Worst of all time, feel free to add

[JMK]

http://entertainment.msn.com/news/article.aspx?news=131054

10. Howard the Duck
9. Hudson Hawk
8. Ishtar
7. Inchon & Battlefield Earth
6. Cleopatra
5. Heaven's Gate
4. The Postman
3. Town & Country
2. Cuttroat Island
1. The Adventures of Pluto Nash

I'd like to nominate Vertical Limit as well.

[ReaperFett]

Hudson Hawk is good!

Postman isn't that bad. Dull, but not the fourth worst movie ever.

[Dasquian Belargic]

I think these are the movies that 'bombed' the most - that cost loads yet made hardly anything.

I don't know whether it was a 'turkey', but I'd suggest The Perfect Storm.

[JMK]

I actually enjoyed that one, but i acknowledge being in the minority there. Marky Mark's romance with Diane Lane did suckify the movie a lot though.

[Pierce Tondry]

I may be insane, but I love Howard the Duck. :)

[ReaperFett]

Haven't ever seen it.

[Marcus Telcontar]

That list is not if the movie sucked, it's if the movie bombed at the boxoffice. Them bombing isnt really in doubt. Suck factor certainly is.

[ReaperFett]

I'm sure it's missing one. I vaguely remember a comedy last year or the year before doing awful, and had a decent cast too. Sure that was lowest.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Pluto Nash though might be the worst movie ever, I tried watching part of that and turned it after 5 minutes it is horrible.

[JMK]

I adored Howard the Duck as a kid, then I went about 15 years or so without having seen it. I saw on tv about 2 months ago and thought I was going to puke. :lol

[CMJ]

Originally posted by JMK
I actually enjoyed that one, but i acknowledge being in the minority there. Marky Mark's romance with Diane Lane did suckify the movie a lot though.

Actually, I know more people that like that movie than those that don't. I think you're in the majority.

[JMK]

WOOHOO!

[Charley]

The Shipping News is definitely the crappiest thing on film.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Originally posted by Agent Charley
The Shipping News is definitely the crappiest thing on film.

Oh my god, do I ever agree. Trapped on a plane flight with this POS as 'entertainment' was paaaaaaaaaaaaain. This a movie to commit suicide by, it's that bad. There is no curse in any language that can describe this crapfest. A loathesome, dispicable, spiteful to the audenice film.

Another rancid film is Ameile. That was on the flight back. Geee, I really lucked out on that trip -_-

[JMK]

Was the trip in between at least worth it?

[Charley]

:lol I saw it on my plane trip as well. Why do they decide to play the most horrible movies on flights?

I got Gosford Park one way, Shipping News the other.

I think they were trying to kill me.

I heard Amelie was pretty good though.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I could see the Shipping News was boring from the Trailers.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Amelie was fun, I liked it. But then I probably identify with the main character a bit more than Mark does.

[Morgan Evanar]

AmeileWhat. You have to be kidding. Amieile is excellent.

Then again, you don't like Pulp Fiction either :rolleyes

[Marcus Telcontar]

Originally posted by JMK
Was the trip in between at least worth it?

Hell yeah. New Zealand is a bloody great place. God knows why they play crap on the flights.... it's not like you can escape easily. Thank god I had my laptop on the trip back and fired up FOTR rip to blot out Amiele. Qantas inflight entertainment leaves a hell of a lot to be desired.

Amiele was awful. It's the type of arty film that puts the F into Art. It's supposed to have some sort of comedy, but the only part that even went close to being bearable was the toilet scene - and even then it was so overdone I was ready to scream "I GOT THE FRELLING POINT ALREADY!!!!"

If it wasnt for the fact it was being shown on the bomber, I would have sued for 2 hours of my life back.


Then again, you don't like Pulp Fiction either

Yeah well I'm not the only one around this place either to hate it.

[Syo]

I loved Howard the Duck

[Jedi Master Carr]

I don't care for Pulp Fiction much either Marcus so you have company :) About Ameile I tried watching it once but couldn't get into. I am not really big into French films. French directors get too wierd for me.

[Master Yoghurt]

Amelie was a funny movie. If you hate it, you probably don't understand French humor :p

As for Pulp Fiction - an absolute classic!

