Our pal Warren J. Cantrell over at 10rant.com is known for his over-the-top persona. This list will no doubt be as controversial as some of his other man-tastic past Top 10s. If you have an idea for your own Top 10, email me at eric@scene-stealers.com. Here’s Warren:

Like a regrettable relationship, sometimes the true nature of a film only pulls into focus after a healthy dose of time and perspective. What we once enjoyed and maybe even defended against less confused peers can sometimes emerge from the time-fog as a shamefully regrettable “phase” that etches an embarrassing low-water mark for all films (or romances) to follow. As it concerns movies, any number of factors can contribute to this miscalculation, be it awesome pre-release hype, back-seat-opinion influence, and/or genre stigma. The last of these is important, for it’s easy for both those making and watching a film to get lost in a popular trend or fad that invariably gets played out and cliché after the fifty or sixtieth re-tread. It is for this reason that a movie’s ability to “stand the test of time” is such an important factor in determining its worth: perfectly executed harmonies between performances, content, and cinematic craftsmanship rare in films even to this day. Some films pulled this feat off and continue to do so even after a few decades on the shelf, and can rightfully be termed “classics,” as they dealt with themes that are a central part of the motion picture industry and the larger human experience (Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?, 12 Angry Men, Psycho, and Paratroop Command come to mind). Other films got it wrong from the get-go, yet because of nostalgic vice-grips on memories or experiences associated with the pictures, people refuse to re-think the movies with a critical 21st century eye. Yes, while many claim that the films below are indispensable members of the holy Hollywood fraternity of screen gems, I’d ask that you take a harder look at what these “classics” were saying to their audience, examining the larger messages at play, and the complete picture from a distance.

10. The Sound of Music (1965)

This movie played around with some fairly interesting components, what with the lush Austrian scenery, horny nuns, and Nazi invaders. Having obviously decided that a plot that focused on the confluence of love and war couldn’t possibly carry the weight of two whole hours, the picture turned instead to song. Yes, to fill gaps that might otherwise have been plugged by Panzer divisions making ninety miles a day and a back-alley Fascist network that was paving the way for invasion with murder, the audience got a full soundtrack of delightful family sing-alongs. Good Christ: what was going on in ’65? I mean, I know Kennedy had his head opened up a couple years earlier, and the country was generally feeling “escapist,” but why deny the people some proper WWII action when the table had pretty much already been set? Was the movie based on a pre-existing musical? Yes. Did the film have fairly serious expectations to fill as it concerned its stage predecessor? Most definitely. Does this mean a flick can’t screw around a little to make a painfully underutilized plot more interesting and dynamic, giving the audience something other than shattered expectations when the Von Trapp’s didn’t kill that greasy little cunt Rolf? Hell no! Give this movie some action that ties in to the monumentally historical events unfolding around the main characters, ditch the songs, and stick with what works: killing Nazis to escape to freedom. Speaking of freedom, we may as well mention the elephant in the room, for after this list’s posting and the beating this next movie’s about to get at my hands, Spielberg, Lucas, Coppola and the rest of the Hollywood elite will make sure I am cast into the abyss, all liberties lost to he who dares criticize…

9. Citizen Kane (1941)

Indeed, there’s a lot to like in this film, yet in a way that puts it into an entirely different category than “The Sound of Music.” Truly, the innovate narrative structure, camerawork, and audio mixing put it into that rare class of film that defines the modern cinematic experience. To call this film a classic, however, is like claiming the Army Field Manual is an indispensable pillar of American literature. Let’s just be honest: while an admittedly important movie, its story is about as interesting as a barnacle convention. Though the movie dealt with a newspaper tycoon with money to burn and the world at his feet, the plot minced through tedious reviews, and re-reviews of the rich asshole’s love life. His love life! The film could have delved into any number of strikes he brutally repressed, or more details surrounding the wars he felt like starting with his newspaper. But no! Instead, the picture took a hard left directly off the shit-cliff into a shit-gulley, setting up very pretty shots with good cuts for a film that didn’t have the story to keep a person even remotely interested. It didn’t help that the film’s characters and the situations they were involved in register on the believability scale right on par with the expected fare in a daytime soap opera. Cartoonish in their presentation, Kane, his wives, and even the butler, acted with such ham-fisted amateur-hour proficiency that a person blushes, almost feeling sorry for the film before remembering how much blind devotion it elicits. The ultimate standard for modern filmmaking techniques and the Nouvelle Vague? Perhaps. Entertaining fare with an engaging plot and realistic performances? Not on your life.

8. Singing In the Rain (1952)

Speaking of foaming-at-the-mouth devotion for no conceivable reason, this sorry excuse for a movie has to get some ink, for nothing occurs throughout this picture that a half-hour sitcom episode couldn’t tidily wrap up. Personally, I couldn’t give a damn about the struggles of a successful movie star in the 1950s, and his headaches concerning famous girlfriends and studio hassles that revolved around the next big “talkie” release. Apparently back in the 50s people stared at clothes drying and watched the leaves change colors for entertainment, hence this exciting brand of storytelling got a bit of attention. After the advent of the flamethrower, however, you’d think this kind of shit would get shelved for more interesting fare, but alas, they still made this crap. And why? So that people could learn how to deceive a popular audience via lip-synching techniques and film slight-of-hand beneath the larger guise of a breezy romantic comedy? By all means, make a love story or a movie about the mid-20th century film industry, but if it’s going to stand up as “classic” 50 years later, don’t you think some endearing truth other than “love perseveres” should stand out? This movie was helpful in the grand scheme of things, however, which is why it’s not near the top slots. Indeed, this movie is proof that in order to make a buck with a film, all a person REALLY needs to do is choreograph a fancy dancing scene and slap together a non-threatening love triangle, and the money, adulation, and “classic” status will obediently fall into line.

