Worst movie evar!

Captain Pink · Post by **Captain Pink** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 2:28 pm

Look mine here: Andaconda

bagheadinc · Post by **bagheadinc** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 3:14 pm

That is easily topped by this

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 3:46 pm

lol they made a sequel (sorda) to Anacondas?

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:18 pm

Yes, they did, and it was terrible.

mikehendo · Post by **mikehendo** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:29 pm

Brokeback Mountain is a wonderful movie..

Arc Orion · Post by **Arc Orion** » Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:06 am

[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="704866"]Yes, they are, but the point I've always gleaned is despite that fact, their odd interpretations are rare and more often then not lead to breakdowns that leave them not functioning, rather than a danger to humanity; and that overall, while they can be dangerous and fearsome, they're still not something to be rejected or feared, merely respected.

That's not a role a villain plays. Antagonist, problem, maybe, but ... bah.[/quote]Again, read -That Thou Art Mindful of Him. I don't want to ruin the story for you, but in it, Asimov directly implies how a robot might work around the laws.

Also, though I believe this one probably doesn't count, as I believe it was written without the three laws in mind, he also wrote Sally, in which some robots (or at least, cars with positronic brains) actually end up killing a man.

Really, the possibility of robots hurting individual humans in order to help them as a whole was brought up by Asimov himself, though I don't believe he ever had a robot with the three laws inbuilt kill a human directly.

wocket · Post by **wocket** » Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:26 am

[quote="Deacon";p="705017"]Yes, it's tragic that Sir Anthony Hopkins isn't in porn...[/quote]

Hey, that slurping noise he made in "Silence of the Lambs" showed some promise. He could EASILY do porn. Lord knows he's better looking than some of the guys already established in that genre.

Arres · Post by **Arres** » Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:55 am

[quote="Deacon";p="705017"]Yes, it's tragic that Sir Anthony Hopkins isn't in porn...[/quote]

Maybe not, but lets talk Scarlett Johannsen or whoever Maxim is claiming as hottest broad this year.

Besides if you get all of this stuff:
[quote="The Cid";p="704992"]-A real director.
-Real acting talent.
-Real writers.
-A real crew.
[/quote]

into a movie it ceases to BE porn and becomes a movie with graphic sex scenes in it. Seriously, it all comes down to writing. You don't need acting talent without a good script and you don't need an inspired director if you don't have good talent.

Here's the problem though: I don't WANT developed characters! I'm not trying to fall in love, or develop sympathy for Bunny Hawt's plight. I don't want to know what her problem IS unless it's that she "just can't get enough, Mr. Johnson". I don't care WHY she's banging, or what her real name is. I want her easily objectified, and forgotten.

I believe that your "dream"ing should be aimed more at getting mainstream America to accept that sex happens to main characters and you would like to see it in your movies without it being immediately dubbed porn and the actors embarrassed forever they were involved.

Prospero · Post by **Prospero** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 3:35 am

Sideways.

LQDMTL · Post by **LQDMTL** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 2:24 pm

[quote="Arres";p="705217"]I believe that your "dream"ing should be aimed more at getting mainstream America to accept that sex happens to main characters and you would like to see it in your movies without it being immediately dubbed porn and the actors embarrassed forever they were involved.[/quote]
Personally, I'm just fine with a movie having 0 sex in it. I don't want a good story interrupted by gratuitous sex. It actually pisses me off when it happens. If I want to see sex, I know where to find it. It doesn't need to be in every movie out there. In fact, it needs to not be in most of them. If you can't make a good movie without a sex scene, you're a pretty shitty director. Just my opinion.

The Cid · Post by **The Cid** » Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:16 am

I think people are going a little too far with their interpretations of "I'd like to see a well-done, romantic porn."

-I've watched porn with girlfriends before. It would feel less awkward doing so if porn movies weren't so...much the way they are.

-Now I know this is something completely different, but "tasteful pornography" is a lucrative business. Just ask Hef.*

-I've seen more disgusting things in great films than a not-so-subtle sex scene. MANY more disgusting things.

* = "Tasteful" is an extremely relative term in this industry. Playboy, as opposed to some of the rags out there, would fit the bill. Please don't jump down my throat about the use of this word, alright?

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Wed Dec 27, 2006 4:40 am

DAMN YOUR USE OF TASTEFUL IN THAT CONTEXT!!

Post by **Martin Blank** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:05 pm

Worst movie ever. Still pissed that I sat through it. I did so only because I thought something so aggravatingly bad had to have something good to it.

Even worse than Scorpion King.

Jezebel · Post by **Jezebel** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:08 pm

You are treading on thin ice, boy.

jimkatai · Post by **jimkatai** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:44 am

+1 for American Psycho being a good movie!

Real Life Forums

Worst movie evar!

Which is the worst movie? (of all time?)

Who is online