Login
Home
581 Lists
7722 Reviews
CollectionsTo be honest, it has been a while since I have watched this movie but since it is probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen, I donāt think I will ever re-watch it ever again. In fact, if I recall it correctly, Iām pretty sure I even saw the damned thing in the movie theater when it was releasedā¦ I mean, back then, I must have been 12 or 13 years old, I was just a kid when I saw this one and, after seeing the trailer, I was rather oblivious and I thought it could be a fun watch. Well, it was a huge mistake, thatās for sure. Basically, thanks to this movie, I discovered that you could watch a comedy without a single laugh throughout the whole thing and it was quite an experience. Anyway, I believe that Sylvester Stallone has made some bad movies in his career but it is easily the worst one (even Stallone himself went on record saying that it was the worst film he has ever done). To conclude, I donāt see any reasons why you should watch this flick and you should just avoid it instead of wasting you time with this crap.
A very bad movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 13 January 2011 01:57
(A review of Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot)
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A very bad movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 13 January 2011 01:52
(A review of Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd)Obviously, I wasnāt expecting much from this flick but since it was broadcasted on TV, I thought I might as well check it out. First of all, to be honest, I think that the first movie is actually one of the most overrated movies ever made so how could I enjoy this prequel which has been labelled as one of the worst movies ever made? Eventually, it was indeed quite terrible. The main issue was that the whole project was so misguided. Indeed, even though I didnāt like the first installment, it was obvious that the biggest assets were Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels and to make another movie about those characters without those guys seemed rather pointless. To be honest, there was actually one scene that me and my step-son really found hilarious. It was that scene when that one guy thinks his bathroom is covered up with shit and starts to shout like crazy. It lasted about 30 seconds and, somehow, we ended up watching this scene 20 times which was rather weird. Anyway, before and after that scene, the whole thing was completely worthless. To conclude, it is pretty much deserves its lousy reputation and it is definitely not worth a look whatsoever and you should pretty much avoid it.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A bad movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 13 January 2011 01:43
(A review of The Kentucky Fried Movie)To be honest, it has been a while since I have seen this flick so, maybe, I should give it a 2nd chance. On the other hand, since I really didnāt like it at all the first around, I donāt think Iām going to waste even more time with this flick. Indeed, it seems that this movie has quite a solid reputation but, personally, I thought it was actually seriously lame. I donāt know, I guess I'm not a huge fan of all those parodies and I thought it maybe was funny once or twice but I thought that most of it was actually rather boring. I have to admit that I was actually surprised by the amount of nudity displayed, not that I really minded, but itās not something I would expect from a US production. At least, this movie would be the breakthrough for John Landis would then direct āAnimal Houseā afterwards and, of course, it would also launch the career of David Zucker, Jerry Zucker and Jim Abrahams who would be forever linked to this genre. Anyway, to conclude, I really didnāt like this flick but if you are a fan of this genre, you may end up enjoying it more than I did.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A very bad movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 13 January 2011 01:35
(A review of Material Girls)Obviously, I didnāt expect much from this flick and I wonder how I actually ended up watching the damned thing.Ā Maybe I checked it because Anjelica Huston was involved but it was really a massive waste of time and probably the worst movie starring this actress I have seen so far. Concerning Hilary Duff, Iāll give you that, she was and still is really cute and I think she had some potential. On top of that, at least, she didn't ruin her life and her career like Lindsay Lohan or Amanda Bynes who used to be her big concurrents but, still, her movies are just incredibly underwhelming. I mean, compared to āThe Perfect Manā, āRaise Your Voiceā, āA Cinderella Storyā or āAgent Cody Banksā, this movie might actually be her worst one so far. Sure, it wasnāt a bad idea to make a movie with her sister Haylie Duff (basically, an ugly clone but just as weak in the acting department) but the story was obviously neither interesting or entertaining and the characters were just seriously obnoxious. To conclude, it was really bad, probably even worse than I expected, and I donāt see any reason why anyone should actually watch it.Ā
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 13 January 2011 01:30
(A review of Cobra)I already saw this movie but since it was a while back, I thought I might as well check it out again. Well, eventually, the damned thing Ā wasnāt as bad as I remembered but it was still seriously weak though. Basically, I have to admit that Cobra himself, some kind of 80ās version of Dirty Harry on steroids, was actually pretty badass but, unfortunately, nothing else in this movie did work though. In fact, Stallone did write the screenplay and, basically, even directed the damned thing himself (Cosmatos was credited as the director but he didnāt have much input after all) so I guess we should blame Stallone for the end-result. On the other hand, they apparently did cut off many scenes to make the damned thing shorter but I doubt that a longer version would have been such an improvement. Anyway, as a result, the plot was fairly idiotic. It was above all quite ridiculous how the main character was blamed by his colleagues when, each time, he did get some of the bad guys which should be proof enough that something major was going on. There was also not a single moment during which they took a breath to explain what was the deal with this army of psychopaths. I probably shouldn't take it too seriously but it's just that it was so damned boring, it was just hard to care about the damned thing. Back in those days, they still believed that Brigitte Nielsen could become a major movie-star and she was still married with Stallone at that time but they didnāt have much chemistry, Iām afraid. Anyway, to conclude, even though the main character was quite charismatic and had some potential, I thought it was a rather lame movie and I donāt think it is really worth a look, except if you really like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A very bad movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 13 January 2011 01:19