7. The Wizard of Oz (1939)

First off, why did we even go to Oz? Why didn’t Dorothy shack up with some lousy, good-for-nothing petty thief and borderline-masochist, going Bonnie and Clyde on the Midwest with her new beau to reclaim dog and honor? Seriously? Who gets a court order to take away a 12-year old’s dog after beating it with a rake? Setting up a great revenge thread that was woefully under-utilized, the film transitioned from there into an alternate universe where the streets were paved with gold and the only impediment to Dorothy’s total domination of the new realm was midgets and witches that immediately melted when introduced to liquids. Naïve country bumpkin that she was, Dorothy spent the rest of the movie opining about her Midwestern farm life, battling flying monkeys (which still terrify me to this day, unholy beasts that they are) and forming uneasy alliances with mutant lion, tin, and straw creatures. And for what? To get back to Kansas, where communities stood gutted by the Great Depression and dogs were taken spitefully from sweet-natured little girls? With a bucket of water and the support of the local Munchkin unions, Dorothy could have solidified a power base that would have lasted in perpetuity. Ultimately, the film was telling its audience that despite all indicators suggesting otherwise, a person should reinvest and commit to a political and economic system that was well into its eighth year of ruin. Though the movie was based on a novel with equally powerful subtext, at least the author of the book made no qualms about his metaphors and insinuations, presenting fairly obvious symbolic and thematic elements to his tale. Almost all of the book’s themes were discarded for the film, a picture that spoke volumes about the movie’s support of United States isolationist policies despite Nazi aggression in Poland, and a devastating war in China. Dorothy was the film’s presentation of U.S. policy at the time, one which refused direct intervention and global dominance, that is until the witch came across the pond, and started dropping bombs on Kansas (would have been perfect for the sequel). But by that point, everybody was willing to accept that the tale was little more than a feel-good musical about a girl, her dog, and a land called Oz that could have been Dorothy’s had she been provoked enough to take it.

6. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937)

For a cartoon, this movie came with some pretty awesome assets: conspiracy, contract murder, deceit, poison, and even witchcraft. This brings us to our first problem, however. Mainly, this flick didn’t know what it wanted from itself. When you set up your story by introducing a woman looking to have the heart of an innocent young girl cut out and brought to her in a box, the first thing that comes to mind probably isn’t that you’d figure this as a sure-fire bet to capture the G-rated 5-12 year old demographic. Second, the movie gave us a comely young lass wandering into the bedroom of seven men living isolated in the middle of nowhere, providing nothing in the way of realistic resolution. And when I say “realistic resolution,” I mean “gang bang.” Come on, you really think seven dudes working like galley-slaves in the armpit of a diamond mine wouldn’t immediately turn out some tasty piece of ass that broke into their cottage and fell asleep on their beds? What are we even talking about, here? Third, where’s the revenge? Seriously! Some half-mad bitch of a stepmother puts a contract out on you and later tries to finish the job herself via poison, and a renegade bolt of lightning ultimately kills her? I take no issue with the fact that the movie is a cartoon, or even that it’s rife with extraneous musical numbers: but to set up a good character thread and abandon it so that dashing princes can arrive and NOT stab the crap out of something! Unforgiveable.

5. Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961)

When I saw this movie, I kept waiting for the male lead to come to his senses, ditch the loopy bitch upstairs, get a cigar, and start working on making a plan come together. That Hannibal of all people had to suffer the indignity of a man checking his balls at the start of the first act makes this entire picture inexcusable. A fiendishly hot Audrey Hepburn though she may have been, she was a whore! Peppard’s character, on the other hand, was a writer with an endless train of gravy practically coming out of the tap via a rich, it-could-be-worse-looking socialite that wanted nothing more than to keep a man-slut on the side, even if that meant sharing him with other, younger, women. This guy had a gig where a woman was paying his bills and keeping him in style, allowing him to concentrate entirely on his writing while his sugar momma wasn’t even asking the guy to be exclusive. Crapping this divinely ordained arrangement down his leg so that he could chase a good-for-nothing cocktease harboring more issues than the Washington Post, the film’s lead ultimately got his prize in the end (a happy twist left out of the novel). But is that supposed to be a good thing? Wracked with guilt and anguish over her dead brother, mangled childhood, lost riches, and whore life, what kind of victory are we to assume for Hannibal and his new woman? He gave up his chance at getting some good ink time in without worry of bills or the taxman as a result of his “kept-man” status. Having thrown that away, and almost certainly in need of a real job to sustain his and the new girlfriend’s plush New York City lifestyle, what drab, sour existence can the audience expect from two people looking to accomplish little more than to keep from whoring themselves back out to high society to get by? Had the lead simply stuck it out a bit longer with the rich old broad to give him time to write and get established instead of chasing crazy high-end call girls, he might have ended up as more than the fractured shell of a man he almost certainly became.

4. Gone With the Wind (1939)

What a pain in the ass this movie is! There wasn’t a pragmatic, straight-thinking character in the whole friggin’ mess of a story: Even borderline-tough Rhett absolutely out of his mind as it concerned Scarlett. This didn’t put Clark Gable’s character into exclusive territory, however, as Ms. O’Hara was hopelessly in love with Ashley (a dude) who was already hooked up with Scarlett’s good friend Melanie. Throughout the course of the American Civil War and the subsequent reconstruction (both historical periods teeming with interesting plot possibilities) the movie looked only at the relationships of confused, hopelessly deranged maniacs, giving the audience plot twists that resembled a mediocre “Real World” episode. The whole thing played out like the narrative in a grocery store romance novel, Scarlett pining over some stupid asshole with a chick’s name while whoring herself out to whatever rich dickhead felt compelled to give the increasingly fat socialite a dick-tickle. By the time anybody came to their senses, the Civil War was over, children and parents had died, and three unrecoverable hours were gone. Though I do give some credit to Rhett for telling Scarlett to screw off at the end, it came too little too late. Had Gable’s character done this at the beginning of the film, it might instead have given the audience time to get to know the slick Reb. blockade runner and all-around bad-ass. Instead, we were forced to endure what felt like months of some incomprehensible love octagon with no real resolution except that everybody got screwed at the end. While I support so challenging a conclusion, this movie took pretty much the longest, most painful route to get to that conclusion, something the next film can certainly relate to …

