ShooterMcMarco
Hall of Fame
I like them both :-(
IMDB 100 worst movies of all time
- Thread starter goober
- Start date
I like them both :-(
I am watching Seinfeld right now
Phil
Hall of Fame
How can Delta Force be #27...or even ON that list. That was a classic, classic epic of good vs. evil. Actually, Chuck Norris' entire CATALOG should probably be on that list...
But WTF is "Keloglan kara prens'e karsi"...I mean, how can it be on the "worst" list if no one's actually SEEN the damn thing, or is even able to pronounce the title?
But WTF is "Keloglan kara prens'e karsi"...I mean, how can it be on the "worst" list if no one's actually SEEN the damn thing, or is even able to pronounce the title?
goober
Legend
Delta Farce, not Delta Force. Someone decided to make a spoof of a bad Chuck Norros movie. Here are some choice quotes from movie reviewers,
"If you had to make a choice between seeing this witless comedy or actually going to Iraq, you'd have some serious thinking to do." Hollywood Reporter, Frank Scheck
"Rare is the movie that can actually offend all corners, but this one does: Mexicans, Iraqis, Americans, the military, rednecks and the institution of American filmmaking are all equally shamed." E! Online, Tod Goldberg
Sean Dugan
Rookie
The worst films are those that are bad, but not so bad that they are not comically bad a al Plan 9 from Outer Space or They Saved Hitler's Brain.
Two films soooooooo bad that they are funny.
Two films soooooooo bad that they are funny.
Fedfan4life
Semi-Pro
37. You Got Served 2004
Roger from sister, sister and Omarion at his best.
Roger from sister, sister and Omarion at his best.
Say what? I can believe 2001: A Space Odyssy is sucky (so sucky I haven't even seen it), but Serial Mom and Weekend at Bernie's were both fairly funny, if imperfect, films. The explicit content of Kathleen Turner's prank phone calls in Serial Mom is worth the price of a rental alone! (While at the video store, may I recommend picking up "Ishtar" as well? I suspect those who claim it's one of the worst movies of all time have not actually seen it. It's got some very funny stuff in it...)
How the hell did "The Children's Hour" end up on anyone's movie list of any kind? Is that the Lillian Hellman lesbeen flick? Never seen it, but a bit of an obscure choice for inclusion here, I must say.
Sounds like "Kundun" would be the perfect companion piece for this flick.
Phil
Hall of Fame
I thought the "a" was a typo...never heard of the parody...I don't think parodies should be on the list-especially if they're parodies of incredibly bad movies (though, let's face it...anything with Lee Marvin can't be all THAT bad). He sleepwalked through that flick.
Dedans Penthouse
Legend
Santa Claus Conquers the Martians (martian children view Santa only on TV--martian parents abduct Santa to make their kids happy. you can imagine where it goes from there). Good call hoons.
Plan 9 From Outer Space (so bad it's good; last Bela Lugosi film)
Che! (pretentious crap; only good thing was Jack Palance--Jack Palance!-- playing Fidel Castro)
Shanghai Suprise (i can't believe this totally bombed--it starred the great & talented actress/singer madonna--surprise)
Swept Away (madonna stunk in shanghai suprise and in this one she smelled)
Gigli (J-Lo's glutes couldn't rescue this one)
Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo (r. schneider = 3rd rate comic)
Glitter (mariah carey plays a boring, self-absorbed, one-dimensional clown; that is, "crusty carey" plays herself)
Caddyshack II (jackie mason's horrible self-parody; "gimme the check" chevy chase, a boring robert stack; dana merrill playing dana merrill with a cork-up-you-know-where; dyan cannon was her usual 'next-morning' crusty self...ugh..horrible movie)
Crossroads (move over anna magnani: here comes brittany spears.)
