Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Bad Movies => Topic started by: onionhead on April 20, 2003, 04:24:48 AM

Title: Threshold on SciFi
Post by: onionhead on April 20, 2003, 04:24:48 AM
Having just watched the first half-our of this flick, I have to ask this--why is is that UFOs always land in cornfields, Blobs are always found by bumpkin farmers, and doofus backyard barbecuers are the first--or in this case, second--attacked by moths from space?  Predator landed in the jungle, the Andromeda Strain wiped out a podunk town in Arizona, the Thing ravages a North Pole outpost.
Of course, there is logic to this.  What if say Jason Voorhees drowned off Malibu while hundreds of sunbathers watched--or if Norman Bates ran a casino in Las Vegas.  What if the sattelite in Night of the Living Dead landed in New York City?  What if Earnest never Went to Camp, but UNLV instead?
Perhaps I am just up too damned late . . .

Title: Re: Threshold on SciFi
Post by: Fearless Freep on April 20, 2003, 02:58:30 PM
Statistically speaking, there is more nothing than something in the world

Title: Re: Threshold on SciFi
Post by: Dunners on April 20, 2003, 08:40:07 PM
what the hell kind of rant is this?( : {
Title: Re: Threshold on SciFi
Post by: Fearless Freep on April 20, 2003, 11:53:41 PM
Just that in movies it seems like UFOs tend to land in the middle of nowhere, but there's a lot more land on earth that we would consider 'middle of nowhere' then is largely populated.  A sheer random chance landing would tend to occur in 'the middle of nowhere'and there could be motivations for doing it intentionally

Title: Re: Threshold on SciFi
Post by: Flangepart on April 21, 2003, 10:15:43 AM
Land in middle of nowhere: You can set up your world domination kit without interfearance excapt by hermits and wandering goats.
Land in major metropolis: Have space army, and don't need to hide same. Kick world wide ass, have a brew afterwards.

Title: Re: Threshold on SciFi
Post by: Bonehead XL on April 21, 2003, 04:20:56 PM
Getting back to the topic at hand, "Threshold" was so awful, don't watch it if you get the chance.

It was sold as a killer mouth movie but is really a movie about some alien insects that, as far as I can tell, only difference from man is that they have really crappy looking CGI claws on there sides.

There's also a butch of zombie-like people stumbleing around that are never explained and disappear at the end.

I thought "Dragon Fighter" and "Inceptor Force 2" proved me wrong, but it appears that SciFi original movies will continue to suck. Point in case: Pythons 2? Sabretooth? Antibody? Shadow World? Dog Soldier? Are you listening SciFi? Stop making movies!

Title: Re: Threshold on SciFi
Post by: Fearless Freep on April 21, 2003, 05:19:02 PM
As far as I know, many of the "Sci-Fi Original" movies are really just unreleased movies that sci-fi buys and airs to be honest, I'm kinda glad they do (even thoug Sci-Fi gets undesearved credit for them).  Most of them are petty low budget and silly, but they can be entertaining escapism for a few hours.

Title: Re: Threshold on SciFi
Post by: Chadzilla on April 21, 2003, 06:04:01 PM
I don't know, I liked it.  Painless waste o' time, and the bug people sucking the guts out of those of a different blood type was a nice, icky touch.  Then again, when a movie cast list ends with the credit and Stephen J. Cannell and I find that a joyous, grin inducing idea, one has to wonder at my critical taste.  And yes, every single time the writer/TV producer showed up it got me humming the famous A-Team theme.  All it needed was Mr. T!  "I pity the moth that bites me!"

Having a Melrose Place vet and Nicholas (Rat Boy) Lea as the heroes was easy on the eyes as well.  I've seen worse killer insect movies, believe me.