3. The Searchers (1956)

There are few “classics” out there that get as much positive attention while still embracing so striking a racist pose as this legendary western. While there were certainly moments of cinematic splendor in the movie that challenged audiences in a way that forced them to re-conceptualize their filmgoing experience (Director John Ford knew how to shoot and cut a good-looking picture.), the story was horrific on multiple levels. In a reversal of the actual scenario of menace to the western plains in the mid-19th century, it’s Native Americans and not whites that were terrorizing innocents in this picture, with John Wayne’s Ethan avenging ethnic-cleansing on behalf of his people. Despite the well-documented reality of the genocide perpetrated against these people, widely known even at the time of this picture’s release, the movie embraced the idea of the Comanche’s faceless savagery as seen most clearly through their Chief Scar. This antagonist’s very name represented his people’s depiction in the film, standing in as an ugly blemish upon the divinely sanctioned American expansion west. Disregarding the safety of the very woman he was charged to rescue on several occasions to exact his revenge on Scar and his people, the Duke did what came most natural to the man: killing Injuns in the name of racial purity. Going so far as to turn his pistol on “Debbie” after learning that she’d acclimated to Comanche society, it’s only after Ethan actually scalped another human being that he realized that maybe, possibly, he might have some issues. Never apologizing for his five-plus year struggle to prevent or otherwise avenge the crime of miscegenation, Wayne’s character leaves the frame in the final shot a triumphant hero, having returned a white woman to her “people.” Say what you will about “Birth of a Nation,” at least people universally recognize that that movie was putrid in message if not in form, something that cannot so easily be said about this or the following entry …

2. Casablanca (1942)

What a pussy! That bitch leaves Rick in Paris without a word of explanation, without an apology or even a see-you-later fuck, and he takes her back? I don’t care that her husband had escaped from a Nazi concentration camp: for all I care it could have been a goddamn whale! Once a woman runs out on a man, favors immediately die. Ladies, break a guy’s heart if you want, but never do either of the following things afterwards: leave them a pen as a parting gift, and/or come back later asking favors. Ingrid Bergman’s Ilsa batted her eyes at Rick for all of a minute and in no time the guy was arranging covert transport, lying to military police, and even shooting people to cover his ex-girlfriend’s tracks. And for what? This film did immeasurable damage to men for decades to follow, the reverberations of the catastrophe felt to this day. This movie informed a generation of women that they could freely abuse, use, leave, and re-use men without worry of retribution or refusal. Because of this film, women are still of the understanding that it’s okay to toy with a man’s emotions and grind his heart into inhalable powder, that even after shattering his life and re-emerging with a new guy, that the ex will still be there because that’s what “classic” men do. Well thanks a lot, Bogey! Because of your baffling lack of backbone and the immediate collapse of your resolve, men will forever suffer at the hands of cruel, lazy, inconsiderate women who think nothing of leaving a guy, parading the new product in front of his face, and begging favors from emotionally-crippled souls. Who else needs a drink?

1. It’s a Wonderful Life (1946)

When it comes to unredeemable crocks of shit, it doesn’t get much more deceptive than Frank Capra’s most egregious assault against America, the flag, and apple pie. In his 2008 write-up, Wendell Jamieson said that “‘It’s a Wonderful Life’ is a terrifying, asphyxiating story about growing up and relinquishing your dreams,” making an excellent point about a movie that is practically on repeat every Christmas. Yes, on the holiday when people are feeling their most vulnerable to influence and sentimentality, this movie comes around like clockwork, pushing people toward a miserable existence that will not ultimately be saved by angels, faith, and the kindness of one’s community. No, in real life, the REAL world outside of Hollywood and Never-Never Land, there is no angel to stop you from taking a header off the bridge, no Dickens-esque retreat into an unseen present. For actual human beings living in the non-fiction realm, the sacrifice of ambition and one’s life’s pursuits, the seemingly endless series of compromises that extinguish the noblest aspirations of the soul: they destroy us lock, stock, and barrel. George’s dilemma before his encounter with Clarence was legitimate for a man who never realistically took stock of his life or what he truly wanted for himself. That he ended up turning on his children and spouse, emerging thereafter from a bar en route to a suicide bridge should come as no surprise to anybody who has traded the dreams of tomorrow for today’s familiar and convenient gratification. George realized on that bridge that his life had been for shit, and despite doing the technically “right” thing by staying behind and printing a sign on his back that read “doormat,” he had nothing to show for his existence than pending collections litigation, divorce, and homelessness. That this film is shown on television regularly, and on a recognized holiday that guarantees its capacity to influence children is astonishing and, unbelievably, not upsetting to nearly enough of you out there. For shame.

Tags: awful, bad, classic, classic movies that suck, classics, films, Good, movies, no, overpraised, overrated, suck, terrible, wrong

From the quick-cut opening scenes in “The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard,” it’s obvious what director Neal Brennan has in mind. He’s hoping that the lightning-fast pace of the movie will cover up for the fact that nothing about it is neither fresh nor funny.

On paper, casting Jermey Piven (the fast-talking Hollywood super agent Ari Gold on HBO’s “Entourage”) as an aggressive, womanizing used car salesman sounds perfect. What “The Goods” may be best remembered for, though, is how good it makes the writers of “Entourage” look.