.. and those movies on the top 10 list, are more or less a waste of time, some worse than others, so I guess they deserved to bomb.

[Jedieb]

10. Howard the Duck - SUCKED
9. Hudson Hawk - REALLY, REALLY, SUCKED!
8. Ishtar - SUCKED
7. Inchon & Battlefield Earth - TRAVOLTA IS INSANE
6. Cleopatra - (A whipped Richard Burton. That DOESN'T suck.)
5. Heaven's Gate - (Sue me, I liked it.)
4. The Postman - SUCKED
3. Town & Country - Haven't seen it.
2. Cuttroat Island - Haven't seen it.
1. The Adventures of Pluto Nash - It's on HBO, NOT GONNA SEE IT.

My quick crapfest list:
Staying Alive (Stallone and Travolta must NEVER be allowed to work together again!)
Event Horizon (Poe is spinning in his grave.)
Everything Woody Allen has done in the last 10 years.

[Jinn Fizz]

"Howard the Duck" isn't nearly as bad as some people try to make it out to be...oh yeah, it's not that great, but it's not terrible either. I liked it well enough. :)

And I also liked The Perfect Storm quite a bit. Of course, the fact that I think George Clooney is hubba hubba might have had something to do with it ;). And boy, I almost got seasick at more than one point during the movie, but it was worth it.

I finally watched as much as I could stand of Battlefield: Earth when it was on the USA Channel a few weeks ago. Holy crap, but that was some awful piece of poodoo. My TV stank for days. :x

[Jedi Master Carr]

LOL I knew I be avoiding that movie when I saw the trailer.

[JMK]

Hey JMC, isn't that Travolta from Battlefield Earth in your avatar? :lol

[Jedi Master Carr]

LOL no I wouldn't put anything that revolting as my avatar. That is Gary Oldman playing Sirus Black in the next Harry Potter movie.

[CMJ]

Originally posted by Jedieb
Everything Woody Allen has done in the last 10 years.

Sweet and Lowdown was really good....but other than that, I pretty much agree with you.

[Sejah Haversh]

How have we missed Gigli?

And, I liked Hudson Hawke, and the Super Nintendo game for Cutthroat Island was quite entertaining.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Agent Charley
:lol I saw it on my plane trip as well. Why do they decide to play the most horrible movies on flights?

I got Gosford Park one way, Shipping News the other.

I think they were trying to kill me.

I heard Amelie was pretty good though.

Gosford Park! I hated every second of it. Same with Dogville.

Oh, I liked The Shipping News.

[Charley]

How do you like the Shipping News? What's there to like? Its a masochistic circle jerk for Kevin Spacey, Judy Dench, and Miramax. It has absolutely no substance, and is one of the most pretentious abominations I've ever seen.

Gosford Park is some idiot savant who decided to remake Clue, only to try to make it high-brow, witty, and pander for oscars. FAILURE.

[ReaperFett]

Originally posted by Agent Charley

Gosford Park is some idiot savant who decided to remake Clue, only to try to make it high-brow, witty, and pander for oscars. FAILURE.
Little thing I've always hated. How the US calls it Clue. The original name was Cluedo, a play on the board game name Ludo, meaning "To play" (Or I play, I forget). To call it Clue removes the cleverness! :)

[Charley]

There was a movie, and it was called Clue. Objection overruled.

[ReaperFett]

Based on the boardgame, Cluedo. Objection sustained :)

[Dan the Man]

No, based on the board game clue, which is based on the more obscure title cluedo, which is based on something even more obscure.

There is no point whatsoever to argue such meaningless semantics.

[ReaperFett]

At what stage in my original argument did I say I was referring to the movie? :)

[Anthony Scott]

:rolleyes

I despise, with a passion, the piece of crap people refer to as Pulp Fiction. OMG what a waste of time and money. :x

Amelie -- another waste of time. It was so bad, in fact, that I took the DVD and tossed it out the window (but I guess my friend wanted it so she picked it up). :rolleyes

I did like a Perfect Storm, though. That was done well and it wasn't a drag to watch.

[Charley]

That figures.

[Jedieb]

The Perfect Storm was a pretty good movie. If I recall, when it came out, most of us here liked it. I know CMJ was really big on the project and he even got in touch with someone connected to the story, right Court?

