IMDB Bottom 100: Number 6 - Birdemic

Number 6: Birdemic: Shock and Terror (2010)

I’ve noted before, I didn’t go into this 100 worst thing entirely blind, I have seen a lot of these films before.

Some I’ve seen many times. Many, many times. Birdemic is one such film. It’s similar to whenever I watch Superman IV, I know what I’m watching is awful but there’s always something new I hadn’t noticed before that makes me enjoy it more.

I don’t feel like I even need to watch it again to do a review of it. I can describe the whole intro right up to the opening line of dialogue. In fact I’ll do just that:

Opening with a POV shot inside a moving car with an awful music loop playing over the top. Seriously, it’s just two bars repeating over and over. Windows Movie Maker credits appear giving us the main players but also ‘Supporting Casts’ because one supporting cast just isn’t enough. Watching this car drive slowly along the road for four minutes but feels three times as long. Eventually our, for lack of a better word, ‘hero’ carefully parks his car (if there is one message to take from this film its park safely because there is a lot of car parking coming up). Rod slowly walks from his car in a way that you would not expect any person to walk in, he looks so unnatural. Eventually he makes it to the restaurant where a terminator is disguised as a waitress. It’s the only explanation I have for the ridiculous way the first line is delivered. You would need to hear it to fully appreciate it, its’ only one word ‘Hi!’ but if you assume multiple takes are done for each shot, like a proper film-maker would, you have to conclude that was the best take. So God only knows how bad the others were.

One new thing I did notice when re-watching was a credit for Tippi Hedren, star of Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds which Birdemic is a loose remake of. Though writer and director James Nguyen clearly didn’t take note of how Hitchcock built suspense in his films. But seriously Hedren is on screen for a second on a TV in a motel room. I do like the cheekiness of it.

Since Nguyen tried and failed to get Birdemic shown at the 2009 Sundance Film Festival, driving a truck with the film’s title emblazoned on the side, it has picked up quite the cult following. If you go on You Tube and type in ‘Birdemic’ hundreds of videos reviews will appear, from little nobodies in their basements to big million plus subscriber channels.

The criticisms always note the same things: the awful acting; Rod being the worlds’ worst salesman; Nathalie apparently being a Victoria’s Secret model but has all her photo sessions in a one-hour photo shop; the excessive parking; the ham fisted environmental message; the stupid song in the nightclub (‘Just hanging out, hanging out, with the family, Yeah!’); it being 47minutes before we even see anything with wings; the kamikaze exploding birds with plane sound effects; fighting off birds with coat-hangers (the motel wouldn’t let them take out the shower rails); the children who immediately forget the brutal murders of their parents; the movie occasionally taking a break to bring you an environmental lecture on global warming and Spruce Bark Beetles; fishing apparently requiring no hooks or bait.

That’s a small sample that barely skims the surface. The one thread that runs through all reviews though is: this is the best bad movie ever! And it really is. Everything about it is wrong. Some claim that Birdemic is intentionally bad. I disagree, to have deliberately made a film as bad as this would have required far too much thought and effort.

The problem with there being all this material available makes it hard to find anything new or original to say about it. So rather than try and sum up the film any more, lets’ see what happened to the principal casts since then:

Alan Bagh – Rod – By all accounts a really nice guy, Birdemic was his first film role. Since then he’s kept himself busy with a number of straight-to-dvd releases and even had a role as an extra in Parks and Recreation. When website Rifftrax took their show on the road and done a live riff of Birdemic, Bagh attended as a special guest.

Whitney Moore – Nathalie – auditioned for her role in a car park and had to take over as make-up artist on the film after the previous two had quit. How appropriately chaotic. She’s kept herself busy since then, mostly in independent low-budget movies even if a lot of her roles do seem to be of the ‘woman in diner’ variety. There’s probably not many actresses who can list ‘Batman’ on their CV though.

Damian Carter – Nightclub singer – he of ‘Hanging out with the Family’ fame (‘gonna have ourselves a parrrrr-ty!’). Despite appearances, he is a proper musician, has performed in venues all over America and released an album. In a 2013 interview he said he had a lot of fun with Birdemic and was happy it gave him a chance to showcase his music. It’s still a weird song though.

