thanks to everyone who expressed concern for nicholas. he's doing well, happy and full of energy. what alarmed us so on friday has not fully gone away just yet. again, i don't mean to be vague, but we think it is a minor thing. and we'll continue to monitor him till it goes away, clears up, heals etc. etc.
so then, happy that tonight i put the final dot to my interview, and sent it off on its own. i think, i hope, it turned out well. at least the answers turned out well. more details forthcoming.
now to bad movies. and i don't mean to really bad movies. i mean hollywood films that are an affront to our humanity. i like bad films, revel in them, but there are a few turds that are life-suckers, energy drainers, and assaults on our time and money. not to mention mind and body. and yet, best or worst lists of anything, be it burgers or boomboxes, are totally subjective. for the past few days i've asked coworkers and friends what they think are virulent movies. answers ranged a bit, but when i suggested a couple of the films on my list, i often got, rich, what are you high? that's a great work of cinema!
nonplussed, indeed. i say what the fuck. my list, a short list of 5 films tonight, are movies that have taken away 90+ minutes of my life, time i'll never get back. not to mention the dough i forked over so i can watch them. each of these films were seen at a theater or drive-in, and not rented. genre and exploitation movies are very dear to my heart, but i love every type of movie. i've never walked out of a movie, but i've come damn close. each of these films have the distinction of being tattooed on the grey matter. i can only hope that someday my long-term memory is shredded. it'll spare me the pain caused by remembering lines, music, faces and images from these films. as conrad's and coppola's kurtz reminded us, the horror! the horror!
without further ado, without commentary, and in no ranking order here is a very subjective list of the five of the most suckass movies ever to be conceived, financed, shot, distributed and advertised. lord help me.
forrest gump
artificial intelligence
the village
flatliners
witches of eastwick
2 Comments:
Hmm, "Gump" is pablum, but what'd we expect out of Zemekis. Spielberg almost always disappoints me, and AI is no exception, but it had its visual moments. "The Village" almost worked for me, but I like Shyamalan much more than you do. Problem with him, tho, is that he's a cinematic O. Henry. He needs that trick for a film to be a film for him. "Flatliners"? Could anyone stay awake for that? "Witches of Eastwick." Bad, but unremarkably so.
I went with my wife to the movies tonight. Her choice. And she chose "Nacho Libre." (My choice tonight would've been "An Inconvenient Truth." The online trailers have hooked me.) "Nacho" was a reasonable Jack Black vehicle, by the way, but essentially nothing. Easy to put in your list of bad films, but I could add most films I've ever seen to it.
Anyway, in the theater, I saw an poster for "The Wicker Man." What a thought. The original was a little creaky in construction, but reasonably compelling. And you've got to love that true 1970s ending. I hope it doesn't change in the remake, and I expect it to be spookier and more affecting than the original. Probably because the original was a 1970s British film.
Geez, just looked up the 2006 version on IMDB. I can't believe it's a Neil LaBute film. But if there's someone who's good at hitting you in the gut, it's LaBute. Oh, those Mormon directors.
Geof
here I thot John Waters & I were the only 2 people in the world who think "Forrest Gump" is a piece of shit.
& Spielberg is so pretentious & overrated that I don't bother seeing his product anymore.
Post a Comment
<< Home