More CRAP
Jaws 3-D
Jaws 4
Aliens 3 (Yes, some people have made a cult hit of it, but I thought it reaked.)
Stop Or My Mom Will Shoot (Why Sly, why? :cry )
Superman 4: The Quest to Embarrass Gene Hackman and Christopher Reeve
Superman 3 (Why Richard Pryor, why? :cry )
The Avengers (Uma, Oprah, Uma, Oprah.... 2 hours of that would have been better.)
Batman and Robin are Gay and the Future Governor of California Looks Bad Bald
Anything Starring Madonna As A Lead
The Phantom Menace (Just kidding! Checking to see if you're paying attention.)
The Object of My Affection (Jennifer Aniston loves a gay guy, there's a cuddling scene, and my wife ended up owing me 5 straight actions films after the horror that was that theater experience.)

[CMJ]

Originally posted by Jedieb
The Perfect Storm was a pretty good movie. If I recall, when it came out, most of us here liked it. I know CMJ was really big on the project and he even got in touch with someone connected to the story, right Court?

...........

Anything Starring Madonna As A Lead


You're right Eb, I sure did.

As far as Madonna goes...I did really dig "Desperately Seeking Susan". It's sort of a 80's neo-noir. She was kind of a lead in that.

[Marcus Telcontar]

The Phantom Menace (Just kidding! Checking to see if you're paying attention.)

I wouldnt be kidding. I tried to watch it again not long ago. I only managed 30 minutes before I decided Glitter was more worth my time

[Anthony Scott]

Originally posted by Agent Charley
That figures.

Just as much as it figures that you'd like those films. :lol

[Charley]

Considering one is quality cinema and the other is pandering to a quick buck, I'd say so.

The special the History Channel did on that storm was a far cry better than the movie itself.

[Droo]

I really liked Gosford Park. I tried to watch The Shipping News but wasn't in the mood although I did tolerate about forty minutes or so before turning it off. I also tried to watch Chocolat the other night but wasn't in the mood but I really enjoyed what I watched.

Alien 3 has been mentioned, I love that film. However what I do now hate and had once previously loved was Alien Ressurrection.

I'm suprised Waterworld hasn't been mentioned; I haven't seen it but from what I've heard it's supposed to be dreadful and considering it was something like the most expensive movie ever at the time it was made.

Considering we're on the subject of bad or poor grossing films - what did you think of Tank Girl? I love that film but it's despised by most.

[ReaperFett]

Waterworld is like Postman for me. It's not good, it's not bad. Just extremely mediocre.

[Anthony Scott]

Originally posted by Agent Charley
Considering one is quality cinema and the other is pandering to a quick buck, I'd say so.

The special the History Channel did on that storm was a far cry better than the movie itself.

Well, you can have your own opinions about 'quality' entertainment. IMO, The Perfect Storm was a far better film than Pulp Fiction or Amelie. Neither of us are right or wrong, it's an opinion. I cannot force myself to like or even appreciate a film such as Pulp Fiction, it's just not in me and so if you find that wrong -- sorry. :)

[Charley]

Gav, strangely enough, I really really liked Chocolat. Its very quirky and fun.

[Jedieb]

I wouldnt be kidding. I tried to watch it again not long ago. I only managed 30 minutes before I decided Glitter was more worth my time
Ah, to have JLB back so the flames could begin...

Podrace cool, Maul fights cool, Neeson kicks <smallfont color={hovercolor}>-Censored-</smallfont>, it's not ALL bad.

Damn Court, it's too bad you liked that pandering film. The book was probably just as bad, eh? :rolleyes

[Sanis Prent]

Like I care. It bored me.

[Jedieb]

If ya don't care, then why even bother typing?

I loved Pulp Fiction A. Scott. C'mon, how can ya not dig a male rape scene AND a Travolta death scene in ONE movie?!:spank

[Sanis Prent]

Spoilers thx

[CMJ]

Actually most of the movies listed here aren't terrible IMHO. Most of them aren't great or anything(though a few that have been listed I would put in that category), but I've seen plenty of worse films.

At the end of the day it all comes down to personal taste. We could all slam our heads in the wall trying to convince each other that some moves "rock" and other ones "suck".

