Razzies – Page 4 – Bad Movie Twins

Under the Cherry Moon Recap

I went bonkers with Settings 101 this week so I’ll keep my assessment to a minimum. Besides my take is boring, while Patrick’s is fun. That’s because I was mostly bored by Prince’s bizarre vanity project. Unlike Purple Rain we don’t get to be entertained by random Prince concerts (which was obviously amazing). Instead it kinda meanders around whatever plot it has (a Pygmalion-like knock-off) with Prince primarily tasked with ogling Kristin Scott Thomas and occasionally dancing around or playing the piano… but not performing. It was only not boring because it gave you the opportunity to observe some pretty terrible acting. This is made all the more amazing by the fact that Kristin Scott Thomas was only in the movie because Prince’s girlfriend (who was the original casting choice) turned out to be so bad that they literally couldn’t keep her in the movie. Yes it is real bad, but leaning towards boring for me.

It was a very lucrative Settings 101 for Under the Cherry Moon. That’s because I was looking for both the physical and temporal setting. In the case of physical it was pretty straight forward. We are introduced to the setting of the film using a shot of a hotel in Nice, France. How do I know it’s in Nice? Well the hotel is labeled “Nice.” Further, as Prince aims to establish his character as a hustler looking to marry rich he and his hustler friend peruse the newspaper for hints of rich ladies in the area. One article that catches their eye is the announcement of the birthday party of heiress Mary Sharon in Grasse, France… just a short 40 minute drive from Nice. So perfect, it is clear that we are set in the French Riviera, but not so much to get to A territory. Still at the C-C+ range. Clear enough, but not instrumental to the plot (just instrumental to Prince making the film), and not specifically provided to the audience. As for the temporal setting there are no moments where anyone says “Oh hey, what a wonderful day in 1985.” But we can pretty easily assume that it takes place in the 80’s given that there are personal computers seen occasionally in the background and Prince whips out a chrome-style boombox at one point. Lucky for us we can somehow still narrow it down to an exact date. That’s because that same newspaper article announcing the birthday tells us that it is occurring on Friday, September 13th. No year is given, but 1985 did have September 13th land on a Friday. We get further proof of 1985 in a later scene where Prince has the record ‘You’re Under Arrest’ by Miles Davis conspicuously propped up on a chair. That record was released in 1985, so unless we are to presume the film takes place in the future in 1991 (the next year where September 13th is on a Friday… unlikely) then we get a very soft exact date of September 13th, 1985 as the day of the birthday party in the film. Phew. That would be a C-. Exact date but not important to the plot and very difficult to ascertain. Boom. I. Love. Settings

Patrick

‘Ello everyone! Under the Cherry Moon? More like Cautionary Swoon (nailed it). I think Jamie and I disagreed on this, but let’s savor those moments before you realize my true feeling, let’s go:

The Good – The music is at the very least ok and at the very best glorious Prince. I thought parts of the direction were interesting as was the eventual choice to release it in black and white … and I’m done.
The Bad – I think this film competes strongly with Howard the Duck for the worst film of 1986 and I thought it was far worse than any of the other films we’ve seen for the 1986 cycle (outside of perhaps King Kong Lives which isn’t a real movie so that doesn’t count). It is not shocking that Howard the Duck and Under the Cherry Moon ultimately tied for worst picture that year. Let’s see: worse actors is easily Under the Cherry Moon, worse writing I think was Howard the Duck, worse direction I think goes to Under the Cherry Moon, worse soundtrack goes to Howard the Duck. And ultimately Howard the Duck is the worse movie, but it was closer than I could have expected. The acting alone in Under the Cherry Moon is like watching amateurs dress up and crack jokes in a period comedy (oh wait … that’s exactly what this movie is). I did not like this movie, and yet it is fascinating in a very strange and magnetic way.
The BMT – Yes, a thousand times yes, although this film is more boring that something nuts like Howard the Duck. This is more like you are watching bad jokes and bad acting sustained on screen all wrapped up in a bizarre gift. I think the BMeTric would be something like 40, distinctly above average, but not alluring enough to attract the number of votes necessary to get over the top.

Phew. I hated that movie didn’t I? I think, in the end, that is going to be the one takeaway from this cycle that kind of made it all worth it. Under the Cherry Moon is probably top 25 as far as bad movies of the 80’s for me and it needed to be watched at some point.

Let’s Remake this guy! Imagine that. I’m thinking Justin Bieber hanging in Paris fleecing young debutantes out of their millions. And then he finds love, oh what a world. The bumping Bieber tunes anchor this romantic turn for the young music phenom who appears poised to become a movie star in his own right! Starring Justin Timberlake as his world weary partner in crime and … I was trying to find a young french actress and the only one that kind of fits the bill is Adèle Exarchopoulos from Blue is the Warmest Color. Funny enough Bieber and her are the same age. One word Netflix … fate.

Cheerios,

The Sklogs

Under the Cherry Moon Preview

Nearing the end of our time wallowing in 1986 and this week we get to target a Razzie release from that year. Of the five films nominated for Worst Picture we still have two unwatched: Under the Cherry Moon and Blue City. I think the choice is obvious. This was Prince’s follow-up to Purple Rain and he decided to direct it himself to… interesting results. Not much more to say. Let’s go!

Under the Cherry Moon (1986) – BMeTric: 24.5

underthecherrymoon_bmet

underthecherrymoon_rv

(Yet again a pretty standard linear BMeTric plot but … can we revel in the fact that Under the Cherry Moon barely broke 2000 votes at this point? That is absurd. It won a Worst Picture for the Razzies. It has the late great Prince in it! Just weird and wild stuff)

Leonard Maltin – 1.5 stars – Supremely silly vanity film with Prince self-cast as American gigolo/entertainer in the south of France who has a devastating effect on women (yes, it’s a science fiction story). Stylish-looking fairy tale/fable, filmed in black & white, is a triumph of self-adoration, and overall embarrassment. Some music throughout, but in fragmented scenes. Kristin Scott Thomas’ film debut.

(The mere fact that this got 1.5 stars instead of bomb is pretty unlikely in the first place. Also it is like Leonard Maltin can’t help himself: what is the deal with the alternative-separated-by-a-slash in this review? “gigolo/entertainer” I could have dismissed, but to follow so closely with “fairy tale/fable”? Unacceptable. At least he doesn’t dismiss it as merely boring. We got that going for us, considering this feels like the spiritual successor to Harlem Nights.)

Trailer – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwkqXsWPY1k

(This trailer consists of a series of random clips from the film with Prince’s ‘Kiss’ playing over them and an announcer telling me to “See it”… and it was amazing.)

Directors – Prince – (BMT: Under the Cherry Moon; Graffiti Bridge; Notes: Won the Razzie Award in 1987 for Worst Actor, Director, and Original Song for Under the Cherry Moon; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 2000 for Worst Actor of the Century; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1990 for Worst Actor of the Decade; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1990 for Worst New Star of the Decade for Under the Cherry Moon; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1991 for Worst Actor, Director, and Screenplay for Graffiti Bridge; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1985 for Worst Original Song for Purple Rain; He only made three major movies and directed two of them! Born in Minneapolis, Minnesota (holla!) he did a lot for that community his whole life. He had season tickets to the Vikings and I believe owned part of the concert venue First Avenue (which featured in Purple Rain). Is recognized for his highly sexualized lyrics which got him into some trouble with parents groups early in his career … I liked Prince, it was very sad that he died earlier this year.)

Michael Ballhaus – (BMT: Under the Cherry Moon; Notes: From a show business family (his father was a German actor and his sons are cinematographers and second unit directors). He is German and mostly known for cinematography (he’s been nominated three times for an Oscar including for Gangs of New York). He was kicked off of this movie after disagreements with Prince and is often listed as uncredited.)

Writers – Becky Johnston (screenplay) – (Known For: Seven Years in Tibet; The Prince of Tides; BMT: Under the Cherry Moon; Arthur and Mike; Notes: Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1987 for Worst Screenplay for Under the Cherry Moon. Very strange, hard to find info. I say it is strange because she wrote Seven Years in Tibet and was nominated for an Oscar for Prince of Tides. I can only assume she is a producer / script doctor now … but seriously, I can’t find anything.)