(A review of The Adventures of Pluto Nash)By now, I have seen almost all the movies starring Eddie Murphy (by now, I think Iām missing only 3 of them) and I have seriously never seen such a talented actor messing up his career. What a waste! I mean, back in the 80ās, the guy was huge and he made some very good flick (I loved āRawā personally) but, in the 90ās, he started to make some dubious choices and in the 00ās, all this movies were just plain terrible. Anyway, from all the garbage Murphy was involving in, I heard that this was his worst one so even though I only heard bad things about this flick, I was still curious to check it out. And indeed, it really lived up to its reputation! It is Eddie Murphy's worst movie (seriously...) and, like I said before, he has made a lot of terrible movies in his pathetic career.... I mean, to make a science-fiction feature with Murphy could have been pretty awesome but they should have started with at least a decent script. Instead, the whole thing was just terribly pathetic and embarrassing. The only funny thing was that, even though there was a huge budget, it still looked really cheap. Eventually, in absolute terms, this movie made the largest financial loss of any movie to date, with a budget of $100 million and a total US gross of $4.41 million. It means that there was a total loss of $95.59 million. Quite impressive, aināt it? Furthermore, it was not funny and just boring as hell. To conclude, the whole thing is a mess and it is definitely not worth a look whatsoever, except if you want to see the worst movie ever made by Eddie Murphy.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A very bad movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 13 January 2011 01:14
(A review of Ed)Obviously, I wasnāt expecting much from this flick but, somehow, I still ended up watching it. Indeed, I always find something quite mesmerizing about very bad movies and, sometimes, I just have to check if a movie is bad as everyone seems to think. Well, this flick definitely deserves its poor reputation, it was just plain awful and you wonder how the makers thought there was anything promising about this concept. First of all, all those movies involving animals doing any kind of sports are usually worthless (I'm not an expert though but I canāt remember watching a single one which was actually worth my time) but this one must be the worst ever. I know I shouldn't take it too seriously but come on! The whole thing was neither funny or entertaining but just plain boring. You could argue that it might be fun for kids but I highly doubt it. At the time, Matt LeBlanc had some huge success with āFriendsā and you can imagine that he planned to build up another career on the side on the silver screen but, since this movie was such a failure, his theatrical career never took off. To conclude, it is a painfully bad movie, it is not worth look whatsoever and you should just avoid it.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 13 January 2011 12:16
(A review of Fathers' Day)I wasnāt really sure what to expect front his flick but since I have a weak spot for Robin Williams, I thought I might as well check it out. In fact, I found out later on that this movie was a remake of one of these many French comedies starring GĆ©rard Depardieu and Ā Pierre Richard. When I was a kid, I was a big fan of Pierre Richard but I didnāt see āLes compĆØresā and, eventually, I'm rather curious to see now the French original version, just to check if it was Ā better than this really underwhelming American remake. I mean, sure, Ā Robin Williams and Billy Crystal both can be pretty funny and there were, indeed, a few good scenes in this movie but most of it was just rather boring. Indeed, the premise was just lame and the movie didn't succeed in making it funny or entertaining. For many who were expecting some fireworks because Robin Williams and Billy Crystal were working together for this comedy, they were seriously disappointed. Concerning Ivan Reitman, after āJuniorā, it was another flop and the rest of his career would turn out to be rather underwhelming. To conclude, even though I have seen worse, it was still a rather weak comedy and I donāt think it is really worth a look.Ā
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A very bad movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 12 January 2011 03:38
(A review of The Avengers)Obviovsly, this movie is not to be confused with the awesome super-hero feature delivered by Marvel, Ā in fact , it is arguably one of the worst movies ever made. Nowadays, if you have a successful TV-show, you can be pretty sure that, at some point, they will adapt it to the silver screen. Well, in this genre, this movie could be the worst ever made so far.Ā At first, since there Ā was a nice cast involved (Ralph Fiennes, Sean Connery, Uma Thurman) Ā and since 'The Avengers' was a pretty good TV-show, Ā there was definitely some potential. Ā Well, eventually, it turned out to be a terrible mess. Seriously, pretty much nothing worked with this movie. Indeed, the story, the acting, the directing, everything was just way below average. For Jeremiah S. Chechik, after the already misguided and underwhelming āDiaboliqueā, this movie turned out to be even worse and it pretty much ruined his career for good (he still managed to direct some episodes of some various TV-shows afterwards but he would never direct again another full length feature). To conclude, this movie has a terrible reputation, it really deserves it and you should pretty much avoid it, except if you are a huge fan of very bad movies.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A very bad movie
Posted : 14 years ago on 12 January 2011 03:28
(A review of No Retreat, No Surrender)To be honest, it has been a while since I have seen this flick but since it was one of the most disappointing movies I have ever seen, Iām pretty sure I wonāt watch it ever again. Anyway, I remember it very well when I saw the damned thing. Indeed, very early in my life, I started to watch movies obsessively (I was about 12 years old) and I was at first completely fascinated by action movies. Jean-Claude Van Damme was, at the time, one of my favorite actors and I have rented virtually all his movies at the video store. During my young years , I watched this because he was on the cover. Eventually, it turned to be pretty awful. Indeed, it is just a terribly bad movie and, at 12 years old, it was also the first time I felt ripped-off by a movie (Indeed, even though he was shown prominently on the cover, Jean-Claude Van Damme was only 10 minutes in the movie). Apparently, it is considered as Jean-Claude Van Damme's feature film debut as he was only an extra on his previous movies. Anyway, to conclude, the whole thing was just pretty pathetic and I think you should avoid this, even if you like the genre.
0 comments, Reply to this entry