- Welcome to Badmovies.org Forum.
Recent posts
#11
Games / Re: Answer the question with a...
Last post by bob - November 09, 2026, 10:13:48 PMBest in Show
Who is sitting in my chair?
Who is sitting in my chair?
#13
Good Movies / Re: Recent Viewings, Part 2
Last post by FatFreddysCat - November 09, 2026, 10:04:33 PM"Deadlier Than The Male" (1967)
Suave, jet-setting investigator Hugh Drummond (Richard Johnson) is on the trail of two lovely female assassins (Elke Sommer and Sylva Koscina) who are killing off the executives of a major oil company.
There were lots of James Bond knock offs and wanna-be's made during the spy craze of the 1960s and this is one of the best. Gorgeous European scenery, lots of action and plenty of female eye candy. Followed by a 1969 sequel, "Some Girls Do."
Suave, jet-setting investigator Hugh Drummond (Richard Johnson) is on the trail of two lovely female assassins (Elke Sommer and Sylva Koscina) who are killing off the executives of a major oil company.
There were lots of James Bond knock offs and wanna-be's made during the spy craze of the 1960s and this is one of the best. Gorgeous European scenery, lots of action and plenty of female eye candy. Followed by a 1969 sequel, "Some Girls Do."
#14
Good Movies / Re: Recent Viewings, Part 2
Last post by M.10rda - November 09, 2026, 08:32:24 PMI didn't like SINGLE WHITE FEMALE but there is one pretty fun moment involving JJL and a suitcase.
I also didn't think of JENNIFER'S BODY once while watching CARRIE '26. Besides a distinct quality differential, Carrie White isn't a succubus. She's telekinetic and doesn't suck (or even kiss) anyone. TBH I don't recall if Jennifer was a succubus either, that movie bored me mostly to sleep. (Whether I "awaken"ed or not remains purely speculative.)
I also didn't think of JENNIFER'S BODY once while watching CARRIE '26. Besides a distinct quality differential, Carrie White isn't a succubus. She's telekinetic and doesn't suck (or even kiss) anyone. TBH I don't recall if Jennifer was a succubus either, that movie bored me mostly to sleep. (Whether I "awaken"ed or not remains purely speculative.)
#15
Bad Movies / Re: Making Dissertation Writin...
Last post by M.10rda - November 09, 2026, 06:00:27 PMWhere was Jack 12 years ago when I needed him? 
#16
Good Movies / Re: Recent Viewings, Part 2
Last post by lester1/2jr - November 09, 2026, 05:34:34 PMSingle White Female (1992) - I saw this when it came out, but wow I forgot a whole lot of it. It's pretty much a very over the top and ridiculous Lifetime movie on the big screen. I liked it, but while it's a thriller, it's still a chick flick, so it was kind of slow going. It also features an early-ish version of the internet, which is interesting.
Jennifer Jason Leigh moves in to Bridget Fonda's apartment with her and all heck breaks lose. There's definitely a lot of "wouldn't you start to think something was a little strange if..." but you just go with it. There's not a lot of New York-ness, they mostly stay in and around the apartment. Things get pretty silly in the second half, but in a fun way. Also, there's not much of a soundtrack either, that I noticed.
4.25 /5 Seemingly geared to women, but colorful and crazy enough to be entertaining to all. The director was clearly determined to pull out all the stops to make things memorable a la the bunny scene in "Fatal Attraction".
Jennifer Jason Leigh moves in to Bridget Fonda's apartment with her and all heck breaks lose. There's definitely a lot of "wouldn't you start to think something was a little strange if..." but you just go with it. There's not a lot of New York-ness, they mostly stay in and around the apartment. Things get pretty silly in the second half, but in a fun way. Also, there's not much of a soundtrack either, that I noticed.
4.25 /5 Seemingly geared to women, but colorful and crazy enough to be entertaining to all. The director was clearly determined to pull out all the stops to make things memorable a la the bunny scene in "Fatal Attraction".
#17
Games / Re: Answer the question with a...
Last post by Rev. Powell - November 09, 2026, 02:44:26 PM
What is best in life?
#18
Games / Re: Movie Title Chains
Last post by Rev. Powell - November 09, 2026, 02:38:54 PMPsycho Therapy: The Shallow Tale of a Writer Who Decided to Write about a Serial Killer (2024)
#19
Entertainment / Re: What have you been listeni...
Last post by Rev. Powell - November 09, 2026, 01:33:00 PM
They released something like 36 CDs worth of previously unheard live Bob Dylan recordings from 1976. Amazon music has 2. This is 1.
#20
Bad Movies / Re: RECENT VIEWINGS (Bad Movie...
Last post by M.10rda - November 09, 2026, 12:06:54 PMEVIL DEAD (2013):
Having spent 13 years processing/getting over the reflective aversion to an EVIL DEAD remake/reboot, I was pretty excited to watch this on Halloween night. We didn't like it at all. In fact we stopped after 10 minutes and watched HOKUM instead - we just couldn't take the insipid, unrealistic dialogue. I watched the rest later myself.
Based on EVIL DEAD alone, here are things I know that Fede Alvarez is at least competent at: use of color; use of loud noises; decent orchestration of violence. (This was also clear in the climactic scene from DON'T BREATHE where the protagonist is stuck in a car w/ a vicious attack dog.)
