Week 8: The Best of The Bad

Welcome back to any and all who have returned for the final installment of this blog! It’s been a wild ride. We’ve seen some reeeaal bad movies. So let me first just go ahead and get this out of the way because I know you’re all wondering. The worst movie I have seen for this blog goes—by a landslide—to: Cats!!!! Great work, Cats, you have done something truly, truly awful by which I will be not only disappointed, but truly haunted, for years to come. Now that that’s out of the way, I wanted to conclude this blog by doing something just a little different. I’ve decided to bless you all, my loyal readers, with my ultimate master list of good bad movies. This list will be divided into two sub-categories: guilty pleasures and legitimately good. But regardless of my personal opinion, all of the following films have indeed been deemed downright trash by critics abound. Perhaps the information that I’m about to share will retroactively disqualify every opinion I have expressed over the course of this blog, as surely no one with even half-way decent taste could like these films. Or maybe you’ll agree with me! Who knows! So without further adieu, here you have it:

Movies I Like Even Though I Know They’re Bad (I’m sorry. I don’t know why either.):

  • Bride Wars (2009) – 11%
  • The First Time (2012) – 47%
  • Something Borrowed (2011) – 15%
  • The Watch (2012) – 17%
  • What’s Your Number (2011) – 24%

Movies I Think Critics Are Just Plain Wrong About:

  • First and foremost, Step Brothers (2008) – 55%
    • Critics, y’all done fucked up.
  • This Is 40 (2012) – 52%
    • Incredibly funny, accurate portrayal of a family that’s just a little fucked up (but aren’t all of ours?).
  • Stuck In Love (2013) – 57%
    • Poignant commentary on how love can hurt.
  • How To Be Single (2016) – 47%
    • A rom com about self-love!!
  • Aloha (2015) – 20%
    • Okay, absolutely yes, Emma Stone’s casting as a character that is partially pacific islander is heavily problematic. But the cast is great, the ride is fun, and the wit is perfectly dry.
  • Comet (2014) – 42%
    • A suuuper intriguing experiment with nonlinear storytelling.
  • Love, Rosie (2015) – 33%
    • Right person, wrong time. Will break your heart and then put it back together.
  • As Above, So Below (2014) – 26%
    • Incredibly original horror premise.
  • A Million Ways To Die In The West (2014) – 33%
    • Not as good as Ted, but brilliantly clever nonetheless.
  • Dark Skies (2013) – 41%
    • I’m a sucker for twist endings.
  • The Possession (2012) – 40%
    • Scared the absolute shit out of me. Also, a curse that must be driven off by a rabbi instead of a priest? Fuck yeah! Inclusivity!
  • The Nanny Diaries (2007) – 34%
    • Super touching lesson on why you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover and how parents are people too.
  • The Time Traveler’s Wife (2009) – 39%
    • Not your average love story.
  • Love And Other Drugs (2010) – 48%
    • Funny. Sad. Jake Gyllenhaal. The whole package.
  • Orphan (2009) – 56%
    • So original. Pretty damn creepy. Will stick with you.
  • The Uninvited (2009) – 31%
    • Another dope twist ending.
  • The House Bunny (2008) – 43%
    • A classic. Anytime you think the movie seems stupid it’s just because the satire is too perfect.
  • The Ruins (2008) – 48%
    • Straight up disturbing as fuck, but that’s the point.
  • Uptown Girls (2003) – 14%
    • Almost couldn’t decide which list to include this film on, but fuck it! I think it’s good!

Maybe there are some movies on here that are new to you, in which case I hope you take the time to watch and perhaps even enjoy! There also might be a couple you are familiar with and for which you harbor strong opinions as to whether I am absolutely right or horribly wrong to have given them praise. Either way, please don’t hesitate to let me know in the comments! I want to hear your opinions!! You’ve already spent probably far too much time reading mine. But regardless, thanks for reading! Now go watch some movies!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Sources:

Critic scores: https://www.rottentomatoes.com

Movie covers in collage:

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/7935130/p793513…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/9286982/p928698…

https://www.sonypictures.com/movies/stepbrothers

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/12019563/p12019…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/11490980/p11490…

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1638002/

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/10372514/p10372…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/10542704/p10542…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/9500614/p950061…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/9027059/p902705…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/9816875/p981687…

