Diasfora

General Category => TV / Movies => Topic started by: 8ullfrog on October 06, 2016, 09:17:50 PM

Title: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on October 06, 2016, 09:17:50 PM
Tom hanks in the hijacked ship movie
Tom hanks in the hudson river plane movie
Marky mark vs the boston bombers
Benghazi 2 electric bugaloo
One I'm forgetting because it was so horrible.


Seriously, why the golly do they make these shitty movies?
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on October 07, 2016, 05:20:11 PM
Titanic.  Four hours of suppressing the urge to hurl loaves of white bread at the screen.  General anaesthesia would have helped me get through it.

Malcolm X.  Eyes Wide Shut.  I had to fast forward through both of them.  Thank god for videos.

I haven't seen anything terrible lately. I'm advised that Prometheus sucks, but I'm curious about it for some reason.  Maybe it's because I tend to like Wigglely Scott.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on October 07, 2016, 08:44:59 PM
Prometheus for sure, since Alien requires no precursor, but while I would say I do not enjoy the films you listed, they were in fact movies, and one can respect the work that went into them.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on October 08, 2016, 02:16:22 PM
Prometheus was a really odd film for me: I thoroughly enjoyed it until I came home and thought about it: the more I thought, the less I understood, until eventually I concluded that it was poo.

It helps if you don't consider it as a prequel.

I'm glad you said that as I always thought it was a little shite but didn't want to offend you.

Now all I need to to do is bemoan macs.

j/k
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on December 22, 2016, 02:24:08 AM
Personally 2016 was a poor year.
Plenty of movies should not have been made.
I am struggling to name a few I loved/hated in fact as most just melted into each other. :-[
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: brickbatz on December 22, 2016, 03:07:58 PM
Waterworld
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on December 22, 2016, 03:33:24 PM
I thought The Legend of Tarzan was a complete waste of time and money.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: dweez on December 30, 2016, 10:02:00 PM
A.I.  I wanted to stab myself.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: brickbatz on December 30, 2016, 10:05:21 PM
A.I.  I wanted to stab myself.

That's the way I  felt while my old lady was watcdhing the 3 The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn vampire romances.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on December 31, 2016, 11:50:03 AM
That's the way I  felt while my old lady was watcdhing the 3 The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn vampire romances.

I feel your pain.

Which makes me glad you didn't actually stab yourself.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on March 14, 2017, 11:07:30 PM
I watched Twilight out of curiosity.  It was teen girl stupid.  What a courtly vampire.  If you're going to love a bad boy, at least make sure he treats you right.  I think that was the lesson of the film.  It could have been worse.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on March 15, 2017, 01:51:51 AM

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=%23&ved=0ahUKEwjGufuVkNjSAhVU6WMKHRJED2EQwqsBCCAwAQ&usg=AFQjCNF1sHlk2z9QIx28jtvfnGP_UlkifA&sig2=usbNmNYP1FdB-bBP84l3yQ

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=%23&ved=0ahUKEwjPmtrkkNjSAhVP7WMKHfHZDUoQ8TUIGzAA&usg=AFQjCNF1sHlk2z9QIx28jtvfnGP_UlkifA&sig2=qWQXX7S-hkVOjxEJGUYUZA
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on March 15, 2017, 03:07:04 PM
Not sure what those ^ links are about as they give me nothing but a blank page.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: brickbatz on March 15, 2017, 04:10:20 PM
^ Same
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: dweez on March 15, 2017, 06:03:09 PM
I almost edited it to "de-linkify" it but figured people would just cut and paste anyway.  I normally trust everyone who posts here but a post with not comment for context, displaying only a couple of obfuscated Google redirect links, always pushes my "paranoia" button.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on March 16, 2017, 06:57:32 AM
Yeah, my tablet was giving me all sorts of poo trying to paste youtube links.


The first link is 19 seconds long, and is dean Winchester killing a vampire with a big knife. He says "eat it twilight".

The second is a mash up that mixes the douchebag from twilight being creepy, and buffy the vampire slayer being, well...

When he finally gets around to saying he wants to kill her, she turns it around and kills the poo out of him.