Actors – Prince – (Known For: Purple Rain; BMT: Under the Cherry Moon; Graffiti Bridge; Notes: See above for Razzie details and biographical details. Graffiti Bridge is a sequel to Purple Rain by the way … I didn’t know that.)

Jerome Benton – (Known For: Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back; Purple Rain; BMT: Under the Cherry Moon; Graffiti Bridge; Notes: Won the Razzie Award in 1987 for Worst Supporting Actor for Under the Cherry Moon. Musician and comedian who worked with Prince and Janet Jackson among others. As a member of The Revolution he obviously had major parts in all of Prince’s films)

Kristin Scott Thomas – (Known For: The English Patient; Four Weddings and a Funeral; Only God Forgives; The Golden Compass; Suite Française; Mission: Impossible; Gosford Park; The Other Boleyn Girl; Ne le dis à personne; Bitter Moon; The Horse Whisperer; Salmon Fishing in the Yemen; Life as a House; Nowhere Boy; Easy Virtue; The Invisible Woman; Dans la maison; Richard III; BMT: Random Hearts (BMT); Bel Ami; Confessions of a Shopaholic; Under the Cherry Moon; Notes: Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1987 for Worst Supporting Actress and New Star for Under the Cherry Moon; Most recently we saw her in Random Hearts with Harrison Ford. Off the top of my head I do know she is fluent in French and tends to provide her own French dubbings in film. A lot of her films are French for the same reason.)

Budget/Gross – $12 million / Domestic: $10,090,429

(Yeah … so that isn’t a good result. It is specifically mentioned in Prince’s IMDb biography as a giant bomb like … why mention it? Anyways, yeah, catastrophic.)

Rotten Tomatoes – 32% (10/31): Under the Cherry Moon may satisfy the most rabid Prince fans, but everyone else will be better served with this vanity project’s far superior soundtrack.

(Kind of shockingly high given it might as well as swept the Razzie Awards. I am excited for the soundtrack especially given that it appears to be a Harlem Nights-esque period piece vanity project.)

Poster – Under the Cherry Sklog (B-)

under_the_cherry_moon

(Really old fashioned looking. I like the font on the letters and the fact that Prince is drawn. Should have scrapped the screenshots of Jerome Benton and Kristin Scott Thomas. Benton’s in particular is really odd with him standing there holding a phone.)

Tagline(s) – See It – Hear It – Feel It – Live It (C+)

(Hate it (slaaaaaammed). I think it is a classic sounds-like-a-tagline tagline. But have to give it some credit for being short and trying to have some cadance.)

Keyword(s) – love; Top Ten by BMeTric: 85.2 The Last Airbender (2010); 84.9 Date Movie (2006); 81.4 Alone in the Dark (2005); 80.6 Vampires Suck (2010); 78.9 In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale (2007); 75.4 Troll 2 (1990); 74.7 From Justin to Kelly (2003); 72.9 Hannah Montana: The Movie (2009); 70.4 Grease 2 (1982); 70.2 Universal Soldier: The Return (1999);

(Weird list, but that’ll happen when literally like 800 movies have the same keyword. Has some of the worst of the worst according to the BMeTric, and yet only Grease 2 really should be watched for BMT. Only From Justin to Kelly is really a “romance” per se, which is a bit annoying. There are so many bad romance movies too.)

Notes – Prince took over from original director Mary Lambert over “creative differences”. Because the production was filming in Europe, it did not come up against the Director’s Guild of America, which has rules against firing a director in favor of a lead actor. (Oh shit, not that is a fun fact)

Kristin Scott Thomas has since been disdainful of the film. In an interview in 2005, she said that “When I left drama school…I was more afraid of not working at all than of the actual material I was being offered. And if you look at my very first film, you’ll understand exactly what I mean.”

The movie had an unlikely spot for its world premiere – the Centennial Twin Theater in Sheridan, Wyo. – in June 1986. Local resident Lisa Barber won the right to host the premiere by being the 10,000th caller in MTV’s “Prince Under the Cherry Moon” contest. Several members of the cast (including Prince) and a few notables such as Joni Mitchell and Ray Parker Jr. showed up in the north-central Wyoming city for the event, which also featured a post-movie party and a 45-minute private concert from Prince at the local Holiday Inn. (Prince is a cool dude. I still kind of regret not going to his pancake pajama party in Minneapolis a few years back. That also involved an impromptu private concert)

Filmed in color, released in black and white.

Prince wrote the Bangles’ “Manic Monday” using the pseudonym Christopher Tracy, the character he plays in this film. The song became a hit for the band the same year this film was released.

Madonna was originally offered the role of Mary Sharon. Susannah Melvoin was then cast as Mary but was replaced before filming began. (Goddamn)

The picture was nominated for Worst Picture at the Hastings Bad Cinema Society’s 9th Stinkers Bad Movie Awards in 1986. (The Stickers! Rarely mentioned these days)

Awards – Won the Razzie Award for Worst Picture

Won the Razzie Award for Worst Actor (Prince)

Won the Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actor (Jerome Benton)

Won the Razzie Award for Worst Director (Prince)

Won the Razzie Award for Worst Original Song (Prince)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actress (Kristin Scott Thomas)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Screenplay (Becky Johnston)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst New Star (Kristin Scott Thomas)

Bonfire of the Vanities Recap

Patrick

‘Ello everyone! Bonfire of the Vanities? More like Bonfire of the Banalities. I had a tough time figuring this movie out, and I’ll tell you why. Let’s go.

The Good – For much of the movie it is well acted. I was rather impressed with Hanks, Willis (surprisingly), and especially Melanie Griffith. It is, for decent stretches, at least fascinating. I would say I was more confused as to whether this was supposed to our world or a truly surreal satirical take on our world, and perhaps that is what kept my attention, but there were certainly bits I did like.
The Bad – Where to begin … I mean, I know this movie is a satire, but it does come across as genuinely racist. Like it is painting a picture of a world it imagines exists and then takes the unfortunate tack of taking down the strawman caricatures it creates, as if that is meaningful. I kept grasping at things, trying to think how I could make the movie better in some tangible way, but the unfortunate thing is: without reading the book I didn’t know! I knew the movie’s approach couldn’t be the book’s angle because it would have been torn down and cast out of society with vigor. But how it differed I didn’t know. Reading the IMDb notes and realizing they were forced to recast the judge as black (Morgan Freeman) makes oh so much sense. At times I really couldn’t believe what I was watching. I found it shocking. I knew it was supposed to be satire, but it is so weak that occasionally you get lulled into the sense that you are watching a real movie only to be shaken awake by angry and awful people and actions. I found the first half of the film stressful, and the second half unpleasant (if slowly relieving as you realize that things are kind of going to way you’d expect them to go). So there you go. I did not think this is was not that bad, but perhaps that is the mood I was in, willing to take this silly movie a bit too seriously. And yet my feelings seem to mirror the critical reception at the time, so I’m giving myself the benefit of the doubt.
BMT – I’ll keep this short. I thought it was boring, but shocking enough to warrant a solid 25 and maybe (maybe) I’d throw it to someone with the tentative recommendation that you are watching a truly strange movie come to life. I do kind of want to read the book about the making of this movie. It must have been simply bonkers.

Let’s see. Sequel/Prequel/Reboot would be fun to try and figure out who would play all of the people in a reboot made this year (plus, hey, it’s not like we are having a serious discussion on race in the United States at the moment …). So in the Tom Hanks role I wanted someone with that boyish charm, who can play someone you kind of want to hate a bit, and as close to 35 as possible (a believable age for the social position Hanks was in in the movie), and I think Andrew Garfield in that role would work really well. You could definitely believe him on Wall Street and then sympathize as his world falls apart around him. Bruce Willis comes across a lot older than he actually is (also 35 at the time), but also the literal alcohol character is tough to pull off I feel like these days, they are either now much older or the perpetual party boy type deal (like Miles Teller in The Spectacular Now). I went a little older and found Danny McBride which I think could work, even has the comedy chops if they wanted to go that direction again. Jeremy Renner or Joel Edgerton could both work as well. Scarlett Johansson in the Griffith role rounds out the important bits. Recast Freeman in his own role and you got a stew cooking.