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0901476/

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/165379/p165379_…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/177102/p177102_…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/180732/p180732_…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/175518/p175518_…

google.comwww.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/v22vodart/32666/p32666_v_…

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1148204/mediaviewer/rm2261516800

Week 7: To All the Boys: P.S. I Still Love You

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIU4xb61PHc

Oh fuck! Shit’s gotten crazy since our last blog post! There’s a literal pandemic and people are sick and we’re all at home and public places are closed and all the movie release dates are getting pushed back and everyone’s watching a docuseries about a man that owns a fuck ton of tigers!!! Needless to say, the cinema landscape has changed quite a bit of late. But fear not! There is still an endless amount of just downright horrible content on all those streaming platforms that can be viewed oh so comfortably (and safely) in your home.

As such, this week I present to you one of Netflix’s latest releases, To All the Boys: P.S. I Still Love You. This film is, of course, the subsequent installment of Lara Jean and Peter’s love story that was kicked off in To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before, with both films being adapted from Jenny Han’s YA novel of the same name and its sequel. This is all very exciting, as the whole romance  genre is new territory for this blog. And yet, I really don’t know how it took this long.

Just as profound is the love story between L.J. and P.K., so too is the storied history between disgruntled critics and YA novel adaptations. A now decades-long series of such adaptations has proved a bottomless well for films that tend not to impress those who review them.

For example, literally every fucking Nicholas Sparks adaptation ever. A Walk to Remember (27%), The Vow (31%), Dear John (29%), The Best of Me (10%… ouch.), Safe Haven (13%), the list literally goes on forever. And I know what you’re thinking: “But what about The Notebook?! That’s a classic!” Well, actually, despite it ultimately becoming a fan favorite, that film didn’t score too well with critics either, landing only a 53% critics-like-it.

But I mean, shit, these movies make money!! Even The Choice (11%)– which, like, whose favorite Nicholas Sparks adaptation is that??—more than doubled its budget at the box office. And that’s why not only do studios keep cashing in on these highly predictable sop-fests, but others have followed suit (and gotten similar reviews). From film adaptations of Nicola Yoon’s Everything, Everything and The Sun is Also a Star, to Joy Moyes’s Me Before You and John Green’s Paper Towns, not a single one has gotten positive ratings from critics.

Now is the time where I interrupt my rambling, albeit point-proving, listing off of your mother’s favorite films to give a huge shout out to a movie that did what all these others failed to do: The Fault In Our Stars (81%, certified fresh baby). Keep doing you TFIOS, you’re killing it. So proud of you.

And actually, To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before managed the same hattrick! With an astounding 97% positive from critics, even someone who hates sequels as much as me knows you don’t just follow that by NOT making the sequel (especially when the second book already exists). But I’m not quite so sure they killed it the second time around.

To be fair, To All the Boys: P.S. I Still Love You technically didn’t get bad reviews. But upon conferring with my roommates who had already seen the film, I was met with evaluations ranging from “so cringey” to “seriously so bad.” I cross-referenced such appraisals with the film’s reviews on Letterboxd (a social media app for cinephiles to rate movies) and saw that its average score was 2.6 out of 5 stars. Good enough for me! Or rather… bad enough.

One-Sentence Synopsis:

Teens in love! (Yeah, that pretty much covers it.)

My Review:

Jesus Christ, what is up with all this product placement?! First Sonic, now this. Subway: the next great production company. These mofos have their absurd product placement in both of the To All the Boys movies!! When people talk about needing “continuity” in a film, I don’t think this is what they mean. It’s weird and it takes me out of the film every time and it makes me angry.

See the source image
Source: https://productplacementblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Subway-Food-and-Drinks-in-To-All-the-Boys-I’ve-Loved-Before-2.jpg

Speaking of the first movie, don’t worry about re-watching it in order to refresh yourselves with the plot before delving into the sequel. About ten minutes into P.S. I Love You, Lara Jean’s little sister conveniently gives a super manic recap of the entire plot of To All the Boys in conversation with a cousin the sisters are trying to impress. Kinda strange, but didn’t mind it terribly. Maybe all sequels should just do this! Ha, just kidding. But it wasn’t so horrible.

Something else that I can’t quite decide whether it’s alright or if it just weirds me out too much to enjoy the film: Noah Centineo. I have this theory that he’s actually just a cyborg created by the corporate overlords at Netflix in order to churn out perfectly marketable content for hormonal tweens. I mean just scroll through his tweets below. Who the hell comes up with this shit?