 There was actually a fairly big copyright snafu over the video where lions gate tried to jack the monetization of the video, and eventually lost.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on March 19, 2017, 02:32:22 PM
I really have to add The Games maker (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2766268/) to this list.  Apart from the story being convoluted and ridiculous, it really had no purpose or point. I kept thinking that perhaps it was a good book that's narrative got lost in translation, but alas, there appears to be no book or even a Wikipedia page that might shed a little more light on it.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: brickbatz on March 19, 2017, 06:51:51 PM
99% of the people would probably disagree with me but IMO The Revenant (Leonardo DiCaprio) is just a remake of Man in the Wilderness with Richard Harris as lead. Already been done.

Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: dweez on March 19, 2017, 06:57:59 PM
Everything's already been done.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on March 20, 2017, 08:47:57 AM
99% of the people would probably disagree with me but IMO The Revenant (Leonardo DiCaprio) is just a remake of Man in the Wilderness with Richard Harris as lead. Already been done.
agree

Everything's already been done.

sometimes a lot better
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on March 24, 2017, 01:00:25 PM
Specifically, I meant this thread for movies that flat out shouldn't be made, because they took up time, money, and space from actual decent movies, or those weird mirror movies, like how armageddon and deep impact came out, or the two white house assault movies, or those shitty, shitty remakes.

The other day at goodwill I saw a metal dvd case, I picked it up, it said REARDEN STEEL.

The golly is rearden steel you ask? That shitty ayn rand "trilogy" that got one and a half movies.

Souless movies for rich naffs to masturbate to.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on March 24, 2017, 08:01:20 PM
Thanks.  I'd never heard of it.  I imagine Paul Ryan and his besties having popcorn and beer over it.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on March 25, 2017, 04:26:15 AM
silence - promised much delivered little
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: Alfonz on March 25, 2017, 12:26:49 PM
Franchise sequels, the majority of which suck. Someone make a list  ;D
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on May 01, 2017, 11:56:10 PM
some of the Middle east war movies appearing atm on pay as you go streamng sites
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on May 02, 2017, 11:46:22 AM
Godfather 2
I didnt realise that number 2/3 were not written by Puzo, and the ending of number 1 in the book was a typical Hollywood happy ending.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: Alfonz on May 03, 2017, 03:49:02 AM
I didnt realise that number 2/3 were not written by Puzo, and the ending of number 1 in the book was a typical Hollywood happy ending.

Godfather Part 2 was a sequel and a prequel to The Godfather, so much of Puzo's story spans across the film. I would say that the Godfather part 2 is an exception to the "horrible franchise sequels", it was very well accepted in it's day as a great movie, but I suppose not everyone would enjoy it. Part 3 was indeed a poor film IMHO.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on May 09, 2017, 02:36:50 PM
Everything starring Canoe Reeves.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on May 09, 2017, 08:48:45 PM
Everything starring Canoe Reeves.

I quite liked "Speed."  I think it had a terrible sequel, but the first one was pretty exciting.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: Alfonz on May 10, 2017, 06:24:35 AM
I also liked The Matrix, the sequels were pretty much as expected.  :(
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on May 10, 2017, 03:03:15 PM
The movies around him might be well produced, but he rarely actually says anything so I might as well have been cast.

My missus doesn't care. Just as long as he's on screen, she's happy.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: mishca09 on May 10, 2017, 08:09:26 PM
John wick 1 & 2 was great  love reeeves
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on May 11, 2017, 02:17:11 PM
John wick 1 & 2 was great  love reeeves

I liked them too but I can only remember Canoe grunting a few times. Can't remember any of his actual dialogue.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: mishca09 on May 11, 2017, 06:53:24 PM
I'll kill them all lol last line in the movie
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on May 12, 2017, 11:22:20 PM
Apparently Alien Covenant isnt reviewed too good
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on May 15, 2017, 07:10:58 AM
Hopefully of to watch covenant tomorrow  ??

Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on May 15, 2017, 02:35:37 PM
Nor was Independence Day: Resurgence, and I thought that was a hoot. Sci-Fi comedy at its finest.

