a general audience, because it connects with that person's culture, experience, age, and other specific aspects fitting their personality. lennier wrote: Usually critics can spot the above average, worth-your-time comedy.
Again, I have to disagree - in my experience, I find critics especially bad at judging the comedy genre.
|
Wed Feb 22, 2006 5:19 pm |
|
|
Harry Warden
Orphan
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:47 pm Posts: 19747
|
bradley witherberry wrote: lennier wrote: True comedy is entertaining to pretty much everyone. I've definitely gotta disagree with you on that point. I find only the most mediocre comedy appeals to everyone. Comedy that any one individual finds the funniest is often pretty far out for a general audience, because it connects with that person's culture, experience, age, and other specific aspects fitting their personality. lennier wrote: Usually critics can spot the above average, worth-your-time comedy. Again, I have to disagree - in my experience, I find critics especially bad at judging the comedy genre.
Comedy is by far the most subjective genre. What one person finds hilarious another is bound to detest and vice versa. That's what makes writing a truly great comedy very difficult and why so many horrid ones are released.
|
Wed Feb 22, 2006 6:29 pm |
|
|
O
Extraordinary
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 1:53 pm Posts: 11517
|
In all of my life, I have NEVER ever walked out of a movie. That is, until TODAY. Date Movie is absolutely horrendous, not funny at all, and a complete waste of time. The jokes were not funny, it didn't really spoof anything other than replaying the jokes from the original movies and not adding much to it. Half of the theater attendee's walked out of this film.
0.5/10 (0.5 because I like Hannigan as a person, but this was just a mess)
This makes my top 10 worst films I've ever seen list. I didn't see the rest of it, but what I saw was horrible.
On a sidenote, we ended up seeing Underworld 2, which was already 30 minutes in. That was the only film we were able to see. I had no idea what was going on, and it took me a while to realize it was about vampires, but it was tolerable at least.
|
Thu Feb 23, 2006 2:25 am |
|
|
Mister Ecks
New Server, Same X
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:07 pm Posts: 28293 Location: ... siiiigh...
|
Eddie Griffin and Carmen Electra in the SAME MOVIE?! My prayers are answered!!!
Let's just say that Alone in the Dark has competition. "Date Movie" is, quite possibly, the WORST movie I have ever seen. My good lord. What was that?! I wish I could say I laughed, but didn't. I smirked twice, that was it. Once at the Kevin Federline line, and once at Tony Cox. Everything else sucked horribly. The parodies, if you can call them parodies, were horrendously bad. Were they trying to spoof Hitch? Horrible execution, if so. What about My Big, Fat Greek Wedding? Again, horrible. Then there's useless appearances by Owen Wilson (no, not a cameo, just his character from "Wedding Crashers"), Napolean Dynamite (again, not a cameo, just a horrible appearance to make you think it's a spoof when it's just stupid), and the Lord of the Rings gang. What the hell was that about? I almost vomited at how bad that spoof was.
Then they throw in parodies, and they clearly have no idea what they're spoofing at all! "Pimp My Ride" gets spoofed, but they throw in a lame "Star Wars" reference. They tried to cram it in there, and it looked so out of place. The aforementioned "Wedding Crashers" and "Napolean Dynamite" spoofs were horrible! It's like the two writers (yeah, definitely the supplier of all the stupid moments from "Scary Movie") didn't see the movies, but decided to spoof them anyway.
"Hey, what was 'Wedding Crashers' like?"
"Dunno, didn't see it."
"Well... we'll just say he's crashing a wedding. People will get it. People are smart like that."
And, anything with potential to supply a laugh is run into the ground. I kinda chuckled when I saw the cat taking a crap in the toilet. Hey, I'm Mr. Toilet Humor! But, they run the joke for 30 seconds!! It's like the movie is DARING us to laugh. The Kill Bill spoof had potential to be amusing, but they run that into the ground for an entire minute. And trust me, the running time is painfully long, even though it's embarassingly short. The Chappelle's Show joke was out of place completely. And one of the early spoofs that made me cringe was The Bachelor. When he makes his cuts, he shoots the losers with a rifle. But, here's the moronic part: the Price is Right theme plays in the background. Ummm... what?
