Thursday, January 3, 2013

5 Signs of a Bad Movie

Confessions of a Film Junkie: 5 Signs of a Bad Movie
By: Brian Cotnoir

     As a person who considers them self to be an expert on bad films, I have sat through and analyzed enough films that I can diagnose within an average of 30-40 minutes whether or not a film is going to be good or bad.  What do I look for—more specifically—to decide whether or not a film is going to be bad is a series of trends, actions, or clichés that I personally can’t stand to see in a film.  What is it that makes a bad film bad?  Is it the actors?  Is it the director?  Is it the script or the film company?  Well I have compiled a list of 5 reasons that I personally believe are a sign of a bad movie.

#5- Over Dependence on Computer-Generated Images (CGI)

"Didn't all that CGI make this film that much more awesome?"
The Film Junkie sarcastically asked, his audience.
     Don’t get me wrong, CGI can be a good thing in a film, and has been used successfully in many films, but there is a certain point when watching a film where I can’t help, but feel like the film’s creators just gave up on it all together and said to themselves, ‘we don’t need to worry about the quality of our film because we have these awesome CGI effects’.  A film that depends too much on CGI, is very likely doomed to fail.  Just because you can afford the CGI with your films budget doesn’t mean that you should put all your eggs in one basket and hope that everything works out in your favor.  Look at films like “Metropolis”, “The Wizard of Oz”, “Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory” (1971); Can you honestly say that those films would have been better if they had CGI instead of building all those massive and amazing sets.  What about “Jaws” would the film have been more terrifying if the shark would have been computer animated instead?  Personally, I’m more impressed by a hand built set, than I am with a set that is mostly CGI.  CGI is great in small doses, I just don’t like seeing it being forced down our throats and told to think it’s great. 

#4- Over Usage of Pop Culture References in the Film.

     This one isn’t as obvious as some of the other reasons I’m going to list, and it’s one I never really thought of until about a year ago.  Let me put into this kind of perspective?  Remember the first time you saw the “Austin Powers” Films and thought they were hilarious???  Watch them again and tell me if you still find them to be funny.  Did you ever notice how many pop culture references Mike Myers squeezes into those films?  There’s a lot of them, and while Pop Culture references in a film are fine for the time of the film’s release you must admit that after a while they lose their charm and comedic effect.  For further evidence as to why Pop Culture references are bad for a film?  Click the link below and see if you can actually remember where this Pop Culture reference originated *Hint It was Beer commercial*

#3- Unnecessary/Random Nudity & Sex Scenes

     I have no problem with nudity or sex in a film, but for the love of God, please make it relevant to the plot.  One of the most annoying things I find while watching a film is when there is a random topless scene that has no relevance to the plot.  If you have to depend on a topless scene or a scenes with girl-on-girl to get people to watch your film then you have failed as a filmmaker.   I especially hate this when I’m watching horror films.  Why? Because I don’t know if I’m supposed to be terrified or aroused when I see a pretty blonde get butchered to death while she’s skinny dipping, and I’m sick and tired of these mixed messages from films.  We have a whole genre of films called “Pornography” to get our sex scenes and hardcore nudity from.  We don’t need more people in Hollywood making more films with unnecessary sex scenes. That’s why many films from the late 1960’s to early 1980’s tend to suck!

#2- It’s a God D@mn Re-Make!

One Of these things is not like the other,
One of these things just sucks so much!
I absolutely hate movie re-makes! I do not like seeing my favorite films ripped to pieces and sh!t back out and have it called an “improvement”.  When will Hollywood learn that you don’t mess with success?  If it isn’t broke then don’t try to f***king fix it! The ratio of crappy movie remakes to good movie remakes is about 1000: 1.  The only thing worse than this is when an American film studio takes a foreign film and films it in English in order to Americanize it.  I’m not sure if many people are aware of this, but most DVD’s have this feature called “subtitles” and they translate what the actors are saying into English!  Why are so many American’s hell bent on avoiding reading!  It’s not f**king difficult to read a few sentences written at the bottom of a screen! “Let the Right One In” didn’t need an American adaptation and “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo” didn’t need one either.  Those films were awesome just the way they were.  Hollywood, you need to come up with your own original ideas instead of ripping off other films!

And the #1 Sign of a Bad Movie is...  

#1- If Lars Von Trier is associated with the film in anyway.

     I hate Lars Von Trier.  I hate him so much.  He is the absolute worst thing that has ever happened to cinema, and yet some people are stupid enough to call him a visionary and a brilliant filmmaker.  The truth is that Lars Von Trier is a horrible human, who does horrible things to his actors, in order to make his horrible movies.  Lars Von Trier does whatever he wants in his films without any rhyme or reason and he claims it’s all part of some poetic license.  Dogme 95 is basically what every 14-year-old with a video camera does when they make a film.  It isn’t a brilliant style of film making, it’s cheap and it’s lazy is what it really is!  Some of you may have read my review of his film “Antichrist”, so you already know how much I hate him.  I can accept when directors do things in their films that don’t make sense, but for the most part they can often list a reason as to why they added it to their film.  The things Lars Von Trier does in his films are pointless, inappropriate and have no relevance to anything in any of his films.  “Melancholia” was basically him proving to everyone that he can waste two hours of people’s lives without them realizing it.  The one thing that concerns me so much is number of big name stars who have been featured in his films.  Stars like Willem Defoe, Stellan Skasgaard, Kirsten Dunst, Kiefer Suntherland, and John Hurt are just few of the big name Hollywood stars who have appeared in Von Trier’s films.  How the hell does he get these stars?  Is he blackmailing them into appearing in his horrible or something? 
Charlotte Gainsbourg makes Kristen Stewart look over-emotional
Another awful thing that Lars Von Trier has done is use actress Charlotte Gainsbourg in his films.  Charlotte Gainsbourg is hands down the worst Actress I have ever seen and quite possibly the worst actress ever.  She makes Porn Actresses look like real stars.  I hate her, and think there should be international laws preventing her from ever appearing on film again.  As for You Mr. Von Trier; you are an awful human being.  Your films leave a sour taste in my mouth and cause my blood to boil over with rage. 

No comments:

Post a Comment