SUB-CATEGORY
(BAD/CHEESY MOVIES THAT YOU ADMIT TO ENJOY WATCHING--GUILTY PLEASURES)
1. Roadhouse
--the scene when Dalton (Patrick Swazey) gets out of bed in the buff and Carrie Ann (Kathleen Wilhoite) audiably 'shivers and quivers' as she's blown away with excitement
--Swazey's quote: "pain don't hurt"
--a jealous Brad Wesley (Ben Gazzara) gives his trashy girlfriend a shiner; swazey walks into Wesley's house while the trashy girlfriend is working out...she looks at him for a full second and then "discreetly" covers her shiner--classic!
Plan 9 From Outer Space (so bad it's good; last Bela Lugosi film)
Che! (pretentious crap; only good thing was Jack Palance--Jack Palance!-- playing Fidel Castro)
Shanghai Suprise (i can't believe this totally bombed--it starred the great & talented actress/singer madonna--surprise)
Swept Away (madonna stunk in shanghai suprise and in this one she smelled)
Gigli (J-Lo's glutes couldn't rescue this one)
Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo (r. schneider = 3rd rate comic)
Glitter (mariah carey plays a boring, self-absorbed, one-dimensional clown; that is, "crusty carey" plays herself)
Caddyshack II (jackie mason's horrible self-parody; "gimme the check" chevy chase, a boring robert stack; dana merrill playing dana merrill with a cork-up-you-know-where; dyan cannon was her usual 'next-morning' crusty self...ugh..horrible movie)
Crossroads (move over anna magnani: here comes brittany spears.)
SUB-CATEGORY
(BAD/CHEESY MOVIES THAT YOU ADMIT TO ENJOY WATCHING--GUILTY PLEASURES)
1. Roadhouse
--the scene when Dalton (Patrick Swazey) gets out of bed in the buff and Carrie Ann (Kathleen Wilhoite) audiably 'shivers and quivers' as she's blown away with excitement
--Swazey's quote: "pain don't hurt"
--a jealous Brad Wesley (Ben Gazzara) gives his trashy girlfriend a shiner; swazey walks into Wesley's house while the trashy girlfriend is working out...she looks at him for a full second and then "discreetly" covers her shiner--classic!
Inspector Closeau - This was unwatchable. Steve Martin must have been desparate for the cash.
The Italian Job remake - the plot of this film is so amazingly stupid I thought it was prehaps meant to be a comedy. If Quinten Tarantino or Guy Ritchie had made that film instead of those idiots following Ed Norton around wondering where he hid the gold they would have taken him to a warehouse and started systematically breaking off body parts until he produced the bullion.
Dodgeball - It was funny for about 20 seconds.
RV - Someone must have blackmailed Robin Williams and Cheryl Hines into making that thing.
Ishtar - I tried to watch it once and it is absolutely BRUTAL.
The Italian Job remake - the plot of this film is so amazingly stupid I thought it was prehaps meant to be a comedy. If Quinten Tarantino or Guy Ritchie had made that film instead of those idiots following Ed Norton around wondering where he hid the gold they would have taken him to a warehouse and started systematically breaking off body parts until he produced the bullion.
Dodgeball - It was funny for about 20 seconds.
RV - Someone must have blackmailed Robin Williams and Cheryl Hines into making that thing.
Ishtar - I tried to watch it once and it is absolutely BRUTAL.
Last edited:
LuckyR
Legend
Since making a good movie is relatively difficult there is an endless supply of dreck. What would make such a list interesting would be to find movies that actually had an expectation to be good and still sucked.
High budget, good actors, no sequels, no slapsticky comedies, no ports from another media-type.
Now that would a great, worst list.
High budget, good actors, no sequels, no slapsticky comedies, no ports from another media-type.
Now that would a great, worst list.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but you clearly have poor, or no, taste in films, particularly comedy.
Ishtar was fairly funny, Dodgeball had many genuine laughs, and even the Pink Panther thing with Martin had very funny moments even if it wasn't as good as the original. (Didn't see RV, but can easily believe it sucked since Robin Williams was in it, and the Italian Job was better than many other films.)Tell us, young Cruzer, what movies DO you think are funny?
This actually ties in to "Ishtar", and the sort of reverse discrimination that took place against that film. Because it was SO expensive and had run over-budget and over schedule, and had such an A list cast and a well-respected director, it became a target for abuse and derision once it was clear that they had not made the next "Citizen Kane". But if you separate all the hype and bad press and just evaluate the actual film itself, it has some fine and funny moments.