And don't get me started on the cast. Even Eddie Griffin is above this, and I hate that bastard. Alyson Hannigan is NOT good in the movie. Why she agreed to it is a mystery. And why I watched this is also a mystery. I asumed all spoofs would end up being good, but this movie goes against my theory altogether. Worst movie of the year (and that's a hard title to take, even though I've only seen "Grandma's Boy", "When a Stranger Calls", and "Bloodrayne"). Possibly worst movie I've ever seen!
Grade: F
Excuse any typos, this was typed incredibly fast. And excuse it entirely. My reviews suck.
_________________ Ecks Factor: Cancelled too soon
|
Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:20 pm |
|
|
Libs
Sbil
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm Posts: 48626 Location: Arlington, VA
|
Well, this is probably not going to have legs.
If the general reaction here is indicative. Especially since a lot of you usually like movies like this.
|
Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:59 pm |
|
|
O
Extraordinary
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 1:53 pm Posts: 11517
|
Libs wrote: Well, this is probably not going to have legs.
If the general reaction here is indicative. Especially since a lot of you usually like movies like this.
Definitely. I've liked the Scary Movie films, and I even found Not Another Teen Movie somewhat tolerable, but this was just a horrible film. I have liked REALLY stupid films, but this is just stupid for all the wrong reasons.
|
Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:12 pm |
|
|
Mister Ecks
New Server, Same X
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:07 pm Posts: 28293 Location: ... siiiigh...
|
Libs wrote: Well, this is probably not going to have legs.
If the general reaction here is indicative. Especially since a lot of you usually like movies like this.
I thought Scary Movie was great, Scary Movie 2 had a quality where it's so bad that it's good, and I thought Scary Movie 3 was tolerable. Little did I know that I would have thought of Scary Movie 3 as a cinematic masterpiece compared to Date Movie.
And hey. My favorite movie of 2005 was Saw II. I don't exactly have the greatest taste in movies, so this should have been great to me.
_________________ Ecks Factor: Cancelled too soon
|
Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:31 am |
|
|
Kris K
Horror Hound
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 1:44 pm Posts: 6228
|
I seen it last night.
D-.
Liked the first 15 minutes, some jokes were funny....the rest fell really, hard, flat on their face. I hated the look of Andy, she's hideous...some kind of puffy faced, fake tan stained, streaky skin, bloated whore. Really disliked her for some reason. Anyway, it was a turd, and i wouldn't watch it again. ever.
|
Sat Feb 25, 2006 11:53 am |
|
|
Mister Ecks
New Server, Same X
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:07 pm Posts: 28293 Location: ... siiiigh...
|
That reminds me: what was with showing Andy in a bikini about thirty times? What the hell?
_________________ Ecks Factor: Cancelled too soon
|
Sat Feb 25, 2006 5:48 pm |
|
|
Jmart
Superman: The Movie
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:47 am Posts: 21152 Location: Massachusetts
|
Holy hell. I only laughed twice (More like chuckled) during the embarassing 71 minute running time. The first time was in Hitch's office with the photo's on the wall of who he hooked up. That was somewhat clever. The second time was when the kitty was on the toilet, and even they pushed that joke to the brink. That's it. For the other 70 minutes, there aren't any clever jokes whatsoever.
You know that uncomfortable feeling when you are the only person in the movie theater who is laughing during the film. Well, this was one of the gleeful times I had watching a comedy just die in front of an audience. No one in the theater was enjoying it, and everyone in the theater was the film's target audience. The crowd was all made up of teenagers, and only on a few seperate occasions was there any laughter. There was not one instance where the entire crowd laughed uproarously at the same time.
This is a failure on all levels, and everyone involved should be embarassed, especially the 2 of the 6 writers of Scary Movie. It's now very clear where the humor didn't come from in that film. Of course though, Scary Movie did have 4 other writers.
This makes Grandma's Boy look like a comic gem.
[font=arial]F[/font]
_________________My DVD Collection Marty McGee (1989-2005)
If I’m not here, I’m on Letterboxd.
Last edited by Jmart on Sun Mar 05, 2006 5:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
|
Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:31 pm |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 120 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|