Soucre: https://twitter.com/noahcent

But sometimes I think his wires get a little crossed and he malfunctions…

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CBNILiyKrc&feature=youtu.be

Careful, Netflix. I’m onto you.

All in all, this movie didn’t inspire much. It was seriously average at best. Not much to truly despise, but nothing that particularly moved me either. With the exception of a couple cool technical decisions like the dope dolly shot at approximately one hour and seventeen minutes into the movie in which Lana Condor appears to be actually standing on the dolly with the camera, giving it a “floating effect” (apparently Spike Lee invented this shot!), this movie truly failed to wow. It ended in the same place where it began with some predictable drama and very little character development in between… meh.

Scoring Rubric: (On a scale from 1 to 5, with 5 being the most compelling)

  • Romance – 1/5
  • Camera – work 3/5
  • Character development – 1/5
  • Potential Netflix cyborg conspiracy – 5/5

Now, before any of you risk COVID-infection and travel across the country to slit my throat for shitting on any of the movies that made your cold, confused pubescent heart feel something when you were 13, let me just say, I love rom-coms… even shitty ones. I literally cried during Me Before You and, yes, The Notebook is absolutely a classic (fuck you, critics!). Meanwhile, I did not get the hype about the first To All the Boys film. Solidly mediocre IMO. But that’s why this blog exists! Because there’s always some good in the bad and some bad in the good (that sounds like a goddamn Noah Centineo tweet) and there’s no accounting for taste! So while you social distance, take this much needed down time to treat yourself to a film or two. And whether it’s a world-renowned cinematic masterpiece or just one of those movies you love to hate, enjoy!

.

.

.

.

Additional Sources:

Week 6: Downhill

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBa9lELOOoo

The film for which I have begrudgingly dragged myself to the theater this week is Downhill, which is named, of course, after the direction in which Will Ferrell’s career has been going lately. I really hate to talk shit about a fellow Trojan but my word did anyone else suffer through the steaming pile that was 2018’s Holmes and Watson? Absolutely unwatchable. Literally. I only watched the first thirty minutes before I quite simply couldn’t fuggin’ take it anymore. But let’s be honest, shit really started hitting the fan for Ferrell’s name a while ago, around the time he churned out both Get Hard and Daddy’s Home in the span of a single year. I mean, Christ on a cracker. So, let’s see if this film proved to be a much-needed infusion of fresh material into this comedy king’s dying career, or if it’s merely another nail in Will’s coffin.

One-Sentence Synopsis:

Essentially the antithesis of Ferrell’s career-defining role in Step Brothers as Brennan Huff, a man-child who can’t figure out how to be a grown-up, Downhill revolves around a middle-aged man who just wants to live the riveting life of a young person again, but feels trapped by his adult commitments.

My Review:

In a rather unexpected turn of events, I genuinely liked this movie. Like… seriously. I thought it was a thoughtful, well-executed, and well-acted examination of what marriage looks like after decades together, and the kinds of sacrifices it takes to make a lifelong partnership, and a family, work. Albeit it got off to a bit of a slow start. But in the end, I felt like I walked out of the theater with some sort of mental and emotional sustenance. 

So then what the hell went so damn wrong in the eyes of literally everyone else that saw it (or at least the majority of critics (62%) and audiences (87%) who straight up did not like this film)? The answer on the audience front is extremely simple. This is not a comedy. Alright fine, it was pretty funny when the Swedish hotel employee and resident free spirit remarked that her job allowed for sufficient free time to *overexaggerated vaguely Scandinavian accent* “catch a dick wheneva I like.” But beyond a small handful of one-liners and otherwise well-delivered moments like this, Downhill is a drama through and through.

When you cast two legends like Will Ferrell and Julia Louis Dreyfus as the leads in a film, people’s minds are gonna go “okay, so it’s a comedy.” Admittedly, I too actually thought it was a comedy up until about 20 minutes in. And, generally speaking, if you’re expecting a lovely laugh-packed ride full of light-hearted family fun à la something like Blended, anything but has the potential to mistakenly come off as simply worst comedy you’ve ever seen (especially when there are still a couple of jokes in there and it’s labelled as a Comedy/Drama on IMDb). Chalk it up to bad marketing. 