It seems like several of you aren't really listing truly dreadful films, true "worst all-time" type flicks, but perhaps films that weren't 20% better than they actually were, or failed to live up to your own expectations for whatever reason. Personally speaking, if I walk into a theater to see a film I'm expecting to more or less stink (and most films do kind of stink), particularly a comedy like, say, "Employee of the Month", and I find myself laughing several times in spite of myself, that film ain't going to end up anywhere near my "worst all time" list.
Last edited:
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
It's been years since I've seen Ishtar but my memories of it were not good at all. I found it to be repugnantly self indulgent the way no other film in history,with the possible exception of Hudson Hawk and all the Smokey and the Bandit movies,has been. Most people who have seen the film don't know or care about the "inside baseball" issues, i.e. the budget,director,ect.
They just know a stinker when they've been subjected to it. The movie felt like one long insider's joke between two hugely egocentric actors(if that isn't too redundant),Warren Beatty and Dustin Hoffman.
I actually felt uncomfortable in the middle of the film like I was almost watching something not meant for public viewing, the film was so self indulgant.
Having said that, the film may contain some fine individual moments,for all I know. It has been a long time and the mind wisely erases painful moments too intense to live with. But all I recall is that that movie stunk like a dead rat laying out in the sun. Sorry.
They just know a stinker when they've been subjected to it. The movie felt like one long insider's joke between two hugely egocentric actors(if that isn't too redundant),Warren Beatty and Dustin Hoffman.
I actually felt uncomfortable in the middle of the film like I was almost watching something not meant for public viewing, the film was so self indulgant.
Having said that, the film may contain some fine individual moments,for all I know. It has been a long time and the mind wisely erases painful moments too intense to live with. But all I recall is that that movie stunk like a dead rat laying out in the sun. Sorry.
People DID care about the inside baseball aspect of it at the time, because, like Waterworld, or even Heaven's Gate, it got a lot of bad press and people were primed to ridicule it.
If the movie was one long, self-indulgent inside joke between hugely egocentric actors, well, then Hollywood needs to make more such self-indulgent inside joke-y movies...
As for Smokey and the Bandit, at this point in time I have no recollection of those films, but don't many people revere them?
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
People revere Smokey and The Bandit? Many people revere Pork Rinds but I don't think that makes them quality foods. This list is about opinions and in my opinion, all copies of Smokey and The Bandit should be gathered up, placed in a space capsule and shot into the sun.
You are saying that the inside baseball aspect of the movie mattered to people but I disagree. It may have been newspaper fodder at the time but the movie sunk out of sight based on it's own lack of any redeeming features.
Ishtar is a classic textbook example of Hollywood's fawning self love for itself.
It's an over indulgent piece of dreck that rightfully deserves to be thought of as a complete disaster,if my memory serves me correctly. That's my opinion anyway.
You are saying that the inside baseball aspect of the movie mattered to people but I disagree. It may have been newspaper fodder at the time but the movie sunk out of sight based on it's own lack of any redeeming features.
Ishtar is a classic textbook example of Hollywood's fawning self love for itself.
It's an over indulgent piece of dreck that rightfully deserves to be thought of as a complete disaster,if my memory serves me correctly. That's my opinion anyway.
Last edited:
I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but you clearly have poor, or no, taste in films, particularly comedy.
Tell us, young Cruzer, what movies DO you think are funny?
This actually ties in to "Ishtar", and the sort of reverse discrimination that took place against that film. Because it was SO expensive and had run over-budget and over schedule, and had such an A list cast and a well-respected director, it became a target for abuse and derision once it was clear that they had not made the next "Citizen Kane". But if you separate all the hype and bad press and just evaluate the actual film itself, it has some fine and funny moments.