James Nguyen – the Vietnamese born writer, director and producer. A former IT Software salesman, which is surprising given how little his films seem to understand the industry (nb. Giving away a 50% discount is never a good deal, there is such a thing as ‘profit margins’ you know). He’s never had any formal training in filmmaking, which explains a lot, but founded Moviehead Pictures in 2001. The people he casts in his films typically have little movie experience themselves. The blind leading the blind. Though he's so out there I think he might secretly be a genius.

One day, I hope for peace between man and birds too...

They would all be re-united though, one more time…

IMDB Bottom 100: No. 7 - Foodfight!

Number 7: Foodfight (2012)

The bad movie that was 10 years in the making.

Which is quite impressive really. Most films are bad because they’re rushed through with little thought behind them. They had a decade to mull over this one and still got it spectacularly wrong.

Made for a budget of $65 million, the first question that strikes you is: where did all the money go? I can tell you where it didn’t go: the animation. It’s not the worst I’ve ever seen to be fair (maybe one day I’ll get to those) but it’s very crude and basic. Not $65 million worth. To put this budget in some sort of perspective, the first Toy Story cost $30 million and Shrek cost $60 million. And both of those films look a thousand times better.

Maybe the cast were a big expense? Well there are some biggish names attached: Charlie Sheen, Eva Longoria, both Hilary and Haylie Duff (I guess they were still relevant when voices were recorded) and Christopher Lloyd. Oh, Chris. I expected this from Charlie but you? You should know better. Still, you were the best thing in 1000 Ways to Die in the West.

Foodfight is written and directed by Lawrence Kasanoff, who brought us such treats as Mortal Kombat: Annihilation and erm, Foodfight! Actually I’m being unfair, as a producer he’s done some good stuff. As a writer and director, not so much.

Thematically, this comes at an interesting time as at time of writing, Seth Rogan comedy Sausage Party is currently in cinemas. They are similar in that they revolve around supermarket items coming to life at night when the store is closed, though Sausage Party is about the food itself while Foodfight! is about the colourful mascots you see on the front of the boxes. They also differ in that Sausage Party is intended for adults while Foodfight! isn’t really suitable for anyone to watch. And by all accounts, Sausage Party is rather good.

I’m starting to worry about the amount of times ‘Sausage Party’ is appearing on this page.

Foodfight! does have its ‘one for the dad’s’ moments (you know, the adult moments they put in kids films they aren’t supposed to get). One that stands out is having Eva Longoria’s characters crotch area dominate the screen but through trick of perspective, make it look like giant insect bugs are flying from her vagina. Is this a commentary on man’s fear of female sexuality, so her vagina is presented as both desirable and to be feared? Nah, they just thought it looked funny.

The plot, such that it is, centres on our main character Dex Dogtective (Charlie Sheen). The film can’t quite make its mind up about Dex, he looks like a canine Indiana Jones but alternates between this and a mix of Humphrey Bogart characters Sam Spade and Rick Blaine. Please, pick one and stick with it. The store all the characters live in turns into a city the moment the store closes but needs to be back in place by the time the sun rises. If the store owner ever watched his CCTV he would be freaked out.

Dex’s girlfriend Sunshine disappears about the same time new mysterious product Brand X hits the shelves. Which brings us to Christopher Lloyd’s character who brings Brand X into the store and his character is something else. The way he talks, overprooonooounciaaaating all his words, the amazing unnatural movements. I like to think they motion captured Christopher Lloyd for this, the image of it would be incredible. It would explain where the budget went, that stuffs expensive.

The mascot for Brand X is Lady X (Eva Longoria), the sexy femme fatale wannabe Fuhrer. Yes, as Brand X takes over the store Nazi-style, she even has her own Nuremberg Rally. She wants to kill off all the other mascots and have their products ‘recalled’. Mascots can be killed conventionally but being recalled seems to be considered worse though both seem to be effectively the same.

Dex leads the resistance against Lady X, assisted by his best friend squirrel Daredevil Dan. Dan is Donkey to Dex’s Shrek but a lot more annoying. And they really ram home he’s the black character early on with lots of reference to him being ‘chocolate’. You know, squirrels, chocolate, that whole connection. But then Dex’s girlfriend is a weird cat lady that somehow promotes raisins, so why question it?