One comment I love is when people watch a really funny movie and they say “Oh, that whole movie was probably improvised!” This may be partially true, but even for a film like “Borat” or “Waiting for Guffman,” there wouldn’t be a movie without the writers. (Almost as proof, “Borat” was even nominated for a screenplay Oscar.)

Piven is a very funny actor and his ability to spout off pithy one-liners with the confidence of a pit bull uniquely positions him in the current world of comedy. But with an asinine script by Andy Stock and Rick Stempson, his talent becomes an empty shtick that quickly becomes annoying.

The deeply buried vulnerability that makes Ari Gold oddly likable doesn’t exist in “The Goods.” Instead, Piven is saddled with a lame backstory about a former partner’s tragic death (by selling–how wacky?!), something about a lost son, a thoroughly forced romantic subplot, and a series of awful and increasingly desperate stabs at raunchy humor.

The film’s biggest failure? In a movie that purports to be all about selling at any cost, there is an alarming lack of actual salesmanship or interesting technique. At least in the 2005 satire “Thank You for Smoking,” Aaron Eckhart’s Big Tobacco spokesperson had an amazing talent for spin. Piven’s salesman-for-hire Don Ready doesn’t come up with one convincing or funny argument for a sale in the entire film.

Hell, even when the down-on-their-luck salesman of Selleck Motors (the company Don is there to save) start moving vehicles, all Brennan does is cut to a triumphant montage: It’s all cheering, holding hands up high, and ringing the sales bell. We don’t even know what exactly it is Don taught them to turn their business around! (Or did that also happen in a vague montage?)

If there was one way this film might have succeeded despite all its other failures, this would have been it. Show us some insight into the how and why of “hard” salesman. Don’t just keep reminding us how badass they are. Let us go behind the scenes; let us see all the dirty tricks and techniques. There has to be more to “hard selling” than merely starting a car at a higher price and letting the customer think they’ve bargained you down.

I did reference all its other failures in that last paragraph, so let me just compile a quick list:

Wasted talent
Brennan co-created “Chappelle’s Show.” What’s worse: Ed Helms and Craig Robinson from “The Office,” Tony Hale from “Arrested Development,” Rob Riggle and Kristen Schaal from “The Daily Show,” David Koechner from “Anchorman,” Ken Jeong from “Knocked Up,” and Will Ferrell himself (in a cameo) are all spectacularly unfunny for the entire 90-minute running time.

Degraded talent
James Brolin is reduced to playing gay for laughs, constantly coming onto Koechner in the most routine ways possible, and even sporting a huge boner unnecessarily for a failed attempt at a cheap laugh. Veteran actor Charles Napier is reduced to playing racist for laughs, playing a dumber version of the same crazed war veteran we’ve seen in every bad comedy since the late 70s. But wait, there’s …

Even more outdated cliches!
Besides the fact that the premise is a rip-off of 1980’s “Used Cars,” Helms is in a “man” band—a three-man singing and dancing trio modeled after the boy band craze of … the late 90s. Way to keep current with your parodies, gents. Maybe in the sequel, you could poke fun at grunge.

Mean-spirited for no reason
At least in “Bruno,” Sacha Baron Cohen’s flamboyantly aggressive uber-stereotyped gay behavior forced us to confront our own prejudices. The caricatures that inhabit “The Goods” go for the easiest, safest, and most insulting punchlines while pretending to be edgy by adding raunch. Just because you throw in some breasts and a couple of mismatched sex partners doesn’t mean you’re dangerous. In fact, it’s the lamest kind of safe.

Even the end-credit “where are they now” character updates are uninspired
It’s the final nail in the coffin of this desperate comedy: We get terribly unfunny onscreen text for just under 10 characters you couldn’t care less about, and each one is less funny than the one that preceded it. It’s ironic, since earlier this summer, Ed Helms also starred in “The Hangover,” which utilized the end credits to greater comedic effect than any other movie in recent memory.

Tags: awful, bad, film, jeremy, Live Hard, movie, piven, review, Sell Hard, talent, The Goods, unfunny, waste

Our Top 10 list today comes from Will Dawson, whose Top 10 Worst James Bond Flicks list still generates lots of comments. J.D. and I both did a Top 10 list of that rare thing—the successful sequel—a while back (Eric’s Top 10 Best Sequels & J.D.’s Top 10 Best Sequels), and Will is looking at the other side of the coin today. We even had blogger Andrew Reed write a list of Top 10 Unfairly Maligned Sequels, in which he sticks up for one of the movies on Will’s list! If you’d like to contribute a Top 10 list of your own, send it to eric@scene-stealers.com. Here’s Will:

The sequel has been one of Hollywood’s most time honored inventions. However, in recent years, due to the fact that Hollywood has been running out of ideas, the sequel has come to represent a kind of dread to how bad it will be and makes people wonder “Why the hell did they make a sequel to that?” Anyway, here is a list of the 10 Worst Sequels of all time, which will make you wonder, “Why the hell did they make a sequel to that?”

10. Robocop 2 (1990)

To tell you the truth, I kind of do appreciate “Robocop 2” for its sincere camp value, and the movie is really campy. Such plot devices as Robocop talking about the merits of good hygiene, a 10-year-old drug dealer that swears like a sailor, and a little-league baseball team that rob a TV store all come to mind. However, these reasons are exactly why the movie is so bad to begin with. The first “Robocop” was an effective satire about law enforcement and what it meant to be human, while this one tries to be serious a criminal drama but ends up becoming an unintentional comedy with the clichéd message “Crime doesn’t pay…especially if you mess with Robocop.”

Cain: You Want Me?
Robocop: Dead or alive.
Cain: One of us must die.
Robocop: Alright, dead then.