It seems like several of you aren't really listing truly dreadful films, true "worst all-time" type flicks, but perhaps films that weren't 20% better than they actually were, or failed to live up to your own expectations for whatever reason. Personally speaking, if I walk into a theater to see a film I'm expecting to more or less stink (and most films do kind of stink), particularly a comedy like, say, "Employee of the Month", and I find myself laughing several times in spite of myself, that film ain't going to end up anywhere near my "worst all time" list.
Obviously I won't ever by asking you for any film recommendations anytime soon. I guess my taste in film viewing has escalated past the juvenile humor which is a staple in every Ben Stiller comedy. You can flame all you want about my taste in comedy films but Ishtar IS one of the biggest turkeys of all time. Perhaps you were stoned when you saw it. As far as comedy films I liked try Dr. Strangelove or Topkapi or One, Two, Three. Since these lists of "best" and "worst" are merely someone's personal opinion there will always be disagreement and there is no need to post rude comments because someone criticized something you like.
Last edited:
Doc Hollidae
Hall of Fame
Agree with Curse of the Golden Flower. Incest......
Why do people continue to cite "Dr. Strangelove" in any way over than when listing the most overrated films of all time? Ishtar and Dodgeball had many more geniune laughs than that alleged comedy. I think people mistake mildly subversive or satiric for being funny when that movie gets mentioned.
anchorsteamer
Rookie
"Dr. Strangeglove" is one of the funniest movies ever made. Yeah it's not humor in a "dumb & dumber" or "airplane" capacity (classics) but it was an iconic film that couldn't have been acted, scripted or done any better. Ishtar certainly wasn't great but it was actually pretty funny, though I didn't see it until probably 10 years ago with no context or thought other then I need to rent something and I cant find anything. As for worst movie ever, the list starts and ends with "Batman and Robin". What a train wreck
I wouldn't underestimate the public's ability to have their perceptions shaped by expectation and media spin (and not just when it comes to movies, either.) It happens all the time, and in ways large and small, and you are naive if you have think perception has no effect on people's judgments. People like to pile on an alleged stinker like "Ishtar" because it's been annointed as a "bomb" we're supposed to condemn, while at the same time they are primed to overly praise an okay movie like "Little Miss Sunshine" because it's this year's critical darling.
As for "Ishtar", all these labels such as "overly indulgent", "fawning self-love", "ego-centric actors" are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The bottom line is that there were many many funny moments in it, period, and that's the true test of a comedy.
In the meantime, where all those "Smokey and the Bandit" fans? I'm not one of them, but I know you are out there. Let your voices be heard!
Last edited:
It may have been iconic at the time, but it wasn't actually funny, and has aged worse than a sun-baked WTA'er.
Now you're talking! This perfectly sums up Ishtar, and the way it (or any film) should be seen and evaluated. You appear to have judged the film on its merits alone, free from any media bias, and correctly can see that it was pretty funny but not great film. It may not be "Citizen Kane", but it sure doesn't belong anywhere near any "worst movie" list.
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
I find Dr. Strangelove to be a movie filled with brilliant performances by brilliant actors(most of them being Peter Sellers but George C. Scott and others can't be forgotten) and directed brilliantly by Stanley Kubrick. It is as hilarious now as when it was made. It is rightfully considered a classic.
I know this is about opinions, but when Dr. Strangelove shows up on virtually every list of best movies ever made, and Ishtar shows up on virtually every list of worst movies, I think one can assume there must be a valid reason.
As for blaming the media for killing Ishtar, I think you greatly overstate it. If the media could really sway movie audiences to that degree the last three Adam Sandler movies would have been hits,instead of bombs.
I know this is about opinions, but when Dr. Strangelove shows up on virtually every list of best movies ever made, and Ishtar shows up on virtually every list of worst movies, I think one can assume there must be a valid reason.
As for blaming the media for killing Ishtar, I think you greatly overstate it. If the media could really sway movie audiences to that degree the last three Adam Sandler movies would have been hits,instead of bombs.
Are you suggesting that the media hailed the last three Sandler movies as great films, but the public wasn't swayed by that and the movies bombed?
(EDIT: FYI: Just checked the U.S. box office on "Click", Sandler's recent film from last year. It grossed almost 400 million dollars worldwide. With "bombs" like that, who needs "hits"?)