There isn’t much beyond the three leads to make this movie again if they cared. The rest of the cast you could debate back and forth, but really that is unimportant compared to actually getting the tone right.

Jamie

As we finish our Now A Major Motion Picture cycle heading into our transition week, I can start to think retrospectively about the collection of books that I’ve (largely suffered) through. In most cases the books and the films were either very similar, bordering on straight adaptations (Pinocchio, Phantoms, The Choice, and The 5th Wave) or wildly different (Fair Game, Get Carter, and Random Hearts). The Bonfire of the Vanities stands out because it’s not really in either category. The first half of the film is basically a straight adaptation, with only minor changes to how characters look or behave. Halfway through the film though, it veers wildly off course. Starting from a scene where our main character Sherman McCoy wanders out of a courtroom in which he has been indicted on charges of reckless endangerment, we, as the audience, also wander helplessly from a film that made some sense, to one that makes no sense. I was so confused by the tone change at that point (anchored by what I knew from the book) that I actually assumed for a while that what we were seeing was a dream sequence (spoiler alert: not the case). It seems at this point that the filmmaker decided that he no longer liked the film he was making (probably because all the characters are terrible people) and decided that the movie needed some bucking up. Let’s all of sudden make Peter Fallow a hero (rather than the shitty pulp tabloid man that he is in the book), let’s have Sherman comically brandish a shotgun in a crowded party, and let’s make the climax of the film be the just acquittal of our valiant hero (!!!) Sherman McCoy. In the book this climax was just only in that it took all the shitty, vain people involved in the story and destroyed them all in a blaze of glory. In the film none of the characters are developed enough to convey this (and the ones that are developed have been developed into nicer, softer characters) so that the climax is played straight. Gross.

Funny enough this probably wouldn’t have made a difference to me if I hadn’t read the book. I wondered if I would have thought the film was well-acted and well-written (albeit a bit aimless), and produced in that Hollywood way to make it pleasant enough. I thought that I might have even said It’s Not That Bad.™ With the book, though, it seemed like a disaster. In the end I think Patrick and I agreed though. The fact of the matter is that the book is considerably more shocking in its racism than the film and in that way you can see the satire. It creates caricatures of real NYC dwellers of the time, but magnifies the hidden racism that roils beneath in order to satirize the institutions in the city (police, law, finance, politics). But how the film reigned back the exaggeration and dared to soften the McCoy and Fallow characters destroys the satire and in turn makes it simple offensive. Basically, I was wrong in my assumption that I might not be offended if I didn’t have the book to anchor me. His recap proves that I would have probably been even more offended.

Perhaps it’s a byproduct of all these films being based on books, but we’ve had a nice little run of films with very distinct settings for Settings 101. Once again we have a film that gets an A! In this case The Bonfire of the Vanities is a takedown of the New York City elite. Obviously they couldn’t change the setting or else the entire message would be lost (instead they just lost the message through shitty character development). We get several shots of the New York skyline, a close-up shot of Sherman McCoy’s New York license plate, clear “Manhattan” and “Bronx” highway signs, and a climax that centers around the idea of a white Manhattanite running over an African American youth in The Bronx. Kinda hovers a bit between A- and A as there isn’t really a distinct New York landmark used as a prop. But as the setting itself is vital to the plot and unchangeable, I give it the A. Once again, misses out on the coveted A+ by not having the setting in the title of the film.

Cheerios,

The Sklogs

Bonfire of the Vanities Preview

On the precipice of finishing the Now A Major Motion Picture cycle, we of course chose the longest book in the world for the Razzie section. That’s right, we’re watching The Bonfire of the Vanities starring Tom Hanks and BMT Legend Bruce Willis. The film was based on the Tom Wolfe classic of the same name, which comes in at a weighty 630 pages (oof). Luckily I started in on the behemoth weeks ago. This has been on my BMT future prospects list since almost the beginning of time, mostly because I couldn’t believe that there was a Hanks-Willis collaboration that bombed so badly. It was nominated for five Razzies (Picture, Screenplay, Director, Actress, and Supporting Actress) and an entire book was written about its troubled production (look at that street cred!). I did not get a chance to read that book… yet. Let’s go!

The Bonfire of the Vanities (1990) – BMeTric: 39.5

BonfireOfTheVanities_BMeT

BonfireOfTheVanities_RV

(Beautiful. Regression to the mean is there, as the votes rise the rating rises as well. But also there is no 2011 inflection point, why? I believe it is because this movie is kind of perfectly “average”. It isn’t popular by any means, but it also isn’t unpopular, probably because of the book it has a built in audience. Make the BMeTric plot interesting as well, where it reaches a pretty strong plateau.)

Leonard Maltin – BOMB – Appallingly heavy-handed “comedy” about a cocky Wall Street wheeler-dealer whose well-insulated life begins to crumble when his wife learns he’s fooling around, and he and his paramour are involved in a hit-and-run accident. With all the power – and nuance – of Tom Wolfe’s novel removed, and all the characters turned into caricatures (racist and otherwise), what’s left is a pointless charade, and a pitiful waste of money and talent.

(Racist caricatures? Pitiful waste of talent? Nearly endless sentence to start what is in reality a fairly banal review for a rare BOMB from Leonard. All point to this being an enigma, a bizarre unfortunate twisting of BMT in general. Uh oh … I feel like my brain is already melting and I’m not even watching this nonsense movie…)

Trailer – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIz_RlNZZlg

(Wow, this is a truly classic trailer. Heavy voiceover and film clips of characters seemingly responding to the voiceover. It’s almost like a short film. That being said, this trailer doesn’t tell me much about what the film is supposed to be about or what the conflict will be. It comes across as, well… a pointless charade.)

Directors – Brian De Palma – (Known For: Scarface; Mission: Impossible; The Untouchables; Carrie; Carlito’s Way; Dressed to Kill; Body Double; The Fury; Casualties of War; Blow Out; Femme Fatale; Snake Eyes; Obsession; BMT: The Black Dahlia; Mission to Mars; Passion; The Bonfire of the Vanities; Wise Guys; Notes: Actually went to Columbia University for Physics, but after graduating decided to pursue filmmaking and enrolled in a theater graduate program. Nominated for the Razzie Award in 2001 for Worst Director for Mission to Mars, 1991 for Bonfire of the Vanities, 1985 for Body Double, 1984 for Scarface, and 1981 for Dressed to Kill.)

Writers – Michael Cristofer (screenplay) – (Known For: The Witches of Eastwick; Casanova; Falling in Love; Mr. Jones; BMT: The Bonfire of the Vanities; Original Sin; Notes: Probably best known for winning the Pulitzer Prize for Drama and a Tony for The Shadow Box. Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1991 for Worst Screenplay for The Bonfire of the Vanities)

Tom Wolfe (novel) – (Known For: The Right Stuff; BMT: The Bonfire of the Vanities; Almost Heroes; Notes: Acclaimed novelist. I presume his credit for Almost Heroes is a case of mistaken identity, but it is hard to prove. Not mentioned on his wikipedia page, so I’m leaning towards it being not true. Funniest thing is that it’s mentioned in books and shit… presumably because the author saw the “fact” on imdb.)

Actors – Tom Hanks – (Known For: A Hologram for the King; Forrest Gump; Saving Private Ryan; Bridge of Spies; The Green Mile; Cast Away; Cloud Atlas; Catch Me If You Can; Cars; Toy Story; Captain Phillips; Charlie Wilson’s War; Toy Story 3; You’ve Got Mail; Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close; Road to Perdition; Apollo 13; A League of Their Own; Splash; The Terminal; Saving Mr. Banks; Big; Toy Story 2; Philadelphia; The ‘Burbs; Sleepless in Seattle; That Thing You Do!; Turner & Hooch; The Simpsons Movie; The Money Pit; The Polar Express; The Ladykillers; Bachelor Party; Dragnet; Joe Versus the Volcano; The Great Buck Howard; Nothing in Common; Volunteers; The Man with One Red Shoe; Punchline; BMT: The Bonfire of the Vanities; Larry Crowne; He Knows You’re Alone; The Da Vinci Code; Angels & Demons; Notes: With someone this famous you almost just have to link to some current news. Check out the Instagram selfie posted by wife Rita Wilson, cause why not?)