[Ardath Bey]

Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2003 remake, lacked the great acting; cinematography; black humor; character and identity; and southern family values of the original independent cult classic. The greatest horror masterpiece of all time plagiarized by big corporate studio greed. Beat that guys!

There are alot of movies that deserve to be posted here ... too many in fact.

[Ardath Bey]

Nope, not kidding. Texas Chainsaw Massacre 1974 rocks. One of my favorite movies. The Pioneer re-issued DVD contains one of the best and funniest commentaries ever too. Too bad it still isn't animorphic.

[Ardath Bey]

Originally posted by Jedieb
Ah, to have JLB back so the flames could begin...

Podrace cool, Maul fights cool, Neeson kicks <smallfont color=#999900>-Censored-</smallfont>, it's not ALL bad.

Damn Court, it's too bad you liked that pandering film. The book was probably just as bad, eh? :rolleyes

I will put The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones on this worst list compilation. I was expecting a wise-before-his-years Obi-Wan taking a young gallant and willing Anakin under his wings. Obi-Wan lacks beauty. Anakin lacks beauty. I desired a pervading mild sense of -modern- chivalric gallantry, intermixed with light moments and humour (vintage Lucas storytelling power), in the face of an unexpected terrible dread and uncertainty. And the cinematography and alien worlds would counterbalance the overall atmosphere of the story. Anakin's shift to the Darkside could have been substantially more powerful and moving.

[Shawn]

Try not to let this degrade into a flamefest, please.

[JMK]

I was expecting a wise-before-his-years Obi-Wan taking a young gallant and willing Anakin under his wings.

From The Empire Strikes Back:

Yoda: You are reckless!

Obi Wan's Spirit (interjecting): So was I, if you remember.

How come you were expecting a wiser Obi Wan when it's never been a known fact that he's wise at all? He's no dope, but he isn't Yoda. If Obi Wan was wiser, he probably would have been able to train Anakin better. Kenobi couldn't control Anakin's impetuous nature.
But this is a different discussion for a different time.

[Ardath Bey]

No, I meant wise in the sense of Qui-Gon Jinn, somebody that is very high on natural intuition. My expectations were too high for the both prequels. I desired the beauty of a sweeping epic-like quality minus flamboyant perculiaraties.

[JMK]

Ah. I think most got their expectations too high in that regard. I did as well, but I still find a lot to like about the prequels.

[Ardath Bey]

I would have loved to see Lucas adopt more cinemaographic camera techniques right down to their most minute idiosyncrasies. Studied up on the masters representing different genres. Material equally focused and sprawling. Mind you, I am not asking for some extravagent Lawrence of Arabia. This is a hands down action-driven space opera afterall.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Originally posted by Ardath Bey
I would have loved to see Lucas adopt more cinemaographic camera techniques right down to their most minute idiosyncrasies. Studied up on the masters representing different genres. Material equally focused and sprawling. Mind you, I am not asking for some extravagent Lawrence of Arabia. This is a hands down action-driven space opera afterall.

What???????

Gimme a break, who cares. Most of us who dont like TPM would have just settled for a better story. Who cares how wonderful it looks, when the actors are planks of wood and the script is a cringe?

Frankly, the Dirty Harry movies on my shelf, the camera work sucks. But who cares, they have great characters and good script. Doesnt that actually mean more in movie??????

[Ardath Bey]

Such details can assist tremendously in delivering the intended message a writer or director desires to convey onscreen.

[Ardath Bey]

A movie that used great techniques is Gladiator - a gorgeous film - too bad it was too hackneyed for my tastes.

[Charley]

Thank you, Master of Cinema.

<img src=http://www.sw-fans.net/photopost/data/501/1156highhorse.jpg>

[Jedieb]

I would have loved to see Lucas adopt more cinemaographic camera techniques right down to their most minute idiosyncrasies. Studied up on the masters representing different genres. Material equally focused and sprawling. Mind you, I am not asking for some extravagent Lawrence of Arabia. This is a hands down action-driven space opera afterall.

I think you're way off here. I think the images are the strength of the prequels. Describing many of the actors as "planks" isn't too far off. Many of them describe their own performances as wooden, but the "cinemaographic camera techniques" we've seen have been the strongest aspect of the prequels so far.

[JMK]

Yeah, that and the music.

[Jedieb]

Oh wait, more CRAP!

