The Thread of Shame

sfoster

Staff Member
Moderator
Sometimes I watch a film and think.. why are these massive idiots given the privilege of making a movie. So when I see something extremely stupid in a movie from now on, I will post it here.

First up.. The original red dawn

A 30 year old patrick swaze plays a teenager. The bad guys attack unarmed kids with rockets and helicopters with handguns. WTH?? Yeah that makes sense. And the main characters drive into the mountains with a truck full of food and not a single bottle of water. then the first thing they do is hunt a deer… never mind all that food they collected and a complete lack of water :weird:

I can't believe this passed for cinema.
I would be ashamed to have any part in a film like this :no:
 
Yeah, I could never watch the original past the initial invasion scene. I tried several times.... the remake's good, though.
 
Uwe Boll's House of the Dead. Granted, I'm not a huge fan of the games or know much about the world within the story of each game, so as far as the faithfulness to the source material I have no idea if it's accurate or not. But in terms of a mindless zombie-action flick...this is the worst mindless flick you could see.

One thing I remember that was ridiculous were the shooting scenes. What I found annoying were the cuts where in one shot a character would be firing a handgun and in the very next one they would be firing a shotgun...now I have seen jump cuts in movies before but the effect here was ridiculous and amateurish.

I think that film deserves a mention here in this thread of shame.
 
my favorite part of House of the Dead is where one of the cutscene video game footage bits spoils the "twist" at the end of the movie. Fantastic!
 
Uwe Boll's House of the Dead.
[...snip...]
I think that film deserves a mention here in this thread of shame.

Although I admire the man for managing to get the sorts of budgets he gets and would love to learn all I could about how he does it (although I think he mostly used a German tax-loophole that's since been closed), I think EVERY movie Uwe Boll has made should be on this list...

CraigL
 
"The Guardian" 1990 - a multimillion dollar movie about a killer tree. 14% on Rotten Tomatoes which is 14% more than it deserves.

WARNING: SPOILERS


Set in the lush, green, forests of California, a killer tree eats children, aided by an English nanny who, erm, sort of carts the tree around from State to State.

Marvel when the tree gets attacked by a chainsaw-wielding biker gang and beats them all up.

Be stunned when a group of wolves emerge from the forest, break into a house and pursue the family only to be thwarted by a low gate which my 20 year old, arthritic cat could have jumped backwards over... in his sleep.

Try not to die laughing when the nanny suddenly develops the power of flight and starts hovering in the air.

Suspend your disbelief as the movie opens with a disclaimer that... "Not all trees are evil."

Watch minor characters explode because the tree sort of, well, blows them up after killing them.

See gratuituous nudity as the hot English nanny gets her kit off... hold on a second, this is a good bit!

Feel the pain as you drive hot pokers into your eyes and give yourself a full, pre-frontal lobotomy in the hope of removing all images and memories of this terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible waste of money.

My favourite Rotten Tomatoes review of this terrible movie is: "Absolutely hysterical, unfortunately it's supposed to be scary."
 
Last edited:
Zeitgeist is a powerful thing.

Well said.

You young'ens have no idea how much Red Dawn captured the spirit of our nation. Like Rocky IV, it is the ultimate Cold War movie. In the early 80's, we were legitimately scared of war with Russia, and this fear permeated our popular culture. It seems antiquated and silly now, but at the time, we were all pretty gung-ho about it.

And perhaps that's why the remake sucks so much ass. North Korea?! Really, that's your threat?! Please. There was once a time when America wasn't the world's only military superpower, and the fear of war was palpable. And that is why the original Red Dawn is, and forever will be, fucking awesome. :P
 
Today I was looking at a list on IGN of the top 25 (in their eyes) action films ever made and on that list was Raiders of the Lost Ark (rightly so it is an awesome movie) and the reason I'm mentioning such a classic and much loved film in a thread called the Thread of Shame is to illustrate a point, which is this:

When a movie is released it is a product of its era and those who grew up in or were already grown up during the era in which a film is released will have certain feelings towards it. The next generation coming up may take the film on board but mostly they will associate it not with the era in which it was released but their own era and judge it accordingly.

I realized with Raiders of the Lost Ark today that the idea the film is an homage to the classic serials of the 1930s but made in the 1980s, gives those who grew up with the film a sense of what movies were like back in the 1980s. Those who grew up in the 30s watching the film would have a sense of what it was like to be watching those serials back in the 30s.

I realized that because Raiders was released over 30 years ago it now actually looks like a colour version of a serial from the 1930s so that visually at least you could almost believe it was made in the 1930s. Now whether this is because of the age gap between Raiders and its initial release to now, or that it's just because they did such a great job at re-creating the 30s, is something to consider.

Anyway gone off topic a bit there but people's perceptions of what a good movie is drastically changes from generation to generation so while the original Red Dawn may seem cheesy now, back when it was released it wouldn't have been perceived that way.
------------------------------------

I would also add Cabin Fever 2 to the thread of shame because it is a very poorly constructed sequel that ignored what could have made it on par with the first and that was the hospital setting. I think it would have been interesting to see the epidemic play out in a hospital. It would have created a bit of 'what happens when a place that is supposed to be to heal people actually becomes a danger to those in that place' kind of feel to the picture.
 
Last edited:
Today I was looking at a list on IGN of the top 25 (in their eyes) action films ever made and on that list was Raiders of the Lost Ark (rightly so it is an awesome movie) and the reason I'm mentioning such a classic and much loved film in a thread called the Thread of Shame is to illustrate a point, which is this:

When a movie is released it is a product of its era and those who grew up in or were already grown up during the era in which a film is released will have certain feelings towards it. The next generation coming up may take the film on board but mostly they will associate it not with the era in which it was released but their own era and judge it accordingly.