Bruce Willis – (Known For: Pulp Fiction; Sin City; The Fifth Element; Sin City: A Dame to Kill For; The Sixth Sense; Looper; Die Hard; Moonrise Kingdom; Alpha Dog; RED 2; RED; Twelve Monkeys; Ocean’s Twelve; Unbreakable; The Expendables; Die Hard 4.0; The Expendables 2; Grindhouse; Die Hard 2; Lucky Number Slevin; The Last Boy Scout; Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle; Planet Terror; Die Hard: With a Vengeance; BMT: Look Who’s Talking Too; The Cold Light of Day; Vice; A Good Day to Die Hard; North; The Prince; Color of Night; Lay the Favorite; Breakfast of Champions; The Whole Ten Yards; Extraction; Cop Out; The Bonfire of the Vanities; G.I. Joe: Retaliation; Hudson Hawk; Perfect Stranger; Fire with Fire; Striking Distance; Precious Cargo; Rock the Kasbah; The Story of Us; Blind Date; Mercury Rising; Marauders; Loaded Weapon 1; Surrogates; The Jackal; Sunset; Last Man Standing; Armageddon; Hostage; Tears of the Sun; Notes: Again, too famous. Recently got sued for his acting fee on an unfinished film. Kind of incredible story. Paid him $8 million dollars and then shut down cause they couldn’t pay the crew! Won the Razzie Award in 1999 for Worst Actor for Armageddon, Mercury Rising, and The Siege; Won the Razzie Award in 1992 for Worst Screenplay for Hudson Hawk; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1995 for Worst Actor for Color of Night, and North and in 1992 for Hudson Hawk.)

Also stars Melanie Griffith.

Budget/Gross – $47 million / Domestic: $15,691,192 (N/A)

(Oooooooof what a disaster. No wonder this is so well known in bad movie circles. $47 million seems like a ton for a comedy book adaptation, I wonder what the thought process there was as well.)

Rotten Tomatoes – 16% (8/51): No consensus yet.

(RT must be busy. Fifty-one reviews for a 1990 film is incredible! Must be diving through the newspaper archives. Good for them. My consensus guess would be: Solid acting performances by Willis and Hanks can’t save this satirical dud from going up in flames.)

Poster – Sklogfire of the Vanities (B+)

bonfire_of_the_vanities

(I like that it has a color theme and the classic symmetry. I particularly like the story that it tells with the city seeming to being on fire and consuming the actors above. The “bonfire” if you will. Could have been done in an artsier way, though. Lacks some aesthetic. Interesting thing about this poster though? If you saw this poster in a theater what time period would you think the film takes place? I would certainly not guess the 80’s.)

Tagline(s) – Take one Wall Street tycoon, his Fifth Avenue mistress, a reporter hungry for fame, and make the wrong turn in The Bronx…then sit back and watch the sparks fly. (F)

(That is super old school. Before they mastered the art of the tagline. Horrendously long. Unacceptable.)

Keyword(s) – accident; Top Ten by BMeTric: 80.2 The Love Guru (2008); 63.1 Zoolander 2 (2016); 61.2 Ghost Rider (2007); 59.3 God’s Not Dead (2014); 58.1 Doom (2005); 57.3 Daredevil (2003); 54.8 Hot Pursuit (2015); 54.1 Cool World (1992); 51.1 Sorority Row (2009); 49.5 The Mangler (1995);

(You might ask yourself: what does this keyword even mean? I don’t know. In Zoolander 2 they were in a crazy massive car crash at one point. In Doom a disease or something is released into a Mars facility. In Daredevil he gets sprayed with toxic superhero chemicals. Solid list regardless though. Reminds me that we have to do Cool World at some point.)

Notes – Alan Arkin was replaced by Morgan Freeman when it was decided to change the judge’s ethnicity from Jewish to African-American in order to moderate criticism of the film’s racial politics. (Kind of a funny choice. If you make a film adaptation that is a satirical take on the racial politics of 80’s New York City and you get criticized for the racial politics… then you probably aren’t doing satire right.)

Steve Martin was the original choice to play Sherman McCoy by original director Mike Nichols. Nichols left the project and was replaced by Brian De Palma who also wanted Martin for the role but the producers disagreed and wanted Tom Hanks cast instead. (Martin is an odd choice for the role. Hanks fits the part naturally much better.)

Actresses considered for the role eventually played by Melanie Griffith include Lena Olin, Lolita Davidovich, and Uma Thurman, (who tested for the part and actually came close to getting it.) Brian De Palma preferred Thurman to Melanie Griffith, but Tom Hanks reportedly felt uncomfortable over Thurman’s relative inexperience and persuaded the director against her casting. (Lena Olin better fits the role physically, actually. But Griffith was good.)

Awards – Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Picture (Brian De Palma)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Actress (Melanie Griffith)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actress (Kim Cattrall)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Director (Brian De Palma)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Screenplay (Michael Cristofer)

Basic Instinct 2 Recap

Jamie

Basic Instinct 2 is horrific. A truly bad film. It’s probably not memorable or interesting enough to be considered in the pantheon of straight dog poo films, but it had aspects that set it apart somewhat. First and foremost, Sharon Stone competes for the title of Worst Acting Performance Ever Seen in a BMT Film. She smirked after every deadpanned line as if to wink at the audience and say “remember this character? Isn’t this fun?” No it was not. I dreaded when she would appear on screen. On top of that this provides a perfect example of one of the main ways that a truly bad BMT film is created: the vanity project. I’ve said before that I feel like BMT films have to be made organically because they are rooted in delusion. If you set out to make a bad film you by definition lack delusion (you are obviously aware that you are making something bad), and so you will not succeed in making a BMT film. Alternately, the vanity project is a product of delusion. This was Stone’s vanity project. No one really cared and they let her drive it into the ground. This will all be detailed in my upcoming books (set for a June, 2054 release): The Seven Deadly Sins of Hollywood: How Bad Films get Made. The Greed chapter would be loooooong. I’m not sure what would be in the Gluttony chapter of the book… The Island of Dr. Moreau?

I’ll just have a quick game to go through our Settings 101 for Basic Instinct 2. This is easily a solid B+. Very, very, very clearly takes place in London. It even opens with a high speed car ride through London with a professional Footballer riding shotgun with Stone. They talk about London and the police investigation is performed by the British police. But what really pushes it to a high B is the fact that David Morrissey’s office is purportedly in the Gherkin, which is the glass egg-like building in the middle of London. Perfect. Only way it could have been an A is if Stone killed someone in London Tower, Big Ben, or Parliament and it was called Basic London. An additional small note: The original Basic Instinct is also a B+ for its clear San Francisco setting. Wonderful.

Patrick

‘Ello everyone! Basic Instinct 2?! More like this Bullshit Stinks Too! Booooooom. To preface this discussion of the movie we have to get a bit into the original Basic Instinct which I watched for the first time in preparation. My feeling? It is like looking at the erotic thriller genre with fresh new eyes. Sharon Stone is amazing, Douglas is amazing (deep V in the original Hollywood badass bar included. The bar was so luxuriously not-crowded, you could get a drink at the drop of a hat, solid stuff). The story could have been an entire HBO series and it would have murdered all 10 hours of it. It almost has an anti-pattern of a twist as well, I found it revelatory. Like what the Thing is for sci-fi horror or Halloween for slasher films, it feels quintessential. And yet I still have two legs to the Michael Douglas erotic thriller trilogy (Fatal Attraction and Disclosure being the other two, also the three highest grossing erotic thrillers in history). So yeah, I’m excited. But not as excited as I was to see how Basic Instinct 2 butchered the original’s legacy, let’s go!