9. Revenge of the Nerds 2: Nerds In Paradise (1987)

Taking off from the classic film “Revenge of the Nerds”, the writers decided to put the nerds in sunny Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., where they run into the same old enemies and engage in the same old sex-jinks. Although I do admire the producers for bringing back some of the original cast (unlike other movies on this list), the movie is a just rehash of the first one with the notable exceptions that the nerds are in “paradise” as it were, and Anthony Edwards has less of a role. Anyway, haven’t the nerds already gotten revenge in the first movie? Did they really need to get revenge in the second one? Oh well…..

Booger: Excuse me, miss. I just want you to know that I don’t intend to sleep with another woman until I’m back here in your arms with my head resting between your creamy thighs.

8. Air Bud 2: Golden Receiver (1998)

Oh man, I just wanted to write “The dog plays football!!!!!” and just get it over with, but I’ll delve into the mess that is “Air Bud 2.”. Basically Air Bud’s owner is on a football team that sucks so they enlist the help of Air Bud to play football, and it turns out Air Bud is super good at football. Beside the fact that non-humans cannot play high school football because it is against the rules, AIR BUD IS A FUCKING DOG AND HE DOESN’T HAVE FUCKING HANDS, thereby he CAN’T CATCH THE FOOTBALL!!!! And don’t give me this crap about how he catches it through his helmet with his mouth–if Air Bud was a real dog that did that in real life, the force and speed of the ball landing in Air Bud’s mouth would make Air Bud’s neck snap or break his teeth. Did I also mention that the dog plays football?

Coach: I’ll tell you one thing boys, that ain’t no golden retriever….that is a golden receiver!

7. The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

Oh man, I remember when the hype for this was so big in high school and I remember being really pissed off when I didn’t see it in theaters, but anyway I rented it on DVD and I thought “Well … that sucked.” “The Matrix Reloaded” has a lot of problems that I’ll sum up in a few details: convoluted plot, bad dialogue, over-reliance on special effects, one of the worst sex scene/montages in film history, too much techno music, too much philosophy, and too much Keanu Reeves. Especially too much Keanu Reeves.

Morpheus: Tonight, let us shake this cave!!!!

6. Jaws 2 (1978)

After the colossal success that was “Jaws,” I suppose you had to make a sequel to it, and although this movie has one of the best taglines in film history (“Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water …”), it still is one of the worst sequels of all time. The shock factor of the shark scenes have become cliché by this point and the emphasis on the film was focused on Chief Brody’s stupid brat kids who get stranded in a sailboat whilst the shark encircles them. This makes the viewer root for the shark to eat said brat kids. You also hope that the spirit of Robert Shaw as Quint the Shark Hunter is going to show up to give Brody some spiritual advice, but he does not, which leaves the viewer with this mess of a film. I guess the reason why “Jaws 2” isn’t as fairly maligned as it should be is because of the horrendous films that followed in the series: “Jaws 3-D” and “Jaws: The Revenge.”

Chief Brody: (to the shark) Alright, you big bastard! Come on! I’ve got something for ya’ now! That’s it! Attaboy, come on! Right over here!

5. The Sting II (1983)

OK, here is a list of how to make your sequel automatically suck: release your it 10 years after the first film, don’t get any of the original cast members back, and think that just because it shares a title with one of the most beloved films of all time, people will go to the theater. Well guess what? “The Sting 2” is guilty of all of these things and it sucks. In a bit of puzzling casting, Paul Newman and Robert Redford (who were perfect in the original) are replaced by Jackie Gleason and Mac Davis. Even Robert Shaw is replaced by Oliver Reed. (It appears that the producers decided to cast the next hardest-drinking actor behind Robert Shaw, who had died of drinking by that time.) Also, why would you try and sting the same person again that you did in the first one? Wouldn’t you think that the “stingee” would notice that these were the same guys who were conning him from the first movie? Unfortunately, the film still shows up on cable every now and again, so beware.

4. Highlander 2: The Quickening (1991)

Ok, so in the original “Highlander,” Connor MacLeod (Christopher Lambert) is an immortal who wins the prize of being the top immortal by cutting off the Kurgan’s head and becomes mortal and goes off and lives with his love interest. In “Highlander 2,” it turns out that the immortals are all from a distant planet that neither of them can remember and that MacLeod was not the one who won the prize and, in fact, there are other immortals about ready to fight MacLeod to win it. Combine this with bad special effects (even for the time), the fact that Sean Connery returns after his character was killed in “Highlander,” and an absurd plot line about the Ozone layer depleting (hey, at least it was prophetic), and you have “Highlander 2”: a giant colossal piece of crap. Russell Mulcahy (the first film’s director and this film’s director) walked out of the premiere and put together a new cut of the film called The Renegade Version, which basically got rid of all the elements about immortals being from space….but even The Renegade Version is still crap. This quote basically sums up the entire film:

Louise Marcus: Okay, now let me just see if I can get this straight. You come from another planet, and you’re mortal there, but you’re immortal here until you kill all the guys from there who have come here … and then you’re mortal here … unless you go back there, or some more guys from there came here, in which case you become immortal here … again.
Connor MacLeod: Something like that.

3. Blues Brothers 2000 (1998)

Ok, I’ll give Dan Aykroyd and John Landis some credit, at least they wanted to press on with the characters and take the series in a new direction, but it’s hard to do it when two of the most iconic actors in the series are dead. Seriously, this film is so unfunny that you would rather have a pineapple violently inserted up your nose then having to sit through just a minute of this movie. The sad part about this is that it appears as though Aykroyd was hoping that this would hopefully restart the series, but there’s just one problem: The Blues Brothers are not The Blues Brothers without John Belushi or Cab Calloway and trying to move on without them was a horrible mistake.

