Main Menu

RECENT VIEWINGS (Bad Movie Thread!)

Started by M.10rda, November 23, 2023, 07:31:52 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

M.10rda

THE CAREY TREATMENT (1972):
I was on the bubble about this one but the fact is I've been posting TOO MANY REVIEWS in the "Good" Recent Viewings section so I'll review this mediocre flick here to keep this thread alive.  :teddyr:

This is the only serious movie I've ever seen that's directed by Blake Edwards, "auteur" of the PINK PANTHER franchise and helmsman of many silly sex comedies. I guess it's still on-brand for him as it focuses on reproductive health and drug abuse against the backdrop of the sexual revolution. James Coburn plays crusading silver fox doctor Peter Carey, who takes occasional breaks from romancing married ladies to attempt to clear the name of another physician friend who's accused of fatally botching an abortion on the fourteen year old daughter of their hospital's CMO. (Phew!) In my childhood I only remembered Coburn as a grouchy elderly man sleepwalking through supporting roles, and when he won the BSA Oscar for AFFLICTION I was rather livid. Critics assured me however that this was a career honor based on Coburn's fine work in his relative youth. I guess they were talking about movies like CAREY TREATMENT? He's fine, I guess - he swings his long arms around at least as much as he swings w/ co-star Jennifer O'Neill and he's reasonably affable to watch, but I still wouldn't give him an Oscar.

The supporting cast has that lowbrow trivial appeal of so many 70s flicks: Dan O'Herlihy (later Andrew Packard on TWIN PEAKS) is the victim's father, James Hong (of BLADE RUNNER and a hundred others) is the unjustly accused doctor, and John Hillerman (TV's "Higgins") and Robert Mandan (later a lead on SOAP) are the medical examiners. Perennial portrayer of flatfoots Pat Hingle plays a schizophrenic alcoholic transsexual who's obsessed with Coburn - no, of course he doesn't, he plays yet another cop. And bug-eyed Michael Blodgett (Lance Rocke in BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS) auditions for Michael Ironside's role in VISITING HOURS ten years later when he briefly attempts to turn the film's climax into a slasher thriller... but, alas, is unsuccessful at causing too much legitimate mayhem or excitement.

Honestly Edwards has a perfectly steady hand for drama - respectable if not accomplished. Although I'm no prude, I still could've done w/o the boob shot of the fourteen year old corpse!

2.5/5

The highlight is a gratuitous sequence where Coburn starts racing his wood-paneled station wagon through traffic and then leaps a drawbridge with it. The station wagon survives. I used to drive a woody as an irresponsible hothead teenager and I assure you - not likely!  :bouncegiggle:

lester1/2jr

^ I read the book because it takes place in Boston where I live. I liked it, but I didn't make it through much of the movie.

M.10rda

I don't care quite enough to confirm this but it did look like they shot some exteriors in Southern California.  :bouncegiggle: ...Which looks identical to Boston, of course.

M.10rda

ROYAL FLASH (1975):
Michael Hordern (appearing in the second film I've watched this week) introduces Captain Sir Harry Flashman (Malcolm McDowell) to a military academy as a British hero famed for his exploits in the Middle East, intercut w/ a colorful brief sequence of Flashman surrendering in shame to some Afghans before narrowly escaping an explosion that wipes them out. These three pre-credits minutes are probably the highlight of ROYAL FLASH and after this scene Hordern f***ks off to a better film while McDowell gamely sticks it out for another 90 or so minutes of extremely lame slapstick.

McDowell's "Harry Flashman" was a supporting character in a popular 19th century novel. Oliver Reed (passable here) and Florinda Balkan (unimpressive away from Italian horror) also appear as historical Europeans Otto Von Bismarck and Lola Montes. It boggles the smarts that 20th Century Fox would endorse this unlikely combination of hundred year old literary adaptation, historical fiction, and BENNY HILL-caliber sex farce.