The Good – The story, while very similar in beats to the original, is at least somewhat interesting. Moving the film to London does give it something of an exotic and novel feeling when directly compared to the original. And that is honestly it, because …
The Bad – Sharon Stone is a straight up parody of herself, I don’t understand how the woman I saw acting in the original became this shadow of herself in only 15 years. The main actor couldn’t keep up with anyone else in this film. The pacing for the movie was a crawl. The directing was lazy, the writing wasn’t nearly as sharp as it needed to be, and the ending is ludicrous. It is a genuinely terrible movie made only more so by the competence of its predecessor.
The BMT – Yes. 70? Sure, but only given what came before. I think it is a solid 50 (40 if you don’t like films that are more on the boring side) regardless, but given how incredible the original is this is a genuinely incredible film. It didn’t kill the erotic thriller, but it may have killed the erotic thriller sequel genre before it even got started.

Phew! I’m going to do a quick Audio Sklog-entary for the solo director commentary for Basic Instinct. There is only one thing I would recommend about this commentary, and it is those brief moments where the director awakens from his slumber and just tears into the film. At one point he exclaims “This isn’t the cure for cancer!” and “If you didn’t like the film, I don’t care”. It is stunning. Besides that, a lot of rote directoral details and discussion of London as a setting. D, this is why you don’t get just one person for commentary, especially a non-enthusiastic technical person. Boring.

Cheerios,

The Sklogs

Basic Instinct 2 Preview

This week we move right back into our Calendar cycle for the Razzie entry. Since the calendar is amazing and affords us amazing choices for movies each week, we of course were able to choose a past Razzie Worst Picture winner! That’s right, we are watching 2006’s Basic Instinct 2! Quite literally the sequel that no one was asking for (and perhaps many begging Hollywood not to make). Released on March 31st, it beat out The Skulls for the honor. Thank God. We’ve (obviously) already seen The Skulls. Let’s go!

Basic Instinct 2 (2006) – BMeTric: 72.4

(Obviously considering the current score it isn’t too shocking that the historical profile is pretty mundane. And now that we know all about the regression to the mean even the vote/rating plot is kind of boring. Reaching 4.0 is kind of expected. Up to 4.3 is starting to get a bit above average. It could be because of the recent erotic thriller comeback … but nah, probably just random.)

Leonard Maltin – 2 stars – Long-gestating sequel to the notorious 1992 hit isn’t the embarrassment you might have expected – or hoped for. What should have been high camp is instead a rather dull psychological-sexual thriller in which slippery novelist Catherine Tramell is up to her old tricks in London when a male companion turns up dead in her car. Did she or didn’t she? Stone makes the best of this and looks sensational while the impressive British cast tried hard to keep it afloat.

(Wow, I was not expecting the classic two star Maltin for this one. I like his creeper comment on how good Stone looks, keep it up Maltin. Dull is bad, but perhaps he was so distracted by the gorgeous magnificence of Stone that he couldn’t focus on the enthralling psycho-sexual thrill-ride that was this film? We’ll have to see.)

Trailer – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhNFW1AXLOg

(My God. So 2006, the music, the way they shot London, the crazy car stunts in the middle of a purported erotic thriller. The entire thing almost seems like a parody of itself in a weird way. Like they made a trailer for a fake movie sequel for April Fools Day.)

Directors – Michael Caton-Jones – (Known For: This Boy’s Life; Doc Hollywood; Rob Roy; Memphis Belle; City by the Sea; Scandal; BMT: Basic Instinct 2; The Jackal; Notes: He has bad-mouthed this film and Sharon Stone several times in interviews over the years and openly admits he only did it for the money. Despite this, he does a commentary for the film, which is very exciting. Nominated for the Razzie Award in 2007 for Worst Director for Basic Instinct 2)

Writers – Leora Barish (written by) – (Known For: Desperately Seeking Susan; BMT: Basic Instinct 2; Notes: Currently resides in New York and runs a sustainable farm school for vetrens. Won the Razzie Award in 2007 for Worst Screenplay for Basic Instinct 2)

Henry Bean (written by) – (Known For: Internal Affairs; The Believer; Deep Cover; Noise; Almayer’s Folly; BMT: Basic Instinct 2; Notes: Also directed The Believer and wrote a novel adapted from his screenplay. Won the Razzie Award in 2007 for Worst Screenplay for Basic Instinct 2)

Joe Eszterhas (characters) – (Known For: Basic Instinct; Jagged Edge; Betrayed; F.I.S.T.; Telling Lies in America; Music Box; Hearts of Fire; Children of Glory; BMT: Basic Instinct 2; Showgirls; Sliver; Jade; Nowhere to Run; An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn; Flashdance; Notes: Bad movie legend. He started his career in journalism, but was mired in some controversy, including losing a ‘false light’ case in front of the Supreme Court. Won the Razzie Award in 1999 for Worst Supporting Actor, Worst Screenplay, Worst New Star, and Worst Original Song for An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn; Won the Razzie Award in 1996 for Worst Screenplay for Showgirls; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1996 for Worst Screenplay for Jade; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1994 for Worst Screenplay for Sliver; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1984 for Worst Screenplay for Flashdance)

Actors – Sharon Stone – (Known For: Alpha Dog; Casino; Basic Instinct; Total Recall; The Quick and the Dead; Lovelace; Antz; Bobby; Broken Flowers; Above the Law; Fading Gigolo; The Mighty; Stardust Memories; Irreconcilable Differences; The Muse; Beautiful Joe; Bolero; BMT: Catwoman; Basic Instinct 2; Police Academy 4: Citizens on Patrol; Sliver; Cold Creek Manor; The Specialist; King Solomon’s Mines; Diabolique; Action Jackson; Intersection; Simpatico; Gloria; Sphere; Last Action Hero; He Said, She Said; Deadly Blessing; Last Dance; Notes: Nominated for an Oscar for Casino. Bad movie legend, as you can see from her Razzie street cred. Frequent visitor to the fair island of Martha’s Vineyard.)

Sharon Stone Razzie Cred: Won the Razzie Award in 2007 for Worst Actress for Basic Instinct 2; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 2005 for Worst Supporting Actress for Catwoman; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 2005 for Worst Screen Couple for Catwoman; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 2000 for Worst Actress for Gloria; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1997 for Worst New Star for Diabolique, and Last Dance; Won the Razzie Award in 1995 for Worst Actress for Intersection, and The Specialist; Won the Razzie Award in 1995 for Worst Screen Couple for The Specialist; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1994 for Worst Actress for Sliver; Nominated for the Razzie Award in 1988 for Worst Actress for Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold

Also stars David Morrissey and David Thewlis (Remus Lupin in Harry Potter)

Budget/Gross – $70 million / Domestic: $5,971,336 (Worldwide: $38,629,478)

(Oh my … oh … oh my. That is not great. That is just … not very good.)

#33 for the Thriller – Erotic genre

(Sigh, if only I lived in the early 90’s once again. Fatal Attraction (1987) and Basic Instinct (1992) ushered in a heyday of erotic thrillers including BMT legend Color of Night (1994). The waves in the graph are interesting, like they saturate the market and then feel a cooling off period. And each wave smaller than the last. A slowly dying genre. But one I hope to see revived once again in the future. Until then though, enjoy one of the worst I suppose)

#43 for the Thriller – Serial Killer genre

(oooof, what was our fascination with serial killers in the 2000s? The show Dexter was right in there as well. This comes right before one last hurrah in the genre before a complete and utter collapse. And recently (The Following, Hannibal) the genre has gotten play in a little wave, but is probably dying again. Looking through things it was basically the Saw series sustaining that, and looking at the actual money being made the genre is kind of moving to microbudget/VOD releases I think. The movie, incredibly, marks an attempt at two 90s genres that are both now on the brink of total collapse. Fascinating.)

Rotten Tomatoes – 7% (10/150): Unable to match the suspense and titilation of its predecessor, Basic Instinct 2 boasts a plot so ludicrous and predictable it borders on “so-bad-it’s-good.”

