Movies That are Going to Suck: Part Deux

Sisco wrote:

This is all just the result of the producers trying to cater to little kids, 13 year old fanboys and stupid people. Still, remember that there ARE good movies out there.

Unfortunately, they've stopped being made.

Has anyone mentioned The View-Master Movie yet?

Seriously...a movie about a toy that you looked through to watch still images on a slide wheel.

Who comes up with this stuff?

The trailers for The Ugly Truth leaves me with the impression that it's about that outdated "Men from Mars/Women from Venus" crap, and they make me want to throw things. The wiki summary doesn't help:

Quote :

A romantically challenged morning show producer (Katherine Heigl) readily agrees to a series of outrageous tests by her male chauvinist correspondent (Gerard Butler) to prove his theories on relationships and allow her to find love. His clever ploys, however, lead to the totally expected result—she finds love at the same time that he falls in love with her.

Ahaha great so it's pretty much a premature remake of What Women Want, and Gerard Butler's gonna be the Mel Gibson who gets the girl after he sees the error of his sexist ways even though he isn't really in the wrong since all women really want is to be in the loving arms of a macho asshat who isn't into that faggy "sensitivity" bullshit.

Or, I dunno, maybe it won't be like 27 Dresses where the worst thing that could possibly happen to a woman is to be thirty-something and single. Maybe it'll be actually be a scathing deconstruction of romantic comedies and a satire on the tired gender stereotypes and unrealistic romcom ideals that hinder real life relationships more often than they help them.

...Nahhh. That would just make people confused and upset.

Spotts1701 wrote:

Has anyone mentioned The View-Master Movie yet?

Seriously...a movie about a toy that you looked through to watch still images on a slide wheel.

Who comes up with this stuff?

Well, McG's been hankering for years to make a Hot Wheels movie with Biblical overtones....

No, that's not a joke. This is indeed a project he's been wanting to do.

I'm really crossing my fingers that the new Tintin movie isn't going to suck completely.

edit: OH GOOD GOD, NO.

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED FROM VIDEO GAME MOVIES, HOLLYWOOD?

Sakurelf wrote:

I'm really crossing my fingers that the new Tintin movie isn't going to suck completely.

edit: OH GOOD GOD, NO.

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED FROM VIDEO GAME MOVIES, HOLLYWOOD?

Don't hire Uwe Boll?

You have to admit that Raimi's a much more accomplished and skilled director to tackle this kind of stuff.

Mr. Comic Book wrote:

Sakurelf wrote:

I'm really crossing my fingers that the new Tintin movie isn't going to suck completely.

edit: OH GOOD GOD, NO.

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED FROM VIDEO GAME MOVIES, HOLLYWOOD?

Don't hire Uwe Boll?

You have to admit that Raimi's a much more accomplished and skilled director to tackle this kind of stuff.

I don't think even Peter Jackson could condense and rectify the retcons of the Warcraft storyline. It's so convoluted, overly long that a movie would eitehr be one chunk of timeline that doesn't make sense out of context or a supercondensed summary of hundreds of years of war. It's not the director, it's Warcraft just doesn't translate into a movie well at all.

.....2012 is going to suck.

Tintin the fucking MOVIE? SHIT!

I seen a few episodes of that. It was horribly racist and surprisingly weird, but that was what made it Tintin. They won't, can't do that now.

Turning animated things into live action is always a bad idea. I mean, look at Alvin and the Chipmunks. And Garfield. And Asterix. God, what's next? The Perishers? Dilbert? Hagar the Horrible?

I'm sitting here and I'm TWO DAMN STEPS away from crying.

But I know when a movie's gonna be bad. You know how the trailers inevitably have the best parts? They hire special people for that. Well when there's not even enough good parts in a movie for the trailer, you KNOW it's gonna suck.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

I'm sitting here and I'm TWO DAMN STEPS away from crying.

It's a good thing you're sitting down then.

Spotts1701 wrote:

Has anyone mentioned The View-Master Movie yet?

Seriously...a movie about a toy that you looked through to watch still images on a slide wheel.

Who comes up with this stuff?

People who do lots of drugs.

Sakurelf wrote:

I don't think even Peter Jackson could condense and rectify the retcons of the Warcraft storyline. It's so convoluted, overly long that a movie would eitehr be one chunk of timeline that doesn't make sense out of context or a supercondensed summary of hundreds of years of war. It's not the director, it's Warcraft just doesn't translate into a movie well at all.