Maybe it makes more sense though that Richard Lester, late of the first two Beatles films and two inane MUSKETEERS movies but still biding time until the second and third SUPERMANs, would decide this was right up his alley. There's a lot of dueling and a lot of comedy pratfalls! McDowell and bad guy Alan Bates are obviously doing most or all of their own sword-fighting and stunts, which is impressive, though it doesn't translate into actual entertainment. It's also impressive how many names and recognizable faces Lester got to show up and embarrass themselves. It's nice to see career character actors Tom Bell and Lionel Jeffries get a lot of screentime as evil henchmen. Alastair Sim also shows up briefly. A young Bob Hoskins is apparently in there somewhere though I was too tuned out to spot him.  There are others I won't bother to mention.

Oh, Elke Sommer gives a completely mannequin-like performance that was probably intended as a joke, therefore I suppose we could credit her for a good performance or credit Lester for perfect casting. I believe some people somewhere really like this flick and maybe if you're in the mood for it, you will too. I wasn't and didn't!

2/5

Dr. Whom

Quote from: M.10rda on July 07, 2024, 08:37:53 PMROYAL FLASH (1975):
Michael Hordern (appearing in the second film I've watched this week) introduces Captain Sir Harry Flashman (Malcolm McDowell) to a military academy as a British hero famed for his exploits in the Middle East, intercut w/ a colorful brief sequence of Flashman surrendering in shame to some Afghans before narrowly escaping an explosion that wipes them out. These three pre-credits minutes are probably the highlight of ROYAL FLASH and after this scene Hordern f***ks off to a better film while McDowell gamely sticks it out for another 90 or so minutes of extremely lame slapstick.

McDowell's "Harry Flashman" was a supporting character in a popular 19th century novel. Oliver Reed (passable here) and Florinda Balkan (unimpressive away from Italian horror) also appear as historical Europeans Otto Von Bismarck and Lola Montes. It boggles the smarts that 20th Century Fox would endorse this unlikely combination of hundred year old literary adaptation, historical fiction, and BENNY HILL-caliber sex farce.

Maybe it makes more sense though that Richard Lester, late of the first two Beatles films and two inane MUSKETEERS movies but still biding time until the second and third SUPERMANs, would decide this was right up his alley. There's a lot of dueling and a lot of comedy pratfalls! McDowell and bad guy Alan Bates are obviously doing most or all of their own sword-fighting and stunts, which is impressive, though it doesn't translate into actual entertainment. It's also impressive how many names and recognizable faces Lester got to show up and embarrass themselves. It's nice to see career character actors Tom Bell and Lionel Jeffries get a lot of screentime as evil henchmen. Alastair Sim also shows up briefly. A young Bob Hoskins is apparently in there somewhere though I was too tuned out to spot him.  There are others I won't bother to mention.

Oh, Elke Sommer gives a completely mannequin-like performance that was probably intended as a joke, therefore I suppose we could credit her for a good performance or credit Lester for perfect casting. I believe some people somewhere really like this flick and maybe if you're in the mood for it, you will too. I wasn't and didn't!

2/5

I haven't seen, but what you describe sounds like a lavish version of a Carry On movie.
"Once you get past a certain threshold, everyone's problems are the same: fortifying your island and hiding the heat signature from your fusion reactor."

Wenn ist das Nunstück git und Slotermeyer? Ja! ... Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.

M.10rda

Quote from: Dr. Whom on July 08, 2024, 01:01:22 AM
Quote from: M.10rda on July 07, 2024, 08:37:53 PMROYAL FLASH (1975):


I haven't seen, but what you describe sounds like a lavish version of a Carry On movie.

That's exactly right.  :bluesad: "Fnarr fnarr" aplenty.

zombie no.one

about to watch CRITTERS 4.

 my only previous viewing of this about 15 years ago resulted in me declaring it to be the most boring movie ever made... but I have just done a rewatch of parts 1, 2 and 3 in the last week, so for the sake of completion I will now endure it again.
please do not mock my potato.

zombie no.one

ok I'm less than 1/2 way through and it really is absurdly uneventful. maybe they should've pitched it as some avant garde minimalist allegory of 'the vacuum of space'...

it also has nothing to do with the actual critters?
please do not mock my potato.