Based on EVIL DEAD and DON'T BREATHE, here are things it's clear that Alvarez has no competency for: believable and sympathetic characterization; credible dialogue; situational plausibility; delicate/thoughtful/tasteful handling of serious and sensitive subject matter.
The way this film uses/exploits the chemical dependency of its main character to justify the plot contrivances that permit her (physical and sexual) abuse is waaay more problematic than the simple/low-minded (yes, gratuitous) tree r@pe in the original.
Am I willing to accept (in this kind of movie) that burying someone alive will cure them of their demonic possession? Sure. However, I am unconvinced that burying them alive will also automatically heal their "third or fourth" degree burns or their bisected tongue!
Alvarez and his cowriter hail from Uruguay thus presumably were native speakers of Spanish. They might now be fluent in English, as well, but it doesn't reflect in their screenplay's dialogue.
Lou Taylor Pucci's acting abilities almost elevate him above the dreadful material. Jane Lynch is cute (when she isn't a demon) and seems to be trying hard but has little success w/ her impossible role. The other two girls likewise can't accomplish a thing and the guy who plays the ostensible "Ash" role has about 1% of Bruce's inherent charisma.
So that leaves EVIL DEAD as a feature-length assault of intense and fairly realistic gore. Although that could be a plus for the film, it actually underlines the most profound failing of the project. Raimi's '81 original is still a delightful tour-de-force of horrific abuse because, in spite of its virtuoso practical splatter, it maintains a level of artifice close to old EC comics or 70s Richard Corben stories from "Creepy". Thus no matter how much the characters suffer (and they suffer far more than in the more popular EVIL DEAD 2), one remains ghoulishly entertained.
Alvarez has unfortunately committed to making his EVIL DEAD gritty, nominally "realistic", and devoid of all camp aplomb. He would have viewers believe that Lynch and the other actors are playing "real" people instead of two-dimensional comic strip figures. He fails in rendering these characters believably, but he succeeds in creating an utterly grey (then red) onscreen world of human suffering and joylessness. I generally have little interest in watching "real people" suffer horrific sadistic violence in a bleak world for 90 minutes, but if I do want to watch that, I'll watch Haneke or Gaspar Noe - not an EVIL DEAD flick!!!
Totally unnecessary, a full-length gratuity beyond any mere tree-r@pe. 1.5/5 I'll admit that the finale where the protagonist chainsaws their doppelganger in the face would have been a more satisfying ending to Alex Garland's ANNIHILATION.
Having spent 13 years processing/getting over the reflective aversion to an EVIL DEAD remake/reboot, I was pretty excited to watch this on Halloween night. We didn't like it at all. In fact we stopped after 10 minutes and watched HOKUM instead - we just couldn't take the insipid, unrealistic dialogue. I watched the rest later myself.
Based on EVIL DEAD alone, here are things I know that Fede Alvarez is at least competent at: use of color; use of loud noises; decent orchestration of violence. (This was also clear in the climactic scene from DON'T BREATHE where the protagonist is stuck in a car w/ a vicious attack dog.)
Based on EVIL DEAD and DON'T BREATHE, here are things it's clear that Alvarez has no competency for: believable and sympathetic characterization; credible dialogue; situational plausibility; delicate/thoughtful/tasteful handling of serious and sensitive subject matter.
The way this film uses/exploits the chemical dependency of its main character to justify the plot contrivances that permit her (physical and sexual) abuse is waaay more problematic than the simple/low-minded (yes, gratuitous) tree r@pe in the original.
Am I willing to accept (in this kind of movie) that burying someone alive will cure them of their demonic possession? Sure. However, I am unconvinced that burying them alive will also automatically heal their "third or fourth" degree burns or their bisected tongue!
Alvarez and his cowriter hail from Uruguay thus presumably were native speakers of Spanish. They might now be fluent in English, as well, but it doesn't reflect in their screenplay's dialogue.
Lou Taylor Pucci's acting abilities almost elevate him above the dreadful material. Jane Lynch is cute (when she isn't a demon) and seems to be trying hard but has little success w/ her impossible role. The other two girls likewise can't accomplish a thing and the guy who plays the ostensible "Ash" role has about 1% of Bruce's inherent charisma.
So that leaves EVIL DEAD as a feature-length assault of intense and fairly realistic gore. Although that could be a plus for the film, it actually underlines the most profound failing of the project. Raimi's '81 original is still a delightful tour-de-force of horrific abuse because, in spite of its virtuoso practical splatter, it maintains a level of artifice close to old EC comics or 70s Richard Corben stories from "Creepy". Thus no matter how much the characters suffer (and they suffer far more than in the more popular EVIL DEAD 2), one remains ghoulishly entertained.
Alvarez has unfortunately committed to making his EVIL DEAD gritty, nominally "realistic", and devoid of all camp aplomb. He would have viewers believe that Lynch and the other actors are playing "real" people instead of two-dimensional comic strip figures. He fails in rendering these characters believably, but he succeeds in creating an utterly grey (then red) onscreen world of human suffering and joylessness. I generally have little interest in watching "real people" suffer horrific sadistic violence in a bleak world for 90 minutes, but if I do want to watch that, I'll watch Haneke or Gaspar Noe - not an EVIL DEAD flick!!!
Totally unnecessary, a full-length gratuity beyond any mere tree-r@pe. 1.5/5 I'll admit that the finale where the protagonist chainsaws their doppelganger in the face would have been a more satisfying ending to Alex Garland's ANNIHILATION.