(Sorry, I’m getting a bit distracted by what appears to be a typo in the consensus there. Apparently “titillation” is spelled with two L’s. Very very odd. Sign me up for a ludicrously plotted erotic thriller all fucking day though.)

Poster – Sklogal Instinct 2 (C-)

(Just like with The Day the Earth Stood Still I think it’s generally a mistake to have a skewed perspective in the poster (which is the effect that the weird shadow creates). I do like the idea that the poster is from the point of view of someone getting murdered and we are looking through his half-closed eyelids. Interesting and artsy and polished in that way. The brown tone isn’t great and too much going on, though, so overall slightly below average. If they had kept it a bit simpler it probably would have gotten a much better grade.)

Tagline(s) – Everything interesting begins in the mind. (F… I think.)

(I can’t believe this ended up on the poster… what does it mean?! It’s an unsolvable riddle. This is one of the worst and most incomprehensible taglines I’ve ever seen for a film.)

Keywords – psychiatrist top 10 BMeTric examples: 73.9 Nutty Professor II: The Klumps (2000), 72.4 Basic Instinct 2 (2006), 71.5 Halloween: Resurrection (2002), 68.3 Psycho (1998), 66.6 Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977), 62.8 Abduction (2011), 61.3 Pulse (2006), 56.9 Dr. T and the Women (2000), 55.9 Poltergeist III (1988), 54.5 Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995)

(I shouldn’t have been so surprised to see all the horror films on the list. Psychology, of course, often plays a prominent role in horror. Either in the form of dealing with past trauma or by those attempting to understand the machinations of madmen. The Halloween series, interestingly, often has both. Donald Pleasence plays a prominent role in five of the Halloween films, whereas in the long running series the “survivors” of each movie often deal with the psychological aftermath in subsequent movies. Not a pure keyword, but interesting.)

Notes – Michael Douglas declined to reprise his role from the original movie, admitting that he felt he was too old for the part. (yah think?)

Robert Downey Jr. was set to star but had to drop out when he was charged with drug possession. Kurt Russell was attached at some point but bailed out because he felt uncomfortable with the nudity. Pierce Brosnan refused to play the male lead role because of distasteful elements. Bruce Greenwood was set to star but dropped out because he hadn’t been signed on yet and feared the actors strike. Benjamin Bratt was banned by Sharon Stone for not being a good actor. (Poor Benjamin Bratt. Also, these casting choices must go back a while. RDJr. hasn’t been busted for drug possession since 2001)

Before agreeing to perform the full-frontal nude scene, Sharon Stone invited a friend over to watch the original Basic Instinct (1992). During the film, Stone, by her own admission, stripped down totally naked and asked her friend if she could “still pull it off.”

Rupert Everett publicly expressed his anger after being turned down to star opposite Sharon Stone by MGM CEO Chris McGurk for being “pervert who would never be accepted by the American public in this role”.

The film was originally intended to be made in 2000. (there we go)

Sharon Stone agreed to reprise her role of Catherine Tremell in a “pay or play” arrangement, meaning she got fully paid, whether the film would ultimately be made or not.

Jude Law, Ewan McGregor, Gabriel Byrne, Javier Bardem, Benicio Del Toro, Viggo Mortensen and Aaron Eckhart were all in the running to star opposite Sharon Stone at one point. (So many people considered and yet they ended up with David Morrissey… huh)

David Cronenberg was in talks to the direct the film for some time. John McTiernan was set to direct after Cronenberg bailed out due to producer Mario Kassar banning him from using his own cinematographer, production designer, and the rest of his usual team. (sound like a lot of people were banning other people)

Awards – Won the Razzie Award for Worst Picture

Won the Razzie Award for Worst Actress (Sharon Stone)

Won the Razzie Award for Worst Prequel or Sequel

Won the Razzie Award for Worst Screenplay (Leora Barish, Henry Bean, Joe Eszterhas)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actor (David Thewlis)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Screen Couple

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Director (Michael Caton-Jones)

Harlem Nights Recap

Patrick

‘Ello everyone! Harlem Nights? More like Meh, Alright! This movie is so weird, let’s get into it:

The Good – I liked the style. The music, costumes, opening credits, feel of it was genuine. It didn’t feel like a bunch of comedians wandering around in costumes looking like idiots. Very very ambitious. There are moments when vintage Eddie Murphy shines through.
The Bad – He wasn’t bad, but Pryor just sleepwalks through this. Too often profanity it used as a stand in for actual jokes. The storyline is just kind of boring. It is like noir films, when you hit it it is amazing, but when you miss it just seems like you’ve seen all the twists elsewhere. I was joking throughout the film that it felt like I had been watching it for years. It is so slow it does feel like it takes three hours to get through everything.
The BMT – This is a rare one: Nope! Too slow. Too boring. Not enough street cred to warrant wasting your time unless you are an Oscar / Razzie / Eddie Murphy completionist. I would say like 10. Maybe 15 on the BMeTric. But maybe I just wasn’t in the mood.

No game this week because I performed a little installment of what I call BMT:CSI:SVU (we’re the special victims!). This is generally data science work about bad movies and is what ultimately resulted in the BMeTric all those months ago. The first installment can be found here, and in general our bad movie musings (quantitative and qualitative) will be held in The Bad Movie Institute of Technology (BMIT), found here.

Jamie

I really have very little to say about Harlem Nights. I actually thought there was a lot of things done right in the film. The music was great (shout-out to Herbie Hancock), costumes were bomb, and it generally looked nice. The whole story was a mess, though. Just slow and bizarre. So bizarre, it’s hard even to say whether it was a good or bad film in the end… it just was. If you had to try to compare it to something else from that era the obvious choice would be Nothing but Trouble, the Dan Aykroyd disaster. Just like Murphy, Aykroyd was given complete creative control of every aspect of his film. In the case of Nothing but Trouble this resulted in a monumentally unpleasant film that borders on unwatchable. In the case of Harlem Nights it resulted in an ambitious period piece that looks beautiful, but misses badly with an underdeveloped storyline. Clearly one is better than the other. Congrats, Harlem Nights.

Harlem Nights is not based on a book. I would have loved to read that book though. Nice slow, character-driven burn. But I don’t care to talk about a fake book this time. Instead I’ll do a classic Prequel, Sequel, or Remake and I have to say: I think a solid remake could be great, especially if they move fully away from comedy. Cast? Michael B. Jordan in Murphy’s role, Denzel Washington in Pryor’s role, and Danny Glover in Foxx’s role. That would get me pretty excited. Give the film a darker tone, with the major heist at the end cut together with the concurrent boxing match and you got gold I tells yah. Let’s get on the horn, Patrick, and take this train to Oscar town. Of course, the only person who would actually end up getting nominated for an Oscar would be Christopher Walken playing the crooked cop because… well you know why.

Cheerios,

The Sklogs

Harlem Nights Preview

Alright, so this week we move onto our Razzie category. We needed a Razzie nominee with a one-and-done director and what better one to do than Eddie Murphy’s only directorial effort, Harlem Nights. In 1989, with Robert Townsend and Spike Lee, there was a bit of a black directing renaissance going on in Hollywood. Eddie Murphy was the it guy and was given the chance to direct a film. He wanted to work with his heroes, so he cast Richard Pryor and Redd Foxx and they cooked up Harlem Nights. Sounds pretty cool and this has definitely got a bit of a cult following over the years, so don’t be surprised if we come back saying some good (or at least alright) things about it. Let’s go!

Harlem Nights (1989) – BMeTric: 23.5

HarlemNights_BMeT

(Yet another weird example of a movie going from “really bad” about 10 years ago (4.8 rating on IMDb) to “mediocre to good” now (5.9 on IMDb). I have to admit, I don’t totally get the migration, but I assume it is just a general IMDb trend, the more people you have voting the higher the average rating tends to be. If this trend keeps up this will end up not even really registering for BMT at all, it if gets to 6.2 it will be near to 15 or so with the BMeTric. Vaguely interesting stuff guys.)