Now, on the critics side of the spectrum, the downfall of Downhill stemmed from something far beyond the film itself, its cast, or its audience’s expectations. Rather, the trouble comes from the source material from which this film mines its inspiration. As it turns out (upon doing literally any research at all, which I did not prior to seeing this movie), Downhill is actually based on a 2014 Swedish film called Force Majeure, with which it shares essentially the exact same plot. And while there are plenty of worthwhile faithful adaptations out there (Little Women, anyone??), critics took issue with what they generally considered to be a pale imitation of the original. One critic dubbed the new iteration, “An odd, misguided remake.” It seems that the general consensus is that ultimately Downhill was just a failed and unnecessary attempt to American-ize a film that was already great in its own right.

Well, I believe it. Seeing as Force Majeure won the “Un Certain Regard” jury prize at Cannes, on top of being nominated for both a BAFTA and a Golden Globe, I feel pretty comfortable in saying that, yeah, it’s probably pretty good. And if you all don’t know by now, let me reiterate that I HATE remakes/reboots/sequels, especially when they bring nothing new to the original story. So, critics, I hear ya on this one. That being said, I haven’t seen Force Majeure. Therefore, I have no point of comparison. And, for me, Downhill as a self-contained entity was effective and meaningful.

Scoring Rubric (On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most exciting)

  • Me actually enjoying the film – 5/5
  • The scene with Kristofer Hivju (Tormund from Game of Thrones) in it – 5/5
  • Finding out that Kristofer Hivju was actually in Force Majeure as well – 5/5
  • Finding out that Downhill is based on Force Majeure and that the only good movie I have seen thus far is deeply unneeded and unoriginal much like the rest – 1/5

Overall Score: 4/5 (Luckily, not bad enough to singlehandedly finish off Will Ferrell’s career)

.

.

.

.

Sources:

Week 5: Sonic the Hedgehog

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szby7ZHLnkA

Whoops, I’m breaking my own rules again! As with my last review of Gretel & Hansel, this week’s film actually did not get bad reviews with critics. But what’s that old saying about rules? Oh yeah, they’re made to be broken. So basically, fuck it.

But I swear I’m not just going off the deep end. This is still a blog about bad movies. And Sonic the Hedgehog has all the ingredients we’ve identified as necessitating utter idiocy in filmmaking throughout the weeks of this blog’s existence. It’s based on pre-existing intellectual property (Dolittle, Cats, Gretel & Hansel), it horrified audiences with its unfortunate character CGI choices (Cats!!), and it even has Jim Carrey in it! Okay, the Jim Carrey thing isn’t really all that relevant or such a sure fire ingredient for bad filmmaking, but it certainly doesn’t help this film’s prospects to have Jim Carrey essentially just playing Jim Carrey per usual, I mean god am I the only one that’s tired of that??

But as I said, the one singular thing that this movie doesn’t have is in fact the central pillar of this blog: bad reviews. And unlike Gretel & Hansel, it managed not to flop with both categories of viewers. That’s right, neither critics nor audiences had any significant beef with Sonic. This film managed a considerable 63% positive ratings from critics as well as an astounding 94% positive ratings from audiences. That means that more audience members liked Sonic than did nearly every film that was up for an Oscar this year, more than Frozen I or Frozen II, more than Inside Out, more than Avengers: Endgame, MORE THAN UP. Every-fucking-body likes Up!!! Are you kidding me????? I couldn’t believe it. I had to see for myself.

One-Sentence Synopsis:

An extremely hairy blue alien child finds himself as a refugee on planet Earth when a series of misadventures ensues following the… okay, what the fuck, this film is basically just a widely-cast net for any moviegoer that plays video games, has children that they want to stop talking to them for a few hours, or is one of those children, while it also conveniently doubles as a 2 hour-long ad for Zillow, Olive Garden, and the Toyota Tacoma.

My Review:

Let’s start with the good. One major thing I will say in favor of this movie and the folks who made it is that, unlike those sadists that worked on Cats, the Sonic guys actually fixed their mistake following criticism over the look of its central character. They even pushed back the release of the film by 3 months in order to pull this off (Source: Altpress). And it paid off!