That movie was pants. There are no 2 ways about it.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on May 21, 2017, 02:42:33 PM
No doubt. But funnier than Mars Attacks, and it didn't have Will Smith. I spent most of the time spotting the movies that it was ripping off ("paying homage to"?): there was barely an original scene, as far as I could tell. (The one or two scenes that I thought may have been original were almost certainly because I hadn't seen the film that they were copying)

The problem was that there was too much money thrown at it for it to be so bad it's hilarious. Its budget made you believe you should be taking it seriously.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on May 22, 2017, 08:01:42 AM
Apparently Alien Covenant isnt reviewed too good

AO Scott in the NY Times gave it a mildly positive review saying it delivered on its brand and even going so far as to talk about how we have grown an affection for the alien whom he likened to a speed skater in a helmet.   Ick.  I watched Prometheus.  That's 2 hours and 4 minutes of my life I won't get back.  No way am I going back to that planet for round 2.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on May 22, 2017, 10:37:48 AM
Friend reviewed Alien Covenant as " Bloody crap don't bother"  ;D ;D ;D ;D
T2 Trainspotting Mmmmmmmmmmm why
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on May 28, 2017, 01:02:24 AM
That's a good deal more succinct and most likely more accurate than the NY Times review.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on May 28, 2017, 02:11:38 PM
I don't look at the budget for a film. Oddly I thought that first Independence Day was a very poor second rate movie that got more attention than it deserved because the special effects were very well done (and to be honest anything with Data in where his name is not Data is pretty much guaranteed to be crap). The second one seemed to realise the shortcomings of the first and (apparently deliberately) riffed on them for laughs.

It boils down to the difference between A and B movies. Generally speaking, money ain't chucked at send-ups.

If Resurgence was meant to be funny, where the golly was Dwayne Johnson?
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on May 30, 2017, 12:59:59 PM
Dude eats ten pounds of food per day, I doubt most movies budget that much to craft services
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on June 14, 2017, 10:15:56 PM
Mummy re-remake is a flop. Which really sucks for UNIVERSAL. They were looking to follow in the MCU mold of an interconnected universe, but it never was. Mashing it all together will just be garbage.

Apparently they didn't even bother making it fun like the movies with encino man.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on June 15, 2017, 08:30:59 AM
Busy on Witch Mountain.
better than San Andreas   :o :o
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on June 28, 2017, 06:50:02 AM
IMDb: Chips 2017
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on June 28, 2017, 02:44:46 PM
IMDb: Chips 2017

I haven't seen it but it has bullcrap written all over it. I wouldn't have touched it with yours.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: dweez on June 28, 2017, 05:09:54 PM
I saw it. It was ok, funny enough but like most of the "parody" reboot movies (think Ben Stiller and Starsky and Hutch) are horrible let downs anyway so I went into it with that mind set.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on June 29, 2017, 12:55:04 AM
Saw an ad for another apes movie. Really? They're still doing that? Must be some people who like those pieces of poo.

I remember in the first one, poo went down on the golden gate bridge. Then, in every other franchise that year, poo went down on the golden gate bridge.

My guess is, one of the special effects firms did a really bitchin' render of the golden gate bridge, and all the studios poo their pants over it.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on June 30, 2017, 12:46:11 AM
I saw Escape from the Planet of the Apes in the theatre.  It was meh.  The first one, that I subsequently saw on tv, was at least a campy triumph of wacky futurism and anti speciesest screed.  You can't beat Charleston Heston for overacting.  He's a champ.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: Alfonz on June 30, 2017, 05:07:24 AM
I saw Escape from the Planet of the Apes in the theatre.  It was meh.  The first one, that I subsequently saw on tv, was at least a campy triumph of wacky futurism and anti speciesest screed.  You can't beat Charleston Heston for overacting.  He's a champ.

Since I was young and impressionable, the Statue of Liberty encounter truly blew my mind.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: brickbatz on June 30, 2017, 08:18:14 AM
You can't beat Charleston Heston for overacting.

I think William Shatner beats him.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: mishca09 on June 30, 2017, 09:21:40 PM
Never liked any of the ape ofnmovies
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on August 18, 2017, 08:49:35 AM
IMDb: Life 2017
IMDb: The Mummy 2017
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on August 23, 2017, 10:43:10 PM
I think William Shatner beats him.