Leonard Maltin – 2 stars – Proprietor of an after-hours club in 1930s Harlem (Pryor) and his adopted son (Murphy) try standing up to a white mobster determined to cut in on their take of put them out of business. Murphy’s debut as a writer-director is skimpily scripted and completely devoid of energy. Even pryor’s effortless charisma can’t breathe much life into this one.

(That sounds about right. Not good, but not off-the-rails bad… two stars. Not sounding like the best BMT film.)

Trailer – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En27DgNW0nY

(Huh. A super understated trailer for what is apparently a super understated movie. I’m starting to get the feeling … oh yeah I’m there, I have a bad feeling this movie is “bad” because it is aggressively and unrelentingly boring. I hope I’m wrong.)

Directors – Eddie Murphy – (BMT: Harlem Nights; Notes: Only directorial effort of his career. His quote about directing: “It was a question of wearing too many hats, and as a result, everything was half-assed. All my peers were directing: Keenan [Ivory Wayans], and Robert [Townsend] and Spike [Lee]. I was like ‘Shit,’ I’m the big cat on the block; let me see what it’s like to direct. So I just did it. I didn’t dig it.”)

Writers – Eddie Murphy (written by) – (Known For: Coming to America; Beverly Hills Cop II; Boomerang; BMT: Norbit (BMT); Vampire in Brooklyn; Another 48 Hrs.; Harlem Nights; Notes: Involved in a well publicized lawsuit, Buchwald v. Paramount, involving the Coming to America screenplay. Murphy’s treatment for the script was alleged to be stolen from a screenplay written by Art Buchwald and the trial ended up being settled. Written about in the book Fatal Subtraction.)

Actors – Eddie Murphy – (Known For: Coming to America; Shrek; Mulan; Shrek 2; Trading Places; Beverly Hills Cop; Shrek the Third; Shrek Forever After; Tower Heist; Dreamgirls; Life; 48 Hrs.; The Nutty Professor; Doctor Dolittle; Beverly Hills Cop II; Dr. Dolittle 2; Bowfinger; Boomerang; Imagine That; BMT: Norbit (BMT); Nutty Professor II: The Klumps (Seen it); The Adventures of Pluto Nash (BMT); Vampire in Brooklyn; The Haunted Mansion; Meet Dave; Holy Man (Seen it); I Spy (Seen it); Beverly Hills Cop III; Showtime; Daddy Day Care; Metro; Another 48 Hrs.; The Golden Child; A Thousand Words (BMT); The Distinguished Gentleman; Harlem Nights; Notes: Major movie star and stand-up comic. One of the most prominent BMT actors of our age.)

Eddie Murphy Razzie Notes – Won 2010 Worst Actor of the Decade; Won 2008 Worst Actor, Supporting Actor, and Supporting Actress Norbit, 1990 Worst Screenplay Harlem Nights; Nominated 2013 Worst Actor A Thousand Words, 2010 Worst Actor Imagine That, 2009 Worst Actor Meet Dave, 2003 Worst Actor The Adventures of Pluto Nash, I Spy, Showtime, 1990 Worst Director Harlem Nights, 2008 Worst Screenplay Norbit, 2009 Worst Screen Couple Meet Dave, 2008 Worst Screen Couple Norbit, 2003 Worst Screen Couple with Robert De Niro (Showtime) and Owen Wilson (I Spy).

Also stars Richard Pryor and Redd Foxx

Budget/Gross – $30 million / Domestic: $60,864,870

(Quite a big hit, although not nearly the hit that the producers anticipated (if stories are to be believed). The more famous story from its release is a couple of shooting that occurred in and around theaters during its release. Led to the first metal detectors installed in theaters.)

Rotten Tomatoes – 21% (3/14): No consensus yet.

(Too old for a consensus, so I’ll make one up: Great cast and sharp 1930’s look, can’t make up for the bizarrely unfunny script by first-time-director Murphy. Maybe stick to acting.)

Poster – Classic (A)

harlem_nights

(It’s just classic. I would hang this on my wall. I feel like all the art aspects of this film were off the chain.)

Tagline(s) – They’re up to something big. (D)

(Does this mean something? I’m confused. Is this a film where Eddie Murphy is made into a 50-foot monster through the reverse use of a shrinking ray? Are Murphy, Pryor, and Foxx tasked with transporting an Elephant somewhere? It only doesn’t get an F because it doesn’t offend my senses.)

Notes – In the autobiography, “Pryor Convictions and Other Life Sentences (1997)”, Richard Pryor states that he ” . . . never connected with Eddie [Murphy]. People talked about how my work had influenced Eddie, and perhaps it did. But I always thought Eddie’s comedy was mean. I used to say, “Eddie, be a little nice” and that would piss him off . . . I finished [Harlem Nights (1989)] thinking that Eddie didn’t like me”.

By his own admission, Eddie Murphy felt that he didn’t dedicate enough thought or care to the directing of his debut. He was more concerned at the time with figuring out where the next party was going to be.

Awards – Oscar Nominated for Best Costume Design (Joe I. Tompkins)

Won the Razzie Award for Worst Screenplay (Eddie Murphy)

Nominated for the Razzie Award for Worst Director (Eddie Murphy)

White Chicks Recap

Patrick

‘Ello everyone. That’s right, only Patrick here. Jamie was, of course, driven insane by White Chicks. A tragic tale indeed. It is either that or he’s on holiday in Mexico. I can’t remember. It is of no consequence because we have matters of the utmost importance to attend to. In particular, a Hall of Fame induction ceremony. If you don’t know what I’m talking about then that probably means you haven’t seen White Chicks. Stop what you are doing this instant and watch it! For it is incredible (and on Netflix). A true masterpiece on every level. Since I’m pulling double duty let’s get into it!

The Good – Um, can I say everything? They let loose in this movie. Everybody is on board. Crazy Mexican impression which made me shout “Oh shit!”? Check. A love story built on a foundation of deceit and lies that results in an inevitable happy ending? Check. A panoply of friends/enemies of the white chicks each one with an individual scene where they can just go bananas on screen? Check. Terry Crews fart battle? Check. Terry Crews “hilarious” roofie/rape storyline?! Check. Terry Crews accidentally having sex with a man gag?!! CHECK.
The Bad – Uh … I’m saying everything again. This movie makes no sense. It is genuinely racist. Every storyline is somehow both expected and off-the-wall, a Schrodinger-like situation in which I think the plot didn’t exist until I observed it at which time it collapsed into a movie that was designed for the pleasure of the observer. Without quantum effects this movie is completely inexplicable. It is the two slit experiment for BMT Theory. You see what it has done to me? I’m making no sense!
The BMT – Did you not hear this is a BMT Hall of Fame inductee? This should honestly have a 70+ BMeTric. It appears than in the past few years people have been somehow giving this 6+ ratings on IMDb, otherwise it would be there. For shame world.
They Look Like Monsters – I’m adding a new special category to my recap. I wrote this exact phrase more than a dozen times in my 5+ pages of notes about this movie. They looked like monsters. Every so often I’d start to wane a bit then all of a sudden Monster Face! And I was back on board. They looked insane. I can only think they knew exactly what they were doing. This ain’t no Big Momma or Norbit, this wasn’t going for wins for makeup. At least I hoped not. Because they looked like monsters. I hope you like monster movies …. because they looked like monsters.
This movie could have been a horror film with minimal slick editing.
Multiple fart battles.
A harpy wife character which will make you go “racist and misogynistic?! They’ve done it again!”
A++++ would watch again. They look like monsters!

Phew, I’ve been thinking about this movie for days. It made me wonder about the Hall of Fame for BMT. Looking back through the lists I would tentatively put 29 previous films into the Hall of Fame (That sounds too high, I feel like a HoF is more like 1-5% of players). But until Jamie gets back tentative it will remain. Rest assured though, White Chicks is on the list. And I am now 1000% more excited for Littleman. And waaaaaay on board with White Chicks 2. I have a feeling it will have to go in the Big Momma’s House 2 direction in which they, inexplicably, use the same characters in a subsequent FBI investigation (i.e. No longer will we have to suspend our disbelief that people could ever mistake the monsters they transform into for real life women, hooray!). On. Board.