Source: https://i1.wp.com/thesnapper.millersville.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Sonic-in-color.jpg?resize=678%2C381

Additionally, this movie appears to have made at least some sort of a concerted effort to be not just a kids’ movie, but a family movie. Jokes that were clearly geared toward the grown-ups in the room were sprinkled in on occasion and with intention. And this is smart because Sonic videogames have now been released and played for decades, meaning that there were likely just as many adults as there were children excited to see their favorite character brought to life in this film.

That being said we now move on to my favorite part, the bad. Although this movie did its due diligence to tend to all ages, it didn’t do so to much effect. Ultimately, this really still felt like a kids’ movie. Only a small handful of the jokes being made actually managed to elicit a giggle or two from yours truly, while the eight-year-old sitting next to me found the film to be an absolute riot.  

Also, I’m sorry but I’m circling back to the Jim Carrey thing. He’s been good but it’s time for a new bit, Jimbo. And the worst part is, he has range (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, anyone?). And he can be genuinely funny (please tell me you’ve seen the SNL parodies of Matthew McConaughey’s Lincoln commercials). He just keeps choosing to take these roles where he does the same shit over and over again. I mean I guess I can’t really blame him because money is cool but I truly didn’t find his performance to add much to this movie. Instead, it only made the humor seem slightly tired and predictable. There’s this rule in filmmaking that you can’t repeat the same beat too many times, especially in comedy, before it suffers from the law of diminishing returns. For all you normal people out there, that basically just means that if you make the same joke too many times it becomes increasingly less funny and eventually isn’t funny at all. My thinking is that if that applies within a single 90 minute movie, how the hell can anyone still find Jim Carrey funny when he’s been doing the same bit for literally 30 years?? More than anything, his performance in Sonic often just took me out of the film entirely. And don’t even get me started on the effect of the weirdly timed and sometimes even downright shameless product placement with which this film was riddled.

Finally, and perhaps worst of all, this movie failed to make me feel anything. Wow, that sounds emo… “I’m just trying to feel something, please, someone help.” But here’s my point. Whereas successful family movies are able to make even your fifty-year-old macho father shed a tear (my dad practically lost his shit during Inside Out) this movie didn’t accomplish anything close to the sort. And it wanted to. So badly. It was practically begging to reach inside your chest and rip your heart out or make it flutter with joy and it just plainly did not. The film’s main premise, when boiled down to its essence, is that Sonic is this lonely orphan whose only true desire in the world is to make a real friend. And then, ultimately, he finds that and so much more after forming a new family with James Marsden’s character and his wife. Cute right? Except it wasn’t. It tried so hard and I think that’s actually the problem. It’s disconcerting how badly they wanted to make the audience care. The filmmakers had the right goal in mind but just couldn’t find the storytelling tools to get it done.

In the end, although its reviews shocked me, this film proved to be exactly what I expected and unquestionably nothing more.

Scoring Rubric: (On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most predictable)

  • Plot – 5/5
  • Jim Carrey – 5/5
  • Successful CGI corrections – 1/5
  • The child next to me nearly spewing out his ICEE in response to Sonic farting – 5/5

Overall score: 4/5 (Snooze fest. Label me disappointed.)

.

Just in case you haven’t seen that series of SNL sketches I mentioned earlier, or even if you have and you just want to watch again, I’m leaving this here for your viewing pleasure. Best thing Jim Carrey’s done in the last decade. Pitch-perfect satire.

.

.

Source for critics and audience scores: Rotten Tomatoes

Altpress article: https://www.altpress.com/news/sonic-the-hedgehog-release-date-moved/

Week 4: Gretel & Hansel

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZblQLhKcZQ

Welcome back, folks! Or, if you’re new here, just welcome! If you have read my blog before then you know that I like to watch movies that scored very poorly with critics. However, this week we are shaking things up.

It’s quite common that when a film is met with disdain from critics, that it nonetheless fairs quite well with audiences. Take, for example, Dolittle which scored a tragic 15% critics-like-it but still managed to pull out a 76% with audiences. Or how about the latest installment of the Star Wars saga which was deemed “rotten” from critics but was received quite favorably by audiences, with 52% and 86% respectively. I was certainly not part of the 86% of audience members who liked that infuriatingly lazy hack job of a Star Wars film, but I digress. I could go on forever with examples of this common disparity. But what about when critics like a film way better than audiences? This is a significantly less common phenomenon. Two movies that experienced such ratings within the last year were Midsommar and The Lighthouse, which both scored about 20 percentage points higher with critics than audiences. But in both of these cases, the film ultimately received a “fresh” score from both parties. So then what the fuck happened with Gretel & Hansel ? This film managed a 61% from critics, but a pathetic 22% from audiences. That’s nearly a 40 percentage point difference.