They're neck and neck, for sure.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: brickbatz on August 24, 2017, 10:22:08 AM
The Oscar for overacting in a drama - the award goes to .... Jack Nicholson!
The Oscar for overacting in a comedy - the award goes to ... Jim Carrey
The Oscar for overacting in a TV series (fiction) - the award goes to ... James T Kirk/ TJ Hooker/ Denny Crane
The Oscar for overacting in a TV series (reality) - the award goes to ... the presenter of The Apprentice
The Oscar for overacting in a TV commercial - the award goes to ... the NRA spokesman (and sometime ape co-star)
Haven't seen the last 2 but the other 3 are spot on.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: dweez on August 24, 2017, 04:43:16 PM
You've never seen old orange-faced 45 or "Damn Dirty Apes!"?
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: brickbatz on August 24, 2017, 05:03:25 PM
You've never seen old orange-faced 45 or "Damn Dirty Apes!"?

Just saw Damn Dirty Apes on YouTube. Yeah, I remember that now. Still can't place orange-faced 45.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: dweez on August 24, 2017, 06:28:55 PM
Hint...he currently goes by POTUS.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on August 30, 2017, 03:15:48 PM
Ticker (2001).

That movie is so atrocious that daily I think about how the world didn't need or deserve it. It really should have been shot at birth.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on October 25, 2017, 02:00:47 PM
Listen American people folk. You cannot call a movie this:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5034266/
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: mishca09 on October 25, 2017, 06:01:35 PM
That a on Netflix.  I was tempted to watch because name finds wig is just terrible b7t I haven't given in yet
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on October 25, 2017, 06:17:03 PM
Listen American people folk. You cannot call a movie this:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5034266/
Just watched the trailer.  It's one of those films where you need to bring a loaf of soft white bread to throw repeatedly at the screen.  Oy.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on October 26, 2017, 03:15:32 AM
You lot sound like Jane Fonda when it was suggested it to her that this is a terrible title for the British. She just did not get it.

I just wrote it on my whiteboard and asked my kids what they thought of the title. The didn't get it either until my daughter said it out loud.

Belly laughs all round.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: Alfonz on October 26, 2017, 05:41:40 AM
You lot sound like Jane Fonda when it was suggested it to her that this is a terrible title for the British. She just did not get it.

I just wrote it on my whiteboard and asked my kids what they thought of the title. The didn't get it either until but daughter said it out loud.

Belly laughs all round.

I didn't get it until I applied my best British accent  ;D
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on October 26, 2017, 09:21:57 PM
I had to ask my husband.   He's an anglophile.

He explained it to me.  I can be a little slow sometimes.  Nyuck, nyuck.  But you know, it works either way.  It seems like a really stupid movie.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on October 27, 2017, 02:24:17 PM
I had to ask my husband.   He's an anglophile.

He explained it to me.  I can be a little slow sometimes.  Nyuck, nyuck.  But you know, it works either way.  It seems like a really stupid movie.

In case anyone is still bewildered, this should explain it:
(contains swearing)

Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: mishca09 on October 29, 2017, 04:25:46 PM
Car dogs
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: dweez on October 31, 2017, 04:59:48 PM
"Our Souls At Night"...

Afternoon Delight?
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 6pairsofshoes on February 20, 2019, 02:22:46 AM
Alien Code.  WTF?

The guy who wrote the soundtrack should be spanked.
I don't get this film.  It's all filmed indoors.  Cheapo budget, I guess.  Every minute we are cued into the oncoming dread with dramatic minor modes in the music.

Good grief.  Another winner from the amazon movies. 
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on April 23, 2019, 05:46:11 PM
Avengers: Endgame.

I'm hoping the spoilers I read are false, otherwise I've been right about Captain America being a piece of poo the whole time. Like I love comics cap, I used to have some pretty old ones that were shockingly insensitive, But Movie Rogers has always been a little madam spoiling for a fight.

If the spoilers were legit, they legitimately just looked at the latest Star Wars and said "Oh, you think THAT pissed nerds off? Hold my beer fam".
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: goldshirt*9 on April 23, 2019, 11:37:00 PM
I think Endgame is required now, unfortunately, but the world really didn't need Civil War.

so agree,
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on April 25, 2019, 08:00:29 PM
I think maybe like me, you don't like the way the Russo brothers steered the ship?

Like, Civil war was a mandated movie, they had no shot at avoiding it. One of the few times the actual Comic-Books forced the movies down a path.

God did they make me hate Movie Cap though. He was a bit of a poo in Avengers. He was a complete scallywag in his first standalone. And that just kept rolling.

And we were supposed to like his shitty attitude. That's the part I don't get. "I can do this all day" Please don't Cap, please don't.

