$10 per ticket? That's rediculous. The place I work just recently upped our prices to $7.50, and we're probably the best theatre in 100 miles. To quote a customer I once had, "For that kind of money somebody had better better give me a hand job while I watch the movie." (He was talking about our concessions tho)
I'll tell you a bad movie..Zombie 90: Extreme pestillence!, the blood looks like ketchup, the 'guts' are hosepipe painted pinl and the dubbing and soundtrack is hilarious (the two main characters are a pair of white german scientists, one sounds like a 70's pimp and the other sounds like Cartman on helium), also the dubbing people seemed to be making it up as they where going along, and didnt know what to say in certian sections, so hummed and harred to see what would happen next.
Violent Shit 3 was made a little later by the same director, and it was pretty cool though, the gore looked sick and realistic, the killings where imaginitive, not "oh look another person got a cardboard sword stuck in them", though the dubbing was also bad, it was all done by one person!, at least he took it seriously, and read the script!
Yeah, I've seen those two lumps of cinematic ejaculations, another one of that dude's is a remake of an old video nasty called Anthropophagous, and it is fucking terrible, the effects were truly crap looking like cheap plastic and it looks like it was filmed on VHS or something.
Have you seen the Bloodletting collection? (assuming you are in britian), he has a movie in that too called "Demonium", which is actually not bad..the gore looks decent (one womans spine is exposed after she is chewed by rats), the story is a little contrived though, he tries to jump around in time like Tarantino, and fails.
funny your all talking about crap films you've seen and critising the hell out of them, but why on earth would you watch a film called Violent Shit 3 and such? ah well
In terms of directing, experience and stuff, Spider-Man 2 was definitely better. However, I think the problem's in the script this time. Too much storyline stuffed into 2 hours. Either way, they cramped it all in too little time, so I got confused and then bored. Can't even SMS some chick in the middle of the movie without missing a vital piece of storyline.
Though, IMHO, I still think D&D's the most overhated movie of all time. It seems like people, ESPECIALLY those D&D (the game) nerds out there hate it just because the 'cool guys' hate it. I've got nothing about people who form their own opinion on it, but there's just too many people who say it's "the worst movie ever" and all I have to do is ask them "have you even seen the movie?" and they go all "ololol i don't have to see the movie, the trailer sucks ass and everyone says it sucks".
Point is, I enjoyed the movie. Not exactly fun, but more interesting than say... LOTR II anyway. Main reason people loved that movie was because they loved the prequel and the books, which were superb.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
I was actually impressed by Dungeons and Dragons because it was basically a student film. The guy had never directed anything before and he had a shoestring budget. If you do a little research on the movie you find out it was basically just a lifelong dream of two friends. "Someday we're gonna make a movie about Dungeons and Dragons! You can direct it!" "Yeah, and you can star in it!" It's kind of inspiring actually, even if it didn't turn out too good.
Last time I had lobster, it reminded me of biology class. Except in biology class the professor didn't make you eat the frog when you were finished.
I'm still annoyed that Tom Baker turned down the part of gandalf . Ian McKellan was good, but Tom would have been soo much better. Instead he was in a crappy D&D film. Woe is me.
One movie I liked and everyone else hated was Independence day... that was a good bloody film! I'm sick of people bad mouthing it based on the opinions of others.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
. Ian McKellan was good, but Tom would have been soo much better. Instead he was in a crappy D&D film. Woe is me.