As you can gather from my admittedly blistering review of Dolittle, I generally tend to side with critics when they say a movie is shit. But what about when the roles are reversed? Who’s right here? Let’s find out.

Single-Sentence Synopsis:

A young woman and her little brother flee the home of their unhinged mother, only to end up living with a grotesque old woman who likes to make her own vaseline and has a seriously bizarre diet.  

Review:

Let’s just take a minute to notice that of the three movies I have reviewed thus far, two of them have been adapted or remade from previous stories. And with no exception they have been completely unnecessary, as they not only failed to bring a new perspective to what came before but also downright shat on the honor of their beloved predecessors (I’m lookin’ at you, Cats). But I actually think Gretel & Hansel could be a much-needed exception! This film did what the others failed to achieve in that it was able to bring something new to the pre-existing story, which in my opinion is the only reason to make a sequel/reboot/remake/what have you. Gretel & Hansel uses the classic, grim fairytale to participate in a contemporary conversation.

At least the way I understood it, this updated take on Hansel & Gretel was actually about feminism. Betcha could’ve guessed that by the way they put Gretel’s name first in the title! Woo feminism! But also, to be completely honest that’s only what I think they were trying to do in this film. It’s quite hard to say because the filmmakers truly did as little as artistically possible to make it clear what in the hell they were trying to say. Any explanation I could give as to why I think this is about feminism makes me feel like a crazy person who’s seeing things where they aren’t. When I got home from the theater and tried to explain to my roommate that the witch eats children, including her own, as a symbol of breaking with traditional feminine roles such as that in the household, I might as well have been saying that the trees in the film represented popsicles (okay but actually I think the trees were a phallic symbol and there’s this whole thing where Hansel keeps trying and failing to chop them down so that totally ties into… okay, see what I mean?).

It just feels like a stretch that would have any cinema graduate student foaming at the mouth, but for your average audience member… I think the only reaction you can expect to get is “what the fuck?”. I consider myself to be a particularly active and thoughtful moviegoer and I still left the theater feeling a strange combination of distress and confusion that is usually reserved for things in the political sphere, not the cinema. However, if this film did have a redeeming quality, it has to be the visuals. The use of color and light was gorgeous, the production design was dope, and that witch was genuinely fucking creepy! Just look at these stills.

But as for everything else, I gotta side with the audience scores… meh. Sorry critics! Maybe the next time someone inevitably takes a shot at this story it will go a little better. At least this iteration didn’t feature Jeremy Renner and sexy Gretel…

Scoring Rubric (On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most disturbing)

  • Witches – 3/5
  • Phallic symbols- 3/5
  • Vaseline- 5/5
  • Hollywood’s inability to be original- 4/5

Overall Score: 3.75/ 5 (Not that bad, but certainly not wood– I mean good!!)

.

.

.

Source for critics and audience scores: Rotten Tomatoes

Sources for photos:

Week 3: The Turning

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rl33gU2APIs

One of my goals in making this blog is to be sure to cover a wide variety of genres in my viewing of terrible movies. With Cats being as completely horrifying as it was, I was left wondering if I even needed to do a horror film. But then I saw that The Turning managed a measly 13% from both critics and audiences on Rotten Tomatoes. So, yeah, I saw that shit.

Single-Sentence Synopsis: (Semi-Spoilers)

A young woman with a troubled past accepts a position as the governess of a massively creepy mansion, where she cohabits with an equally creepy old woman and takes care of two equally troubled children, until those little shits quite literally drive her insane. Or at least that’s what I think it was about…

Review:

“Wait I don’t get it” were the first words my roommate said as the end credits began to roll. Looking at me with complete bewilderment, she clearly expected her cinephile friend to have a well-worded explanation that could make sense of the preceding hour and a half of grey area. I had nothing. As we remained in our seats stunned, even as the house lights came up, I think we both began to wonder if we had missed something or failed to grasp a major aspect of the film’s plot. But then the lady who had been sitting a few rows behind us stopped on her way down the stairs to inquire, “Did y’all get that ending?” And that’s when I knew that this movie was just straight up fucking confusing. Or perhaps the better way to put it is that the movie itself is confused. It doesn’t know how to say what it’s trying to say, and quite possibly doesn’t know what it’s trying to say in the first place. I genuinely can’t tell.