Elwood: Uh, ma’am, we’re the Blues Brothers. We do blues, rhythm & blues, jazz, funk, soul. We can handle rock, pop, country, heavy metal, fusion, hip hop, rap, Motown, operetta, show tunes. In fact, we’ve even been called upon, on occasion, to do a polka! However Caribbean is a type of music, I regret to say, which has not been, is simply not, nor will ever be a part of this band’s repertoire.

2. Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo (2005)

The first “Deuce Bigalow” wasn’t going to rewrite film history, but at least it was mindless entertainment for an hour and 40 minutes with some good scenes. This movie, however, is terrible. The script appears to be written by a bunch of hormonally crazed 15-year-olds who don’t know anything about sex. The stereotypes are rampant and typical (woman from Chernobyl has penis for a nose, Dutch people are portrayed smoking weed, etc.), and the fact that this is a Rob Schneider movie make this film absolutely one of the worst movies I have ever seen. If you ever want your significant other to break up with you, plop this in the DVD player and watch.

Heinz Himmler: I am Heinz Hummer. I’m the gigolo with the most below. Okay? I can give you a Filthy Lopez like you never had before. I could give you a Cambodian Creamsicle… that will make you scream all night. Okay? But not now because I’m busy. So leave me alone, bitch.

1. Caddyshack 2 (1988)

Oh god, this movie is quite possibly the worst movie I’ve ever seen. Every committable offense you could make in a sequel is made: No original cast members (with the exception of Chevy Chase, who basically took the money and ran), a bad script, and the fact that none of the cast members appear to be interested at all make this film so very horrid. Jackie Mason, Robert Stack, and Dan Aykroyd are poor substitutes for Rodney Dangerfield, Ted Knight, and Bill Murray–and you know you have a problem when this movie is rated PG, and the gopher is the most compelling character. Now, excuse me while I put in the original “Caddyshack” and try and forget about “Caddyshack 2.”

Capt. Tom Everett: If I pull the arrow out, will you p-please s-suck out the poison?
Ty Webb: Let me get this straight. You pull it out, I suck. Is there any money in it for me?

Tags: 10, all-time, awful, bad, ever, film, films, list, movie, movies, sequels, ten, terrible, top, Top 10 Worst Sequels, Worst

The sixth filmic adaptation of J.K. Rowling’s enormously popular book series arrives in theaters with an inordinate amount of baggage from five movies of myth-building and expectations, so it almost seems set up to fail.

While “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” is only the second film (along with “Prisoner of Azkaban”) to deliver a visually stirring package, it is the first to drop the ball so completely in the storytelling department.

Director David Yates returns to Hogwarts for his second “Potter” film (he’ll also helm the two-part finale “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows”) and with director-of-photography Bruno Delbonnel, he brings some impressively atmospheric cinematography to the table. It foretells a sense of impending doom that is welcome, albeit never quite explained in the bleary-eyed screenplay by “Potter” veteran Steve Kloves.

In Rowling’s rich fantasy world, the themes are embedded deep in the details, and “Half-Blood Prince” has none of them. It’s like a rough sketch that the filmmakers are hoping Potter fans will fill in with memories from the novel.

Two budding romances—between Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) and Ginny Weasley (Bonnie Wright) and also between Hermione (Emma Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint)—are badly mishandled. Although a significant amount of screen time is spent on them, the relationships are vague and forced, more in line with the kind of puppy love you might expect from one of the earlier films.

Harry finds an old textbook once owned by the “half-blood prince” and the request of Dumbledore (Richard Gambon), Harry must get Professor Slughorn (Jim Broadbent) to come clean about an old secret. The importance of the textbook, however, is barely touched on. By the time the identity of the half-blood prince is revealed, its only significance is that it’s the title of the film.

Plot holes abound. At the beginning of the movie, death eaters are raining down on the Muggle world, but are never mentioned again. The supposedly questionable loyalty of Snape (Alan Rickman) is obvious from a maddening amount of foreshadowing.

Many of the film’s “mysteries” don’t work because their central conceit is that we aren’t supposed to be sure what’s really happening. Yet each one of these plot points are robbed of their inherent drama because they are all too obvious. If the series is supposed to mature and be about becoming an adult, Kloves would be smart to start treating the viewer like one.

Another problem is that Gambon, who took over when Richard Harris passed away, has never really connected with Radcliffe. As a result, the pupil/mentor relationship between Harry and Dumbledore seems distant and amorphous. The final showdown with Harry and the wizard is unforgivably bungled, as Harry’s courage is held in check in the most contrived way possible.

If you want to see a well-done supernatural story as a metaphor for growing up, watch the TV series “Buffy the Vampire Slayer.” At least its writers had seven seasons to sort out the messy teen-to-adult transition.

For more: Here is a print review from an obsessed Harry Potter fan, contributor Whitney Mathews, and my on-camera video review with J.D. is below.

Tags: awful, bad, Half-Blood Prince, Harry Potter 6, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, new, poor, review, screenplay

Baz Luhrmann is the type of filmmaker who revels in excess. His last picture, the lush and melodramatic “Moulin Rouge!” was a lesson in how to make the old seem new again. He toyed with the formulas of tragic romances, over-the-top musicals, and slapstick comedies, and pillaged the back catalog of rock n’ roll’s greatest hits, placing them in early turn-of-the-20th Century Paris. The result? A risky, dazzling movie steeped in classic Hollywood mythology.

If only he were so daring with the new epic adventure that bears his home country’s name. “Australia” has very little of its predecessor’s irreverence or nose-thumbing spirit, opting instead for a stubborn adherence to the tenets of the budget-busting Hollywood prestige pictures of the 1950s and 1960s. Don’t get me wrong—sweeping countryside shots on the wide-open canvas of Australia are about as beautiful as they come. Why then would Luhrmann support his large-scale cinematic sense with the most silly and derivative of scripts? More importantly—why leave a corny, old-fashioned screenplay corny and old-fashioned? Why was “Australia” virtually un-tweaked by Luhrmann’s ever-so-slightly bent vision?