I did like some bits of CW, like Spider-man, Tony Stark being angry as hell that he's still even here (He was going to quit being Iron Man) The fact that he doesn't even want to be Iron Man (It cost him Pepper) and that he seems to be the only one who gives a poo about the collateral damage he had a large hand inflicting, and he kept getting dragged back in by people he increasingly didn't like.

And then Infinity war was like "Yeah, that poo's too heavy, let's go back to the most common superhero trope, SOME BAD GUY IS TRASHING EVERYTHING"


Endgame I'm not even going to see. I read the spoilers and decided I don't want to throw money at that.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on April 26, 2019, 01:19:55 AM
Oh it's so much worse. They ride war rhinos. And pretty much just ignored colonialism. And could solve most of the worlds problems, but don't, because isolationism. I'll bet they could cure AIDS, but they don't! But they have hovercrafts in a country small enough you could walk everywhere. Like I think Disneyland may actually be larger than Wakanda. Both have a lake.

Like, they don't even have to reveal they cured aids! Find some promising research doctor, and drop a STANDARD USB hard drive on her desk, explaining what she got right, what she got wrong, and a "Good Luck".


Oh, and the Teenage sister is smarter than Tony Stark. Because they say so.

Okay, watched endgame. Wakanda is worse than "Not curing aids"

I think I'm shitting up my own thread here though, I meant this to be more of a "Why the hell was this movie even made, it tied up actors that could have been doing so much more, wasted a fuckshed of money, and wasted everyone's time" Like that Gerard Butler submarine movie, or that Gerard Butler Geostorm. He can act, I don't get why he loves being in garbage. Probably Cash.  I think we could have been spared most of the jingoistic "True Story" movies that I believe have a sinister undertone.

And instead I'm just bitching about something I didn't like.

I actually REALLY LIKE the idea of Superhero collateral damage leading to very real consequences. I may not have liked much of the comic Civil War, but it's spark point was brilliant.

Team of teenage superheroes (Why are they letting teenagers into such situations, why are they letting non police handle crime, why is it a reality show, and how the golly did this happen)

Attempt to pull vigilante cowpoo against villains who are lying low. Next to an Elementary school. Things go bad.

In the movie? Dipshit manages to break up the only people who can defend the planet from alien invasion that is guaranteed to happen using Hijinks out of Scooby Doo.


Really, aside from the Avengers getting madam Slapped by the UN, the movie had very little to do with the comic storyline.


I did not like the hailed as revolutionary Batman films. Bale made a pretty good Bruce Wayne, but much like Bateman in American Psycho, Bruce is supposed to be the mask.


And Ledger wasn't that great. The one snuff tape scene was chilling, but I feel like they didn't really know what they were going to do, and Ledger's death forced their hand.

If I'm wrong, and that's the movie they intended to make? Woof. Nolan never did poo for me. I understand why people love his movies, but it's not my bag man.


You are of course talking about famous misogynist and Fedora aficionado Frank Miller. They actually took a Bat Book away from him because he was going bless'ed insane. I actually liked that book. Batman paints a room yellow and drinks lemonade to be a richard to Green Lantern.

richard Grayson has been trained to fight, and nothing else. He instantly punches out Green Lantern's throat. Batman was just trying to be a richard, not kill the guy. Whoops!

Dickhead batman also uses Superman to ship poo across the Atlantic super fast through blackmail. God that book was too beautiful to live, And Frank Miller is horrible.
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: smokester on January 25, 2020, 11:37:32 AM
So, we took a stab at IMDb: Art of the Dead as it had over a solid 6 in IMDB. It is absolute poop and going back and reading the reviews there is definitely something weird going on. We've all probably seen film ratings manipulated by members who joined 3 days after the movie was released, or even are actually cast or production team members from the film in question. But this film is staying at 6.2 no matter how many bad reviews it gets in the comments and no matter how many more people vote.

I call shenanigans!
Title: Re: Movies the world didn't need.
Post by: 8ullfrog on January 25, 2020, 06:22:10 PM
I take it back, Endgame kept RDJ from making Doolittle.

The original Doolittle was rigged to be a hit and was still a dismal failure. Like it went up against in the heat of the night for an Oscar.

I don't know why people keep thinking Doolittle is a movie people want.