Yentl
The Mirror Has Two Faces (After her transformation Streisand used so much of a glow filter on her closeups that she looked like a cartoon. She deserved that South Park cartoon. Think I'll give Mecha-Streisand another visit on DVD tonight.)
Look Who's Talking 3 (For the love of Yoda Travolta, WHY????)
Grease 2 (Pfifer, WHY??????)

[Ardath Bey]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
What???????

Gimme a break, who cares. Most of us who dont like TPM would have just settled for a better story. Who cares how wonderful it looks, when the actors are planks of wood and the script is a cringe?

But is Attack of the Clones any better? There's not much difference between them. AotC did have a couple of good action sequences, Jango-Obi fight and Obi's starfighter pursuit of Jango. Not enough to redeem a poorly constructed film that put more emphasis on special effects than acting or writing. And the cinematography --- blue screens and CGI environs. IMO, this film had not one single strength. I wished the AotC could have achieved a level of performance and drama such as Fellowship of the Ring or Gladiator. Instead it is belittling to the point of being insulting.

[CMJ]

While I agree with to a degree on TPM, I TOTALLY disagree on AOTC. It's the 3rd best of the series, and the first honest to God STAR WARS movie since ESB.

(While TPM and ROTJ each have sections I like alot, neither are wonderful "wholes")

[JMK]

I agree partially about TPM. Parts of it make me cringe while others are really cool. I'm not a huge fan of some of the romantic scenes in AotC, but that's my only complaint about the movie.

[Ardath Bey]

IMO, ROTJ was a great movie, much of the material was tied up. The only bad part was GL getting cutesy with miniature wookie furries ... those ewoks. But it had Yoda's passing, Jabba the Hutt, Luke's second duel with Vader, the race to destroy the second Deathstar, and the Emperor and Vader's deaths. Nothing in AOTC can compare to the onscreen presence of Hamill, Ford, Carrie, the Wookie and Vader. There was alot of magic in this movie despite ewoks and a sappy ending. I feel AOTC and TPM are equal.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
What???????

Gimme a break, who cares. Most of us who dont like TPM would have just settled for a better story. Who cares how wonderful it looks, when the actors are planks of wood and the script is a cringe?

I miss Jonathan. :\

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Dutchy
I miss Jonathan. :\


He still posts at CC.net (http://www.coruscantcity.net/cgi-bin/board/ultimatebb.cgi).

I'm sure he'd be more than happy to argue with you over there.

[Dutchy]

:lol

Maybe I'll say hi. :)

[Jedieb]

IMO, this film had not one single strength.
I still remember watching a clip of Yoda's duel with Dooku at SWC2. The entire audience went insane. It was incredible and for me, although I know some don't like it, it still holds up as the highlight of the film. So there's one amazing strength I've found with AOTC.

The love story just doesn't work. Especially this scenario;
"I just chopped up a bunch of women and kids!"
"Oh my God... that's so... HOT!"

That's my first bit of dating advice for my daughters. If you're on a date and the boy confesses to mass slaughterings, DUMP HIM!

[CMJ]

Originally posted by Jedieb
If you're on a date and the boy confesses to mass slaughterings, DUMP HIM!

:lol :lol :lol :lol

[Turcyn Rorke]

Last edited by CMJ on 11-11-03 at 10:55 PM Why: A movie that was issued 10 years ago doesn't need spoiler tags
What does it being released 10 years ago have to do with anything?

[Marcus Telcontar]

Originally posted by Turcyn Rorke
What does it being released 10 years ago have to do with anything?

Simple. There is a resonable expectation that movies or books, after a certain time, have been out long enough for the majority of posters to know the story and scenes. Otherwise, it would be retarded to have to to cover up that Luke skywalker's father is Jar Jar Binks every time it's dicussed. About a year is a resonable time.


That's my first bit of dating advice for my daughters. If you're on a date and the boy confesses to mass slaughterings, DUMP HIM!

You are a bad, bad man :lol :lol :lol

[Jedi Master Carr]

I agree with that older films/books shouldn't need spoiler tag.

[ReaperFett]

Generally, older movies don't. But if a movie is getting rereleased or it's a movie few have seen, covering the MAJORS is polite, IMO.