I realized with Raiders of the Lost Ark today that the idea the film is an homage to the classic serials of the 1930s but made in the 1980s, gives those who grew up with the film a sense of what movies were like back in the 1980s. Those who grew up in the 30s watching the film would have a sense of what it was like to be watching those serials back in the 30s.

I realized that because Raiders was released over 30 years ago it now actually looks like a colour version of a serial from the 1930s so that visually at least you could almost believe it was made in the 1930s. Now whether this is because of the age gap between Raiders and its initial release to now, or that it's just because they did such a great job at re-creating the 30s, is something to consider.

I watched through Young Indiana Jones on Netflix. I really loved it. It gave me a new appreciation for the crystal skull movie because the movie fits with the larger story line. There's a lot of movie magic in the show. The Phantom Train of Doom was probably my favorite.

I know what you mean about movie's referencing earlier movies. Modern movies do it with video games too. People will incorporate elements of stories that they enjoyed when they were younger.
 
And that is why the original Red Dawn is, and forever will be, fucking awesome. :P

You can talk all you want about what 'era' it was made in. I've watched literally dozens of silent features, as well tons and tons of old movies. Hell I have seen every charlie chaplin film. I watch old movies more than I watch current film, so that is in no way or shape an excuse to me

Red dawn was hands down one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. Sadly one of my older friends seems to have liked it too. It got awkward when i told him how dumb it was but he couldn't refute any of my arguments.

Who uses rockets against unarmed teenagers and then handguns against a helicopter?? certainly not real soldiers. do you know how much those rockets cost!! and yet real armies and military intelligence did exist in that era. instead this plays out like it was scripted by a 12 year old
 
Last edited:
You can talk all you want about what 'era' it was made in. I've watched literally dozens of silent features, as well tons and tons of old movies. Hell I have seen every charlie chaplin film. I watch old movies more than I watch current film, so that is in no way or shape an excuse to me

Red dawn was hands down one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. Sadly one of my older friends seems to have liked it too. It got awkward when i told him how dumb it was but he couldn't refute any of my arguments.

Who uses rockets against unarmed teenagers and then handguns against a helicopter?? certainly not real soldiers. do you know how much those rockets cost!! and yet real armies and military intelligence did exist in that era. instead this plays out like it was scripted by a 12 year old

I don't think you're getting me. I'm not making excuses for it, because of the era it was made in. I'm saying that in order to appreciate it, you kinda just had to be there. I'm telling you that it tapped into our psyche, and unless you shared that part of our psyche, you really don't feel where we're coming from.

By comparison, I can point to one of the more popular movies of this decade -- Avengers -- and there are TONS of ways that you can tear it apart for having huge, gaping plot-holes. And yet, most audience members (myself included) loved it. We didn't pay attention to the plot-holes, cuz the movie connected with us. Same thing for Red Dawn. Yeah, in retrospect, there are plenty of plot-holes and other things that don't make sense. But it connected with us.
 
By comparison, I can point to one of the more popular movies of this decade -- Avengers -- and there are TONS of ways that you can tear it apart for having huge, gaping plot-holes. And yet, most audience members (myself included) loved it..

Well I concede that i will likely never be normal.
I tore into the avengers for being stupid as well. Particularly the part when they start GIVING THE HULK ORDERS. Why in gods name does the hulk listen like a good boy and take orders from tony stark. I audibly groaned seeing this for the first time
 
I've said this before, and I'll probably say it again a thousand times. Taste and quality are not necessarily the same thing. You can think something is really good and not like it, and think something is terrible and love it. Absolutely nothing wrong with that, and in fact, it allows you to look at things critically without losing the enjoyment that you have, or appreciate the quality of things that you just don't like.

I'm sort of a fan of Uwe Boll because of how miserable his films are. They never fail to crack me up...except, it seems, when he's trying. I didn't care for Postal; it was a non-stop stream of dead baby jokes and toilet humor. Not my cup of tea. But on the other hand, Alone In The Dark? You could see there was a pretty fun movie buried in there, and the almost expert precision with which anything good was turned to crap!

As for giving the Hulk orders, the line between Banner and the Hulk is a lot thinner than before, which is what Bruce had been working towards (this happens in a lot of comics as well). So the rage monster still has a little of the intelligence and focus of Banner, and he has a little harder time keeping a lid on things.
 
Maybe in order to bash on another flick, you need to put up one of your own as a comparison?

Really now, what kind of an argument is this?? The only people who are qualified to be movie critics are directors? Because most movie critics have not actually directed a film you know. I can't help it if something jumps out at me as illogical, or even worse moronic. At the same time I'm not perfect, and if I make a mistake like that I would be embarrassed and ashamed. I wouldn't be above putting one of my own movies in the thread of shame if it deserved it

As for giving the Hulk orders, the line between Banner and the Hulk is a lot thinner than before, which is what Bruce had been working towards (this happens in a lot of comics as well). So the rage monster still has a little of the intelligence and focus of Banner, and he has a little harder time keeping a lid on things.

I don't mean to include the avengers in the thread of shame, it doesn't deserve it IMO. But someone brought up it so I agree that it had some problems. It's a tiny mistake the film would have been better off not having.. What was the point of the order, it was basically saying just go smash stuff. they should have had the hulk go and do it on his own, minor quibble
 
Last edited:
Back
Top