Game time. My quick game is a drinking game. This is three fold and rather cavalier when it comes to drinking games. Trust me, it would work:

If you think “They look like monsters” – drink
If you think “wow, that seems racist” – drink
If you think “well, no way they could get away with that joke nowadays” – drink

If you are honest with yourself you will be slammed by the end of playing this game. Be honest with yourself.

And as for Jamie’s game, I heard through the grapevine that this movie was in fact based on a book. The book is called The Debutantes. Written as a pre-world war I satire of upper crust British society the book is about two handmaiden of wealthy ladies on their way to a debutante ball who, through a series of hilarious events, end up taking the places of their mistresses. Deftly navigating the political firestorm that is high society Britain, the two servants teach the nobles a thing or two about manners (and attract the eyes of the most desirable lords to boot). Critics decried it as “Low-class Evelyn Waugh” and “Distinctly non-posh”, the book quietly entered the public domain and then was adapted by the Waynes brothers (huge fans). Or so my grapevine source led me to believe.

Cheerios,

The Sklog

White Chicks Preview

As we head into the homestretch of the airball category, we are faced with finding a Razzie nominated film featuring a professional athlete. This is going to be pretty hard, right? Wrong! Not when you have Terry Crews (played for six years in the NFL) on your side! That’s right, we are taking advantage of his comedy filmography and doing the classic Wayans Brothers film White Chicks! It was nominated for five Razzies (Worst Picture, Worst Actress (ugh, for the Wayans Brothers), Worst Director, Worst Screenplay, and Worst Onscreen Couple), but came up against a juggernaut (Catwoman) and failed to win any of them. I’m pretty excited for this. Let’s go!

White Chicks (2004) – BMeTric: 50.7

WhiteChicks_BMeT

(Woah Nelly! Two 50+ BMeTric films in a row? Hose us down! This might be too much to handle. This is actually a nice plot because White Chicks was released right as the internet archive started to store IMDb pages and it is reasonably popular. You can even see the DVD bump right in the beginning.)

Leonard Maltin – 2 stars – Two male, maverick FBI agents go deep undercover, disguised as air-headed twin sisters, to flush out a criminal. They’re black but the girls are white, and that’s the central joke. Logic aside (and it certainly is), the heavy-handed comedy is a fragile excuse for the Wayans brothers to do a series of broad, silly riffs, poking fun at stereotypical white people. Unrated version runs 115m.

(Secret twin movie! Secret twin movie! Just like the Antonio Banderas classic Two Much, this begs the question: does a movie where the characters are pretending to be twins count as a real twin movie? The answer is yes, yes, a thousand times yes. I’m so happy. Editor Note: To point out, unlike with Two Much in this case presumably Maitland Ward and Anne Dudek are in fact playing twins. Although I don’t recall whether they specifically mention they are twins in the FBI briefing in the beginning or not. It is a subtle but important difference.)

Trailer – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6V25aqQblM

(They literally look like monsters. How anyone would think they are human beings is odd, especially anyone who knew the girls they were impersonating. I’ll just hang out waiting for the dance scene, which looks amazing.)

Writer/Director – Keenen Ivory Wayans – (Known For: Scary Movie; I’m Gonna Git You Sucka; BMT: Scary Movie 2; White Chicks; A Low Down Dirty Shame; Little Man; Notes: Nominated for Worst Director and Screenplay, White Chicks (2004), Littleman (2006). Rose to prominence as the creator of the sketch comedy show In Living Color)

Actors/Writers – Shawn Wayans – (Known For: I’m Gonna Git You Sucka; BMT: Scary Movie 2 (Wri); White Chicks (Wri); Dance Flick (Wri); Little Man (Dir) (Not Found); Don’t Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in The Hood; Notes: Brother of director Keenen Ivory Wayans.)

Marlon Wayans – (Known For: Scary Movie; Requiem for a Dream; The Heat; The Ladykillers; Above the Rim; I’m Gonna Git You Sucka; BMT: Scary Movie 2; White Chicks; A Haunted House; G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra; A Haunted House 2; Senseless; Dance Flick; Dungeons & Dragons; Norbit; The Sixth Man; Fifty Shades of Black; Mo’ Money; Marmaduke; Little Man; Don’t Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in The Hood; Notes: Nominated for Worst Supporting Actor, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra (2009). Originally cast as Robin in Batman Forever.)

(Dual Razzie Notes For Shawn and Marlon: Won for Worst Actor and Screen Couple, Littleman (2006), Nominated for Worst Screenplay, Littleman (2006), Nominated for Worst Actress, Screen Couple and Screenplay: White Chicks (2004). I actually find it rather stunning that of their entire filmography only two movies generated all but one of the Razzie nominations for the Wayne family)

Additional Writers – Michael Anthony Snowden (screenplay) – (BMT: Scary Movie 2; White Chicks; Notes: Nominated for Worst Screenplay, White Chicks (2004). According to IMDB his nickname is FireFly, used to write for South Park)

Andy McElfresh (screenplay) – (BMT: White Chicks; Notes: Nominated for Worst Screenplay, White Chicks (2004). Writes prolifically for late night television. In 2013 he and Kevin Smith co-wrote a Krampus based anthology horror film on Kevin Smith’s podcast, unrelated to the actual Krampus movie from 2015)

Xavier Cook (screenplay) – (BMT: White Chicks; Notes: Nominated for Worst Screenplay, White Chicks (2004), frequent collaborator with the Wayne family)

Budget/Gross: $37 million / $70,831,760 ($113,086,475 Worldwide)

(Smash hit… which is not surprising. Right around the time that Big Momma’s House was also a smash hit. The fifth (!) highest grossing “cross dressing” film of all time. The lowest grossing major release (1000+ theaters)? Connie and Carla (2004)… which I’ve never heard of.)

Rotten Tomatoes: 14% (18/123), Scattershot comedy that’s silly and obvious.

(Wow, RT. That’s all you can give us for a consensus? No clever pun like “Silly gags and poor writing makes this Wayans brothers comedy a drag.” Like I just made that up in five seconds and it’s better than your lame consensus that could apply to a trillion other comedies.)

Poster – Literal Monsters

(Gooo! Again, monsters. This is a great example of the types of posters that I hate, hate, hate. No clear color scheme other than white (and human colored, which is the worst). The font isn’t interesting. The spacing is all off. You know what it reminds me of? The Juwanna Mann poster, which was also the worst. I wonder if it was made by the same guy.)

Tagline(s) – None! (F-)

(No!!! No, no, no, no, no. I do not accept this. BMT will be shutting down until White Chicks gets their fucking act together and provides a tagline. Nope. Unacceptable.)

Notes – The Miltons was originally intended to be a comical remake of Gone With the Wind in modern day Beverly Hills. After many script revisions, the story settled and became White Chicks. (Is “the story settled” some euphemism for something? So we set out to make this like a modern day Godfather, but then the story settled, yada yada yada Deuce Bigelow).

The original title was the “The Miltons” sounding more like the Hiltons, which they spoofed. (hmmm, I think we may have missed the boat a bit on the cultural reference here)

When The Wilson sisters get out of the airplane, the song playing is a spoof of “Miss Hilton”, a song recorded by The Penfifteen Club for The Simple Life, Paris Hilton’s hit reality show. (yeah, I’m going to cut short the Hilton notes at this point. We get it, they’re making fun of the Hiltons)

Less than a year ago the Waynes said they wanted to do White Chicks 2. (sigh)

Razzie Cred

Razzie Awards 2005, Nominated for Worst Picture, Columbia

Razzie Awards 2005, Nominated for Worst Actress, Shawn Wayans, Marlon Wayans, The Wayans Sisters.

Razzie Awards 2005, Nominated for Worst Screen Couple, Shawn Wayans, Marlon Wayans, The Wayans Brothers (In or Out of Drag).

Razzie Awards 2005, Nominated for Worst Director, Keenen Ivory Wayans

Razzie Awards 2005, Nominated for Worst Screenplay, Keenen Ivory Wayans, Shawn Wayans, Marlon Wayans, Andrew McElfresh, Michael Anthony Snowden, Xavier Cook