[Ardath Bey]

This forum usually reflects the last ten-fifteen years of cinema. And alot of us are regular movie goers. But I agree with Fett. It is polite. :)

[JMK]

If it were up to me, once a movie gets to te stores and has been out for a couple months in every market, no spoiler tags would be used. If it took someone a year (or 10 years, as Turcyn questioned) to see a movie then they really didn't care enough about seeing it.

[Master Yoghurt]

Agree with JMK here. If you care so much for the movie, you probably would have seen it in the first few weeks or so anyway.

[Niklos Thorson (Oddball)]

But that doesn't mean you should be unpolite. I would never give away the Usual Suspects ending, as that RUINS a movie. Does anyone here want to ruin movies? No. What effort is it to write a word twice and put brackets round them?


Or Boondock Saints. Out since 1999, I got FOUR people from SWF to see it over Easter. None had it ruined. They might not have even HEARD of the movie pre-Easter for all I know.

[Master Yoghurt]

Heck, I have not even heard about those movies you mention. You can spoil me away all you want, because Im probably not going to see those, and even if I did, it would not be a big deal to knowing how it ends. Either I enjoy the movie for what it is, or I dont :)

[JMK]

If we can talk about Attack of the Clones openly here now, we can sure talk about any movie that has been out as long. What, are we supposed to be cautious of ruining EVERY movie, regardless of how long it's been out? No friggin way.

If someone is sensitive to Pulp Fiction spoilers because they haven't seen it since it's been release in 1994, too bad so sad. 9 years is plenty time to see a movie. Hell, 1 year is more than enough time.

[Niklos Thorson (Oddball)]

There are spoilers, and there are MAJOR spoilers. Sheer laziness to not put [spoiler ] and [/spoiler ] in a post is just not polite.

[Charley]

I agree with Fett. Don't be a jerk. Use tags for things that will ruin a movie. Usual Suspects is a pretty good example.

[Droo]

And as I only saw The Usual Suspects this year, had the ending been spoiled for me I would've probably hunted you down and gauged out your eyes. But in all seriousness, it really is impolite and unneccessary to not use spoiler tags for plot twists and major points in films. Just because you consider said movie old and are of the mind that if someone hasn't seen the film then they obviously don't care for it or care to see it and thus shouldn't mind having what you found interesting and exciting about the film ruined for them, which isn't the case. We are talking about films because we love watching movies, spoiling movies for each other, regardless of the films age, goes against the spirit of this forum as far as I'm concerned.

I'd assume that after about three months that all here would've seen a newly released Star Wars film and as such shouldn't have to continue using spoiler tags after that. I believe there was a time period set for using spoiler tags after Episode 2. That's fair enough, but this is Star Wars fans, not movie fans and given that all movie-related discussions belong here then I'd say it would be good form to respect others wishes to not have their movie watching experiences spoiled.

Who wants the soap box?

[ReaperFett]

Originally posted by Dru
I believe there was a time period set for using spoiler tags after Episode 2.
I believe it was fine from July 1st onwards.

[Charley]

Correct.

Its not like we're asking to mask every little detail. Just ask yourself "Is this going to give major points in the movie away?"

That should help clear things up.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Asking for spoiler cover in anything older than a year is just anal retentive. There really comes a point where


Originally posted by JMK
If it were up to me, once a movie gets to te stores and has been out for a couple months in every market, no spoiler tags would be used. If it took someone a year (or 10 years, as Turcyn questioned) to see a movie then they really didn't care enough about seeing it.

What, are we supposed to be cautious of ruining EVERY movie, regardless of how long it's been out? No friggin way.

If someone is sensitive to Pulp Fiction spoilers because they haven't seen it since it's been release in 1994, too bad so sad. 9 years is plenty time to see a movie. Hell, 1 year is more than enough time.

where the above is true. The original rule was one year with Star wars films. That is my rule of thumb for anything else, because, really, if aint been seen after a year or so, after it's out on DVD etc, then it's fair game and there is a resonable expectation anyone who cared less as seen the movie in question.

The only reason I'll mask ROTK spoilers is that there is a movie coming up.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Here's another rule: Don't post multiple times in a row. That's post count++ behavior. If you have the last post in a thread and you want to post again, just edit your previous post. Thanks.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Yeah but there are limits it is like saying that the if I say who dies in the Illiad is a spoiler that would just be nuts. There are certain things that aren't spoilers anymore, like Romeo and Julliet kill themselves at the end of the play.