Count me confused.

From the start, it’s obvious that something is off with the writer/director’s staging. An uptight English woman (Nicole Kidman) is supposed to be met by her husband’s reliable cattle rancher (Hugh Jackman) when she gets off the plane in Darwin, Australia. Instead, she ends up embarrassed and offended when her underwear gets thrown about as the rancher (known only as the Drover) uses her luggage to pummel some men in a barfight. The timing is all wrong. The scene is supposed to be charged with raucous spirit, but is thwarted by the incredible obviousness of it all and the fact that the actors telegraph every move before it happens. That moment played out funnier in my head before it had even ended onscreen.

The movie, set during World War II and featuring the oppressive weight of being a “historical epic,” eventually finds even more unreliable legs, jutting its awkwardly unfunny tone for a staid and boring one. An ode to Australia, Luhrmann tries to fit in as many issues that define the country’s national identity as he can, but each approach is more ponderous than the first.

A mixed-race Aboriginal boy called Nullah (Brandon Walters) narrates the film with a cutesy delivery just one baseball cap shy of Short Round, the plucky Asian stereotype of “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.” Portraying Australia’s forced removal of “the stolen generation” doesn’t have to insult the natives as well (see 2002’s “Rabbit-Proof Fence”), and it probably isn’t what Luhrmann intended. Meanwhile, the mysticism of Nullah’s uncle is represented by the old man standing just outside the periphery of the entire plot, staring ahead like the wise creature he is. The problem? He’s supposed to be the suspect in a murder.

He obviously didn’t do it, because Neil Fletcher did. The usually-reliable David Wenham (Faramir from “the Lord of the Rings” movies) plays the villain as an over-the-top outback version of Snidely Whiplash. He’s as desperate and conniving as the evil Duke (Richard Roxburgh) from “Moulin Rouge!,” but with no sense of humor or wink of mockery. By the time Wenham’s character flowers into the grand baddie of the entire piece, it’s really too bad because he’s not menacing at all and it’s disappointing to know that there is nothing more going on in the script.

An almost-exciting cattle drive and a surprise Japanese bomber attack are high points in a movie that gets so weighed down by its own by its own stuffiness that its lead actors can barely muster enough character to craft a romance. This is the stuff of big theater productions, and Jackman and Kidman never really embody their roles. Instead, they act as if they were projecting to those sitting way up in the balcony. The actors are not helped by dialogue that is so bad that I wonder if it just skipped Luhrmann’s mind that he planned on replacing it at one point.

It’s hard to say at what point “Australia” completely lost me, but since the movie is two and a half hours of earnest emptiness, let’s just say it was a long, cold road to the closing credits.

Tags: Australia, awful, bad, baz, failure, film, hugh, jackman, kidman, luhrmann, movie, nicole, review

This weekend, the new James Bond film “Quantum of Solace” raked in a huge take of $67 million in America alone. For Scene-Stealers sitegoer Will Dawson, this is very exciting. He’s got a lot of favorite Bond movies, but has instead, for us he decided to create a list of the top 10 worst James Bond films from the franchise’s 46 years. Some of these movies, says Will, have their moments, but for the most part these are the Bond movies that there are just no excuses for. And he didn’t even include Timothy Dalton! I smell some controversy … If you have an idea for your own Top 10 list you’d like to submit, email me at eric@scene-stealers.com! Will’s list starts now:

10. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)

The problem with this movie isn’t that the storyline or the supporting cast is bad, in fact, that is far from it. The story and the action sequences are actually some of the better ones in the entire series. Diana Rigg is a very intriguing Bond girl and Telly Savalas had probably the best characterization of villain Blofeld in the entire James Bond franchise. The film’s only problem can be surmised in two words: George Lazenby. The one-time only Bond’s acting is so wooden and unbelievable that you keep hoping Sean Connery is going to come in and save the day, but he doesn’t, leaving us with the mess that is Lazenby. Surprisingly, Lazenby wasn’t fired by the producers. He quit the role, claiming that Bond would become something of anti-authority figure for the Vietnam generation.

9. The World Is Not Enough (1999)

The third in the Pierce Brosnan Bond series suffers from not enough memorable moments. Robert Carlyle (one of my favorite actors) is used ineffectively as the villain, and although Sophie Marceau is pretty seductive as the other villain, it is Denise Richards who provides the film’s only memorable moments. (And by memorable, I mean extremely annoying!) She is Dr. Christmas Jones. Richards has not only has the worst Bond-girl name in the history of the franchise, but she is also one of the worst actresses to portray a Bond girl. Instead of coming off as sexy and stylish, she comes off trashy and bitchy. Unfortunately, this isn’t the only time an actress’ performance as a Bond girl has had mixed results at best. Really bad Bond pun:

Bond: “I’ve always wanted to have Christmas in Turkey.”

8. Diamonds Are Forever (1971)

After Lazenby left the role, Sean Connery returned as 007 in this over-the-top outing that has a ridiculous plot, annoying Bond girls, and very bizarre villains. The plot of the film revolves around Blofeld (played this time by Charles Gray of “Rocky Horror Picture Show” fame) trying to put diamonds in his laser beam to destroy the world. Jill St. John is Tiffany Case, who is not only Denise Richards-annoying, but also has absolutely no chemistry with Sean Connery. Connery also seems to be bored in the role that made him a star; it’s probably a good thing that he took the money and ran. Note the strange homosexual underscores between the two Bond henchmen, Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint. Here is an example:

Mr. Kidd: Well, they’re both aboard, and I must say Miss Case seems quite attractive… [Mr. Wint glares at him]
Mr. Kidd: …For a lady. [pause]
Mr. Kidd: Heh heh heh heh!