M.10rda


zombie no.one

Quote from: M.10rda on July 08, 2024, 08:58:43 PMWhich is the one w/ DiCaprio?

Part 3... which isn't really worth the CRITTERS name either. the first 2 movies are the only ones which really seem to have any idea what they are.

young Leonard has a rather sweary role for a kid in part 3, I thought.

I've now been hit with a sudden and vaguely troubling urge to watch all the CHILD'S PLAY movies. from memory I don't really like the first 3 that much (not seen the rest), but I'm going through this weird semi-forced nostalgia phase lately...  :question:
please do not mock my potato.

Dr. Whom

So I got intrigued by Royal Flash, and watched some clips. It really is lavish, what with all the extras, the costumes, the locations... Yet as far the script and well, comedy in general is concerned, there is very little there. Even with these YT clips, which I assume are the best parts, scenes are needlessly drawn out and jokes are few and far between. Considering how little they had to work with, all the cast is doing an excellent job.

It is almost as if someone said to the studio 'You know that Barry Lyndon epic that Kubrick is working on? What if we did a slapstick version?'

The resemblance of Alan Bates to Terry Jones here is distracting as well.
"Once you get past a certain threshold, everyone's problems are the same: fortifying your island and hiding the heat signature from your fusion reactor."

Wenn ist das Nunstück git und Slotermeyer? Ja! ... Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.

M.10rda

Richard Lester was capable of commanding and marshalling big budgets and McDowell was still a very happening actor. Seems like a classic case of enough acting talent and money being involved that no one figured they needed a good script. The very first scene in Afghanistan does look and feel like either a Monty Python sketch or an outtake from HELP! The rest of it just looks like Benny Hill or a CARRY ON flick as you said...

M.10rda

13FANBOY (2022):
A vicious serial killer or killers target (mostly minor/forgettable) actors from the F13 franchise plus Dee Wallace Stone, who was never in an F13 film and presumably could still live comfortably off E.T. residuals and yet somehow agreed to play a large supporting role in this crowdfunded crap. Corey Feldman also appears in a few scenes though not (puzzlingly) as "Corey Feldman", star of F13s part 4 and 6, which seems like a huge missed opportunity.

The writer/producer/director is the confusingly named Deborah Voorhees, who apparently played "Tina" in PART 5, maybe (I don't recall her at all) and appears briefly here as the second victim. I'm all for female filmmakers in horror but Voorhees just delivers all the same sexual objectification, misogyny, and sadism towards women that any old male director would deliver, or possibly more. The very attractive Hayley Greenbauer plays Voorhees' final girl grand(?)daughter, "Kelsey Voorhees", who has a gratuitous shower scene, a highly gratuitous ass shot in a g-string, and then a topless sex scene all within the first 15 minutes. Most oldschool F13s made horny teen boys wait at least 30-45 minutes to see any boobies. Also, D. Voorhees is just plain bad at writing and directing. 13 FANBOY is more distractingly dumb than any OG F13... yes, it's even worse than TAKES MANHATTAN.

This was Madame's selection and she made it to the end, in spite of constant (justified) complaining.
0.5/5

She only made it through 30 minutes of EXORCIST: BELIEVER last week and the first 40 minutes of that film was the good part!  :question:

zombie no.one

#148
Quote from: M.10rda on July 14, 2024, 07:22:38 AMyes, it's even worse than TAKES MANHATTAN.

that's my favourite F13 I'll have you know  :twirl:

parts 3, 5, and 7 are in joint 2nd place

not heard of this, but yeah just the entire self-serving premise sounds repellent

there is too much back-slapping in the nostalgia scene

please do not mock my potato.

M.10rda

I've got no right to judge... to each their own... I used to think they were all just about equally bad besides VI and X but from a sober perspective they all offer something or other of value. Except maybe MANHATTAN, that one's super dumb.  :wink: J/K.