Every time I see a bad film come out, I wonder to myself, “who the hell let that film get made?” Ultimately, I come to the same conclusion every time: most bad movies are bad because they simply do not need to be good. Production companies use an algorithm that pops out just the right elements needed to draw in enough unsuspecting audience members for a return to be made on the company’s investment. Simple as that. Even a steaming pile of dog shit will turn a profit if it’s got Will Smith starring in it, right? Maybe that’s a bit cynical, but I really don’t think it’s that far off. The Turning does not strike me as this kind of movie. If I had to guess, I think that someone somewhere along the line actually had a good idea for a movie. Unfortunately, that idea got lost in a sea of excessive red herrings and loose ends that will never be tied up. Not to mention a deeply unlikable main character whose downright incompetence at every turn is more shocking than the jump scares. But, hey! At least they tried! I think?

The way I see this movie, it is a piece of commentary on mental health. However, “commentary” in this sense is used very broadly. As in, it seems like the film is attempting to say something about mental health. Do I know what it intends to say? Absolutely fucking not. Your guess is as good as mine. That being said, this movie really made me think. I can’t stop thinking about it. And that’s got to be worth something.

Normally—or at least is the case with my first two reviews—I feel the urgent need to insist that no other soul waste their time and money on the heinous film through which I have just suffered. This time is different. I almost kind of liked this film (or at least I didn’t hate it). But more importantly, I need someone else to see this movie so they can tell me what the hell is going on. PSA: Cinemark Baldwin Hills has $8 tickets for students! Please use this knowledge to go watch this utterly perplexing film without breaking your bank so that you can talk to me about it.

Scoring Rubric: (On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most puzzling)

  • Ending – 5/5
  • Filmmakers’ intentions – 4/5
  • Protagonist’s motivations – 3/5
  • The fact that I’m recommending more people go watch this – 4/5

Overall score: 4/5 (Confusing enough that I can’t confidently say that it’s bad)

Week 2: Cats

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtSd844cI7U

Guys!! Cats was actually really good, like I’m not exactly sure what the deal was because I think if you really give it a chance—NO. Can you fucking imagine?? I have two things I would like to say as a preface to this review. 1. I have never seen Cats performed as a play and knew next to nothing about it going into this movie, so if you have and want to disagree with or correct me in the comments absolutely please do! 2. I literally just returned from the movie theater and I do have to say that I wish I had planned better so as to give myself adequate time to sit with the many feelings this film gave me and perhaps emerge from the catatonic state of horror (pun NOT intended) in which I currently find myself; but instead you, my poor audience, will have to deal with what may in fact prove to be the incoherent ramblings of a deeply traumatized individual. Now, let’s get into it, shall we?

Single-Sentence Synopsis: (SPOILERS)

An hour-and-fifty-minute long nightmare from which you will beg to be awakened up through the last scene, as you watch hairy Jennifer Hudson defeat all the other hairy humanoids in a competition for which the prize is… death?

My Review:

As I said I know virtually nothing about the origin of this story, but I am forced to assume that the play from which this cinematic hellscape was adapted is better than what I have just witnessed. From what I can understand, it seems that the central glue of the universe in which Cats operates is that it is inexplicable, and therefore magical and wonderful in its defiance of reality. From the bizarre names of the cats to the actual magic in the plot, this story was clearly never meant to be rooted in reality. And if those aspects of the film’s world weren’t enough to tip you off about the nature of its rules, the unremitting repetition of the word “ineffable” just might get you there (subtle, Andrew Lloyd Webber).

That being said, I believe that there is a fine line between inexplicable and completely fucking insane; and having horrifying cat/human hybrids that are the physical embodiment of the “uncanny valley” don’t exactly help to push the needle toward the former descriptor. Also, I straight up cannot get over “Rum Tum Tugger.” That shit is so funny. Rum. Tum. Tugger. Rum Tum Tugger. Rum Tum, fucking, Tugger. What kind of a name is that??? Crazy. Anyways, I digress. The CGI was clearly a disturbing crossbreed that is neither human nor cat enough to sit right with audiences. From the moment the first trailer for Cats was released, fans of the musical and random by passers alike took to social media to voice both their complaints and their abject horror. So much so that the director Tom Hooper had to release a statement that the cats of Cats were not yet fully done and would look different in the final cut of the film (Source: https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2485783/cats-controversial-cgi-changed-after-viral-online-response). See the photos below for examples of how the visuals went from shit-your-pants scary to simply quite horrifying.