7. Live and Let Die (1973)

The first Roger Moore movie on this list and certainly not the last, “Live and Let Die” combines plot elements taken from blaxpoitation phenomenon “Shaft” and southern-hick TV comedies like “Hee Haw”. The stunts are unrealistic even for a Bond flick (In one scene, Bond escapes by jumping on top of crocodiles!), and there are definite racial overtones and stereotypes (The villains are all black and Bond has to save a white woman from the clutches of the evil black men). Another horrible thing about this film was the introduction of Sheriff J.W. Pepper, a character that was created possibly to make the Bond series “less British,” which means “less snobby” in the eyes of American audiences. On the plus side, Jane Seymour (Oh, Dr. Quinn!) is incredibly hot as Solitaire and Paul McCartney’s theme song is pretty sweet.

6. Octopussy (1983)

This is the worst titled Bond movie of all time. In the film, Bond (Moore again) travels to India and encounters the title character on a manmade island where she trains women in “business.” I’m uncertain what follows next because the only thing I can remember are the numerous double entendres as Bond makes references to Octopussy’s name and wonders how she got it (According to her, it was because she had a fondness for octopi). Anyway, Maud Adams, who portrays our title heroine, is too stiff and lacks the vital chemistry with Moore that is needed in a Bond Film. However, this is Homer Simpson’s favorite James Bond movie as evidenced in this line from “The Simpsons”:

“You know what I like from you Brits, Octopussy. I must have seen that movie [pause]….twice.”

5. A View To A Kill (1985)

Moore’s last outing as Bond is just as difficult to watch today as it probably was back then (It came out two years before I was born.) From the out-of-place Duran Duran title song, to the final scene atop San Franciso’s Golden Gate Bridge, this movie is one giant mess. It certainly doesn’t help matters that Moore was pushing 60 around the time he was making this movie and looks out of shape and out of place as our hero. Christopher Walken is miscast as Max Zornin, a supposed Nazi superchild-turned-trained KGB agent. The convoluted plot revolves around trying to destroy Silicon Valley. And then there’s Grace Jones. Moore, not surprisingly, later regretted to having taken part in the production at all.

4. The Man With The Golden Gun (1974)

Britt Ekland as the most obnoxious Bond Girl? Check. A villian with three nipples? Check. Hervé Villechaize (who you may know better as Tattoo from TV’s “Fantasy Island”)? Check. The reappearance of the obnoxious J.W. Pepper from “Live and Let Die”? Checkmate. This is a desperate and bad Bond movie. Moore’s second outing as Bond is so strange that I really don’t know what to think of it. On the one hand, it is unintentionally hilarious. On the other hand, it’s so damned weird. Just thinking about Christopher Lee taking off his shirt and revealing his third nipple makes me cringe. And seriously, “the Plane!! the Plane!” guy from “Fantasy Island” as a Bond henchman? What the hell?

3. Moonraker (1979)

Alright, I know it seems that I’m knocking Roger Moore unfairly, but I’m not. It just so happens that the majority of Bond Films that Moore were in were extremely corny and unbelievable, and this definitely is the most unbelievable of them all. Trying to cash in on the “Star Wars” phenomenon, the producers decided to put Bond in space, with horrible results. From meeting Lois Chiles, who portrays Dr. Holly Goodhead as though she’s merely reading her lines, to a battle between U.S. Space Marines and Hugo Drax’s henchmen, this movie is another great travesty in the history of Bond movies. Not even the reappearance of Jaws (Richard Kiel) from 1977’s “The Spy Who Loved Me” could save this movie from the cheesiness that characterized Moore’s absolute worst outing as Bond.

2. You Only Live Twice (1967)

This is my least favorite of the Connery Bond films mostly because this Bond film is the first bad movie in the series. There is too much gadgetry that serves no point, the Bond girls are completely unmemorable, and the plot involving Blofeld (this time played by Donald Pleasance of “The Great Escape” and “Halloween” fame) trying to use his laser to bring about world destruction is ridiculous. However, not any of these moments can compare to the one where Bond has to undergo plastic surgery to look like a Japanese local. Not only does Connery not even remotely resemble a Japanese person, but he also comes across as a dumb stereotypical Caucasian male trying to impersonate a person of Asian descent. Offensive? Oh, yeah. However, this was only the worst Bond movie until…

1. Die Another Day (2002)

From Madonna’s horrible title song, to Halle Berry’s messy performance as Jinx (Berry supposedly was to get her own franchise after “Die Another Day” was completed!), this movie is one giant stinking pile of shit. If you want to talk about all the things that are wrong about James Bond movies—well here they all are. Awful villains (including a man who has a diamond-incrusted forehead), an over-reliance on CGI (a car chase in a melting ice hotel), blatant product placement (including one close-up of a Norelco electric razor), and badly misused actors (examples include Pierce Brosnan as Bond, Michael Madsen as a Felix Leiter knockoff, and Madonna’s horrible two-minute cameo as—get this—a fencing instructor) make this the dismally worst one in the series. The good thing that came out of this crapfest was the complete reboot of the franchise— a new version of “Casino Royale” with Daniel Craig. This is also the last appearance of M’s secretary Miss Moneypenney, whose constant flirtatious tension with Bond was a regular feature of most Bond films. In “Die Another Day,” she is seduced by Bond … by way of virtual-reality glasses. How horrible. Truly a new low.

Tags: 10, adams, awful, bad, blofeld, bond, brosnan, christmas, connery, denise, diana, george, girls, grace, james, Jaws, jinx, jones, kiel, lazenby, maud, moneypenney, moore, movies, pierce, pleasance, richards, rigg, roger, savalas, sean, sucky, ten, terrible, top, Worst