Famous B-Movie That You Have No Interest in Seeing?

[Chadzilla]

I have no interest in subjecting myself to "Last House on Dead End Street".

[Funk, E.]

Well... you can't argue with the numbers, but numbers can be generated in many a nefarious way. You can't argue that organized crime generates "the numbers" does that make it good? Does that mean they are doing society a favor (in a sense yes, but in another sense they do society a disservice)? Same thing with CEOs. They make the big bucks, do they deserve it? The fact that he has stumbled upon a pathetic formula to film making and feeds the people tripe doesn't mean I have to admire him. Ford made a lot of money off of Pintos that exploded on rear end impact and Explorers on faulty "cost effective" tires. The fact that you make tons off of an inferior product doesn't make you admirable it makes you unscrupulous. Sucess is not it's own measure.

[Funk, E.]

Okay, on the book/movie concept. If you're going to make a movie that only has 1% in common with the book, don't call it by the title of the book. Rename it and say it's "based on" like Bladerunner did. I went to Film school too I know the unique challenges to story telling in each format, but as Kubrick so ellegantly demonstrated in A Clockwork Orange you can still stay true to the book AND bring to it your own unique vision of it. If you're not going to stick to the story don't claim that it IS that story. Call it what it is, your insperation and that's it.

[The Burgomaster]

Well, comparing organized crime to Spielberg's movies might be a bit of a stretch . . .

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the guy. I'm just pointing out that, regardless of his talent as a director, his movies consistently make barrels of money.

Personally, I'd rather watch TAXI DRIVER, NOTORIOUS, SHANE, ERASERHEAD or DEEP RED than most Spielberg "feel good" flicks. But the fact is that all of those movies combined have not made as much money as E.T.

[Funk, E.]

I didn't mean to imply that Speilberg is a gangster. Please, don't over extend the metaphor. I just meant to demonstrate that the ability to make money doesn't sanctify the method or product. Speilberg's movies don't kill people by being substandard like the Pinto did. The dramatic nature of the comparison isn't meant to artificially vilify the man so much as bring into greater focus the fact that making a lot of money is frequently done at the expense (literally and figuratively) of the people the money is made off of.

We here on this board have bemoaned the negative impact of successful business practices before specifically Blockbuster, McDonalds, etc. I see as a more direct comparison Speilberg as the McDonalds of motion picture directors. The "partner in crime" with Blockbuster. One of the knowing and known perpetrators of the degradation of quality cinema. He shouldn't be put on trial for war crimes or anything or even arrested for what he does. He just shouldn't be praised for being able to make a boat load of cash off of bad product.

[jmc]

Oh...I haven't seen MEN BEHIND THE SUN, and don't plan to.  The animal deaths in the cannibal flicks don't really bother me, but it sounds like the ones in this film would.

[Vermin Boy]

Of course, those movies combined didn't have the advertising budget of ET, either...

[Ash]

Lair of the White Worm...

[JohnL]

I hve no interest in watching The Hunger or Liquid Sky. I wouldn't call them famous bad movies though. For that, I'd say Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I watched it once and have no interest in seeing it again. I don't mind the sequels, but did like the original. I suppose it has something to do with having watched it AFTER I saw movies like Friday the 13th, Halloween etc.

[Vermin Boy]

Faces of Death, or any of its approximately 8,000,000 sequels and ripoffs.

[Dr. X, Yyz, Sr.]

anything with Carmen Miranda

[Scotty Xtreme]

Yeah, same here Vermin Boy.  Other than that, I dunno.