Last edited:
Moose Malloy
G.O.A.T.
How can anyone not think Dr Strangelove is (still) brilliant & funny? It doesn't seem dated at all, don't think any of Kubrick's films do, his films always seem ahead of their time. Peter Sellers is one of the most gifted comedic performers of alltime & Kubrick one of the best directors. Comedy is a genre that most splits audiences, though, so many differences in what we find funny.
Here is a list of the best films of alltime, as voted by many respected directors.
http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/topten/poll/directors.html
Dr Strangelove is #5
btw I found Ishtar funny as well, the budget & offscreen attention was probably a factor in the public's reception of it, it wasn't that bad.
Here is a list of the best films of alltime, as voted by many respected directors.
http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/topten/poll/directors.html
Dr Strangelove is #5
btw I found Ishtar funny as well, the budget & offscreen attention was probably a factor in the public's reception of it, it wasn't that bad.
Last edited:
Exactly... Unfortunately for Ishtar, it's perceived as much worse than it is. Fortunately for Strangelove, it's perceived as much better than it is...
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
I'm saying the amount of publicity generated by Hollywood to hype their product doesn't always correlate with box office success(think of "Snakes on a Plane" for example). I think the obverse is true also,to a degree.
Critics can't kill or help a film to any great extent and neither can newspapers or t.v. But there is one thing that can.
What matters most is word of mouth. What do your friends,neighbors,co- workers,family think about a film? That is the real test.
If your buddy says a movie stinks that may kill the deal but if the film critic in Time magazine pans it, that has substantially less infulence on the average
Joe. That's what doomed Ishtar.
People saw the movie,thought it was garbage and told their friends.
Just like Heaven's Gate or Waterworld or Click the one thing that guarantees a movie won't draw flies is to put out a product that
isn't capable of drawing flies. Ishtar is such a product.
Critics can't kill or help a film to any great extent and neither can newspapers or t.v. But there is one thing that can.
What matters most is word of mouth. What do your friends,neighbors,co- workers,family think about a film? That is the real test.
If your buddy says a movie stinks that may kill the deal but if the film critic in Time magazine pans it, that has substantially less infulence on the average
Joe. That's what doomed Ishtar.
People saw the movie,thought it was garbage and told their friends.
Just like Heaven's Gate or Waterworld or Click the one thing that guarantees a movie won't draw flies is to put out a product that
isn't capable of drawing flies. Ishtar is such a product.
Before I address the rest of your post because I don't have time at the moment, why are you including "Click", a hit movie that grossed 400 million, on a list of box office and critical failures?
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
I wasn't aware it was a success. It didn't seem all that successful to me. Insert your own favorite bomb then(Spanglish?). The point remains the same.
Last edited:
alfa164164
Professional
Superman Returns may have been the only movie I actually considered walking out of before it finished (my wife stopped me).
If you weren't "aware" that CLICK was a hit movie that grossed some 400 million dollars, don't you think it was a bit reckless of you to have cited it, twice, as an example of a big flop? What's next, you claiming Federer isn't a very good tennis player, someone else pointing out he's won 10 slams, and you responding "Well, I wasn't aware he'd won all those grand slams. He seems pretty bad to me..."
Now I'm thinking maybe you just aren't "aware" that Ishtar was actually an okay flick?
I agree that word of mouth is crucial, but a man of the world like yourself should not be so naive to think that the media doesn't play a huge role in shaping our perceptions and expecations in many areas of life, including the quality of a motion picture. While certain kinds of silly films like "Snakes on a Plane" (which actually got some good reviews) and, say, The Police Academy movies, may be immune to what the critics say, many other films can be greatly buoyed by critical praise or destroyed by it. Enough critics pan a movie, and you might even get a chance to hear any word of mouth on it because a studio may quickly pull it from theaters to cut their losses.