Source: https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2485783/cats-controversial-cgi-changed-after-viral-online-response

While these adjustments did help slightly, the problem overwhelmingly remained. And, in addition, the issues did not begin and end with this film’s character CGI. The behavior of the “cats” (especially when combined with the CGI) was equally lost in that repulsive chasm that exists between typical anthropomorphic characters and living human beings. The cats scratch the floor and screech instead of clapping in response to a performance, their hisses are too human-like and bizarre, the cats wear no clothes most of the time but some wear solely sneakers??… please don’t make me continue. AND IT DOESN’T END THERE. Oh no no no. Not only does this movie feature absurd human-esque cats, but there are mice too. And cockroaches. That is not a typo. Cockroaches. Played by people. Now that shit was disturbing. See the clip below to watch Rebel Wilson as a humanoid cat eat a humanoid cockroach.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7Uei5Qk9RM

In conclusion, I have never owned a cat and would certainly classify myself as a dog person. However, that is a far cry from the state I now find myself in: actively troubled by their mere existence. So please, if you’re reading this, do not bring your cat near me, don’t even mention Ian McKellen’s name, and for God’s sake do not pay money to see this fucking movie.

Scoring Rubric: (On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the absolute worst imaginable)

  • Animation – 5/5
  • Cat names – 4/5
  • Hissing – 3/5
  • Nightmares – 6/5

Overall Score: 4.5/5 (So bad it’s actually scary)

Week 1: Dolittle

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEf412bSPLs

Ah yes, awards season is upon us. But at a time when Hollywood is busy lauding its best and brightest, we audience-goers are left with perhaps the worst movies of the year. With the major Oscar contenders likely having premiered in the fall and throughout December, late winter and early spring are a horrifying time to be a cinephile. And that, my friends, is why it is the perfect time for this blog. Together, we will endure this scary season of cinema; and we’re starting off post #1 with the latest in major studio flops… Dolittle.

Single-Sentence Synopsis: (SPOILERS!!)

An antisocial physician, following the death of his wife, embarks on a journey that culminates in him literally pulling bag pipes out of a dragon’s asshole in order to save the queen of England.

My Review:

Oi! Dolittle? More like don’t-little. Ha. Okay, that was bad. And yet, I promise you that joke was better than any joke in this movie. In fact, amongst the handful of jokes that actually managed to land, evoking a smattering of chuckles from the audience with which I endured this cinematic trainwreck, I noticed a common theme: bodily functions i.e. flatulence. From a small monkey burping to a massive dragon fart, the timely passing of gas from either end totally killed. So, that should give you an idea of what you can expect from this film. And—hey—I’m not judging. Farts are funny. But when they’re the only form of comedy that’s working for your film, something’s gone awry.

In short, Dolittle struck me as having possibly been made by folks who have never actually seen a movie before… in their lives… but have perhaps had a few explained to them by someone else. I would also say that this same logic applies to Robert Downey Jr.’s Scottish accent (i.e. “Scottish accent? Never heard one! Let me arbitrarily throw in an occasional ‘oi’ and no one will know the difference.). To be fair, following the conclusion of RDJ’s iconic role as Iron Man in last year’s Avengers: End Game, it was always going to be hard to decide what should come next. How could any other character even approach the level of renown or love garnered by his take on Tony Stark? But perhaps the question the actor himself was most concerned with was “how could I find another role that will pay as much money?”. Well, with a $20 million pay-day for his turn as Dr. John Dolittle, it seems like Downey found the answer (Source: https://www.looper.com/175563/heres-how-much-money-robert-downey-jr-is-making-for-dolittle/).

Scoring Rubric: (On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most idiotic)

  • Accents- 4/5
  • Animation- 3/5
  • Jokes- 4/5
  • Cast- 1/5 (actually a phenomenal cast… how/why?)
  • Farts- 5/5

Overall rating- 3.4/5 (fairly unwatchable, reasonably idiotic)