[JMK]

New candidate for worst movie of all time: Extreme Ops.

Filthy, disgusting movie. Truly a waste of time. :cry

[Jedieb]

Asking for spoiler cover in anything older than a year is just anal retentive.
I've got no problem using spoiler tags. But once a movie has been out for awhile, made it to video and then cable, I think it's fair game. After awhile it just becomes part of pop culture history. Do we have to use spoiler tags to talk about Luke's father or Norman Bates's mother? They're major spoilers, but it's not my fault somebody's not up on them. What's next, can't say the shark kills Quinn? C'mon!

[JMK]

Well, I don't know, not everyone knows that the Titanic sinks. It's only been out for 6 years now. ;)

[Jedi Master Carr]

Yeah and happened what 90 years ago ;) Also are we going to have to post spoilers for Troy? If it follows the legend I will have to say troy is taken down by a trojan horse,Hector is killed by Achilles Achilles is killed by Paris, , and Agamemon is killed by his wife.

[Mu Satach]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
There are certain things that aren't spoilers anymore, like Romeo and Julliet kill themselves at the end of the play.

I had such high hopes!!!
:cry :cry :cry

[Marcus Telcontar]

OMG I JUST HAD TO LOOK AT THE TITANIC SPOLIER. THE BOAT SINKS??? OMG WHAT ABOUT JACK AND ROSE?????

:D

[JMK]

No No No Marcus, I CANNOT reveal that here, not even under spoiler tags! People may be too tempted to ruin the movie! :lol

[TCM'74]

Early tale of the tape on openings at RottenTomatoes is ripping The Haunted Mansion and Timeline. Timeline ranks at a very low 20%. And neither overly kind to The Missing either despite a high ranking of 69%.

[JMK]

I think anything with Paul Walker in it is destined to fail. Except for the Fast and the Furious which only succeeded because of Vin Diesel and the cars.

Movies with him in top billing (ratings from rottentomatoes):

Meet the Deedles (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/MeettheDeedles-1082427/) 0 fresh, 11 rotten.

The Skulls (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/TheSkulls-1095489/) 5 fresh, 68 rotten

The Fast And the Furious (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/TheFastandtheFurious-1108372/) 57 fresh, 63 rotten

Joy Ride (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/JoyRide-1110152/) 83 fresh, 28 rotten - I guess he had some support here with Zahn and Sobieski. :p

2 Fast 2 Furious (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/2Fast2Furious-1123065/) 56 fresh, 89 rotten. Here we go, back to normal for Walker.

And now the 20% for Timeline (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/Timeline-1127659/)

Of course he had smaller roles in movies like Pleasantville, Varsity Blues, She's All That and Brokedown Palace, but only one of them (Pleasantville) was reviewed as fresh,and look at the cast that had. So, of the 10 movies I've listed, 2 were reviewed as fresh. That's not a good success rate. I'm just going to come right out and say it: Paul Walker is the WORST. ACTOR. EVER.

Thank you.:D

[Jedi Master Carr]

Be thankful then we didn't get him for Anakin :p

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by JMK
Of course he had smaller roles in movies like Pleasantville, Varsity Blues, She's All That and Brokedown Palace, but only one of them (Pleasantville) was reviewed as fresh,and look at the cast that had.

I loved She's All That. Cliché flick, but one of the best in its genre. Of course with the lovely song Kiss Me by Sixpence None the Richer.

Maybe it had to do with Rachael Leigh Cute, though. :)

[JMK]

Believe me, I think I'm Rachael Leigh Cook's biggest fan so anything she's in I cannot evaluate objectively.

And JMC, I'm overjoyed he was skipped over for Anakin.:uhoh

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Okay I saw Timeline and it *did* suck, which was a SUPREME disappointment for me, as it is my favorite book of nearly ALL time. I've been anticipating it since April. :cry

Apart from the story butchering, the movie itself was paced badly, imo, and if you hadn't read the book the beginning was confusing. My boyfriend saw it with me and he said that it was an OK movie (hasn't read the book)...but it wasn't anything spectacular. Slow in the beginning and by the time it ended it was getting better.

:cry I have to go re-read my book now.