But it's not just critics. Many factors can influence how we are primed to receive a certain movie, or a product of any sort, be it negative or positive, and one of the reasons Hollywood spends millions of dollars in advertising and publicity in order to position and push their movies is because it works. The reason we are even aware of the movies we're talking about here is because of advertising and publicity, while we remain ignorant of dozens upon dozens of small, independent films of vastly superior quality that didn't have the dollars to compete with Hollywood movies.
Ishtar got a bad rap even before it was released -- even before it was finished, if memory serves -- and it wasn't because of audience word of mouth.
Last edited:
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
I guess I got Click and Spanglish mixed up so perhaps that invalidates everything else I say...but I don't think so.If you weren't "aware" that CLICK was a hit movie that grossed some 400 million dollars, don't you think it was a bit reckless of you to have cited it, twice, as an example of a big flop? What's next, you claiming Federer isn't a very good tennis player, someone else pointing out he's won 10 slams, and you responding "Well, I wasn't aware he'd won all those grand slams. He seems pretty bad to me..."
Now I'm thinking maybe you just aren't "aware" that Ishtar was actually an okay flick?
I agree that word of mouth is crucial, but a man of the world like yourself should not be so naive to think that the media doesn't play a huge role in shaping our perceptions and expecations in many areas of life, including the quality of a motion picture. While certain kinds of silly films like "Snakes on a Plane" (which actually got some good reviews) and, say, The Police Academy movies, may be immune to what the critics say, many other films can be greatly buoyed by critical praise or destroyed by it. Enough critics pan a movie, and you might even get a chance to hear any word of mouth on it because a studio may quickly pull it from theaters to cut their losses.
But it's not just critics. Many factors can influence how we are primed to receive a certain movie, or a product of any sort, be it negative or positive, and one of the reasons Hollywood spends millions of dollars in advertising and publicity in order to position and push their movies is because it works. The reason we are even aware of the movies we're talking about here is because of advertising and publicity, while we remain ignorant of dozens upon dozens of small, independent films of vastly superior quality that didn't have the dollars to compete with Hollywood movies.
Ishtar got a bad rap even before it was released -- even before it was finished, if memory serves -- and it wasn't because of audience word of mouth.
Sometimes people get confused, as you are perhaps when you confuse what I've said about Ishtar vis a vis it's lack of success.
I've never claimed that the media panning the movie didn't have an effect on people's perceptions of it. I'm sure it did.
But as I said before I think you've greatly overstated that effect.
What killed the movie was the word of mouth from people that had watched the film and found it to be, as I did, a highly self indulgent monument to the colossal egos of the stars involved. It was difficult not to feel uncomfortable while watching it, it was so self consciously smug.
The word of mouth did this movie in more than anything. You say differently but I'm speaking from experience,albeit my limited personal experience. That's the feed back I got from others too.
Last edited:
beernutz
Hall of Fame
If you weren't "aware" that CLICK was a hit movie that grossed some 400 million dollars, don't you think it was a bit reckless of you to have cited it, twice, as an example of a big flop? What's next, you claiming Federer isn't a very good tennis player, someone else pointing out he's won 10 slams, and you responding "Well, I wasn't aware he'd won all those grand slams. He seems pretty bad to me..."
Now I'm thinking maybe you just aren't "aware" that Ishtar was actually an okay flick?
I agree that word of mouth is crucial, but a man of the world like yourself should not be so naive to think that the media doesn't play a huge role in shaping our perceptions and expecations in many areas of life, including the quality of a motion picture. While certain kinds of silly films like "Snakes on a Plane" (which actually got some good reviews) and, say, The Police Academy movies, may be immune to what the critics say, many other films can be greatly buoyed by critical praise or destroyed by it. Enough critics pan a movie, and you might even get a chance to hear any word of mouth on it because a studio may quickly pull it from theaters to cut their losses.
But it's not just critics. Many factors can influence how we are primed to receive a certain movie, or a product of any sort, be it negative or positive, and one of the reasons Hollywood spends millions of dollars in advertising and publicity in order to position and push their movies is because it works. The reason we are even aware of the movies we're talking about here is because of advertising and publicity, while we remain ignorant of dozens upon dozens of small, independent films of vastly superior quality that didn't have the dollars to compete with Hollywood movies.