Which means this has too much potential for sequels and spin-off story lines. As much as I would appreciate seeing better rendered faces or IRL armor and props, by no means does this grant a movie (that should only be done with epic justice and equal epic effort) be attempted. Blizzard may steal $15 a month from me, but I think this is going to be one I'm going to have to take a pass on.

There's a GI-Joe movie coming out. I saw a poster for it at the movies.

Hasbro is on a roll with Transformers, clearly.

And SHIT, GI-Joe could barely house enough plot for a 20 minute episode, how the hell are they gonna make a movie out of it?

In other news, Alvin and the Chipmunks is getting a sequel. Can anybody say, "God, you exist and you are CRUEL!"?

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

And SHIT, GI-Joe could barely house enough plot for a 20 minute episode, how the hell are they gonna make a movie out of it?

By basing it on the comics, which were decidedly not for children, were often more batshit insane than military drama on TV is today, had real guns instead of bizarrely inaccurate lasers, and people getting shot by them. Quite a lot. The difference is more striking than the difference between the goofy Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon of the nineties and the also-decidedly-not-for-children comic it was based on that equal amounts of viewers never knew existed.

Of course, they're not going to do that.

People here are saying that Hollywood is running out of ideas.

After seeing that they plan to make a sequel to an apallingly badly recieved movie about computer animated chipmunks, I'm inclined to agree.

In fact, regarding ALL the trailers I saw today, I'm inclined to agree.

They're remaking Nightmare on Elm Street, you know. Like they did with Friday 13th.

REMAKES! SEQUELS! CRAZY SHIT ABOUT HOUSES FLYING WITH BALLOONS! AND SOME INVENTOR WHO WORKS OUT HOW TO TURN WATER INTO FOOD!

I think I've made my point...

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

People here are saying that Hollywood is running out of ideas.

After seeing that they plan to make a sequel to an apallingly badly recieved movie about computer animated chipmunks, I'm inclined to agree.

There are still ideas in Hollywood. What makes you think that everyone and their uncle in that place doesn't have some ~AMAZING~ screenplay that they constantly have tucked under their shoulder in the hopes that they'll accidentally bump into some bigshot producer who'll be willing to give them lots and lots of cash?

The ones that are getting greenlit, however, are usually the ones that companies are certain will make money. At the moment, most of those ideas are remakes and sequels, as they are safer and thus perceived as guaranteed monkey makers.

Quote :

CRAZY SHIT ABOUT HOUSES FLYING WITH BALLOONS!

I feel really sorry for you sometimes.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

CRAZY SHIT ABOUT HOUSES FLYING WITH BALLOONS!

Pixar's Up was ballsy and brilliant. How on earth did it managed to get lumped in with that other stuff? No comprende.

Hey, I haven't seen the film. But all I could think of when I saw the trailer was "Somebody was fucking TRIPPING when they wrote this movie."

I'm allowed to judge movies that aren't out yet based on a trailer that looks like somebody's first crack trip.

Harley, go watch it. I'm serious. Pony up for a movie ticket and just go watch it.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

I'm allowed to judge movies that aren't out yet based on a trailer that looks like somebody's first crack trip.

I have trouble imagining that someone who writes robot mpreg without questioning its plausibility can deem a trailer trippy for an image as comparably less unusual as a floating house.

Oh, very well... I'll get onto it next week.

But seriously... A FLOATING HOUSE?! Good movie or not, doesn't it strike you as just a little desperate when Hollywood starts using ideas like that? Even if it IS Pixar?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

No.

What Pixar has and you don't:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

IMAGINATION.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

AND SOME INVENTOR WHO WORKS OUT HOW TO TURN WATER INTO FOOD!

If you mean Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs, that one's based off a children's book. Which doesn't automatically equal suckitude.

Mae Bedlam wrote:

No.

What Pixar has and you don't:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

IMAGINATION.

Mae?

I'm going to hunt you down, and kill you slowly, with a pickaxe. Moments before you die, I'm going to stop killing you, and leave you to bleed to death, in a broken toilet filled with pig's fecal matter. I want you to know now, so you can't say I didn't warn you.

NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY says I lack imagination and lives.

Harley, keep digging that hole. It never gets old.