Ishtar got a bad rap even before it was released -- even before it was finished, if memory serves -- and it wasn't because of audience word of mouth.
FWIW, IMDB and rottentomatoes both have Click grossing $137 million in the US. Where did you get the $400 million figure?
The_Dark_Knight
Banned
Any movie with Christopher Walken can be considered great.
beernutz
Hall of Fame
You obviously didn't see Gigli or Domino.
Walken trivia: Was George Lucas's second choice for the role of Han Solo in Star Wars.
Wow, how different would filmdom have been if Walken was Han?
Last edited:
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
Hmmm... maybe I wasn't as far off as first thought.
Rottentomatoes has Spanglish grossing just $42 million. At any rate my points don't fall or rise based on the box office of some middling Adam Sandler movie.
Borat
Professional
Killer Klownz from outer space is almost such a bad horror film it is a good comedy.
What part of WORLD WIDE GROSS confused you?
Yes, you were very far off. You called a hit movie that grossed close to 400 million worldwide a "bomb". And Spanglish, a not-bad film that got some good reviews, and did respectable, if not boffo, business as well when you add in some 40 mill in vid rentals, is far from being considered a "bomb".
And yeah, I think your points do rise or fall a bit based on your erroneous claims about hits and bombs.
Last edited:
beernutz
Hall of Fame
No part of it confused me, dipstick. I merely asked where you got your numbers since they appeared to me to be at odds with the US gross.
Sure seems like that's what you were claiming when you said this earlier:
In any case, I think we can agree on the following:
1) You and your buddies didn't like Ishstar and spread the bad word about it.
2) You and your buddies were primed by the media not to like it, which makes number #1 here no surprise.
3) You don't know anything about Adam Sandler's career or the success or failure of his movies, and should probably stop referring to him and his movies to support your arguments.
It's not on there because it's a list of "all time worst movies", not a list of "much-funnier-than-you'd-expect films".
Of course they are at odds with US gross, genius. Last I checked, world wide gross meant WORLD WIDE GROSS. I stated I was referring to the world wide gross quite clearly -- and even underlined it -- in the original post. (And I got those numbers from IMDB, as you did.) So don't get your panties in a wad just because you either misread the original post or have trouble grasping the difference between how much money a film makes just from the US box office versus how much it makes in the entire world.
Last edited:
The_Dark_Knight
Banned
What, no Bloodz vs Wolvez?
and of course the classic:
Death Bed: The Bed That Eats People
and of course the classic:
Death Bed: The Bed That Eats People
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
Then I guess your status as a judge of movies sinks a bit as well based on your attempts to rehibilitate the reputation of a bomb like Ishtar. Talk about revisionist history!
So I got something wrong about one Adam Sandler movie. Sorry.Do you want to quibble about Heaven's Gate or Waterworld as well? Any complaints there?
It's all about opinions anyway. Or that's the impression I get. So sue me.
I'm not the only one in this thread who recognizes Ishtar is funny, as you can see for yourself. Our ranks are growing! After remember, "Citizen Kane" wasn't considered the classic it is today when it first came out...
I haven't seen Heaven's Gate or Waterworld, so can't comment on those.
And you didn't get "something wrong" about "one" Adam Sandler movie. You made a major mistake about the fortunes of Click, and then you falsely labeled Spanglish a bomb as well. Reading between the lines, I'm guessing Adam Sandler is not a favorite of yours...
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
No, I don't care for Adam Sandler and let me know when that "Ishtar Appreciation Society" forms up. I want to see people find Ishtar "funny".
Ishtar has geniune laughs, but Dr. Strangelove... not so much. I'd like to witness people actually laughing at this wildly overrated "comedy".
alwaysatnet
Semi-Pro
I'll let that stand as the last word on the issue. I think the remark speaks for itself.Your post,#98,not mine,I meant.
Last edited:
If you were going to "let that stand as the last word on the issue", you wouldn't have posted again.
I'm sure Strangelove is an "important" film that has a lot to "say" about politics and war, but for pure laughs? Rent Ishtar!
Similar threads