Dex leads the resistance against the naXi’s (see what I did there) that culminates in a, you guessed it: FOODFIGHT!!! Actually there are some amusing ideas here, seeing real life weapons reduced to foodstuff like the ketchup water cannons and cherry pie bombs.

So eventually good guys win after a patience breaking 90 minutes, Dex gets his girl back and everyone dances for far, far too long. Seriously, we don’t need to see what happened to every single character, especially when only 4-5 have more than 1 minute of screen time.

And if you’re hoping to see icons like Count Chocula and Captain Crunch, you’ll be very disappointed. Not many big brands wanted to attach themselves to this so you get a lot of rip-offs instead. Vlad Chocool anyone?

I can’t help thinking this was a Producer’s style set-up, this was meant to fail. They had the worst script, the worst animators, the worst story, worst directors, worst actors (well, some).

Though unlike The Producers, this time it did all go wrong/right (RIP Gene Wilder).

Now let's all go see Sausage Party.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 8 - Keloglan vs the Black Prince

Number 8: Keloglan vs The Black Prince (2006)

Oh Turkey, Turkey, Turkey.

Please stop making movies. Pretty please?

This is the third Turkish movie I’ve watched in a row and I don’t think it’s good for me.

It’s the fourth overall and I think that probably makes me an expert in the subject of Turkish cinema. Four movies is more than 99% of the rest of the worlds’ population have seen (the other 1% being actual Turkish people obviously). There is an interesting sub-genre in the bad film world known as ‘Turkish Remakesploitation’ as it was common for Turkish film-makers to take Hollywood films and remake them for Turkish audiences. The myth is that this was because of a ban on Western movies in Turkey. There wasn’t it was just hacks looking to make a quick buck off somethings success.

Keloglan vs The Black Prince appears to be exploiting two sources. Unfortunately those sources appear to be Hoodwinked and Friedberg and Seltzer movies.

Set in the world of Fairy Tales, Keloglan is a simple shepherd who has been betrothed to the Princess, why I’m not sure but just go with it. Keloglan (which I believe means ‘Bald hero’) is played by Mehmet Ali Erbil, who played the villain in Yes, Sir. As he was about the only entertaining thing in that movie, I wasn’t entirely upset to see him again. Amazing rubbery face.

When first we meet him, he has long flowing blonde locks but he loses them while saving the Princess from a crappy CGI dragon. Its’ actually quite a good sequence as the Black Prince also appears and the two squabble over who gets to save the Princess while she remains in mortal danger. Keloglan saves her in the end but loses his hair in the process. Forward four years and Keloglan is suicidal while the Princess Cankiz has been trying to get out of the marriage sending him off on quests hoping he’ll fail. Which is quite the 180 as in the previous scene she had seemed very much into him.

The latest quest she has for him is to go steal a belt from a particularly ill-tempered giant. But along the way, Keloglan and his side-kick Cankuslogan have the idea that any belt would do so set off in search of a less dangerous giant to steal a belt from. They are aided and/or hindered by Temyuslogan, who is actually a woman called Balkiz who is in love with Keloglan so has dressed as a man to be near him. This is because the film has ideas way above its station and wants to parallel Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night. You can’t miss it as the book is directly referenced throughout to the point Balkiz is actually reading a copy of it. Which makes no sense at all. Firstly, this is clearly not the same Universe as Shakespeare and if you did apply a time period to this, it would be long before Shakespeare was born.

Anyway lots of fairy tale references in here: Aladdin, Rapunzel, Red Riding Hood, Snow White, Cinderella (who is a villain for some reason). There’s a meeting of villains and I’m sure one of them is supposed to be Bluto from Popeye, which was a bit weird. There were more modern references as well such as The Ring and the Macarena (I did say ‘more modern’). The finale has Keloglan doing an Elton John impression in a pink wig.

Back to the story, they find a female giant performing Hamlet (see point above re Shakespeare) in a circus and persuade her to come back with them (dressed as a man, I think it’s the writers fetish) to show they completed the task. This brings out the real giant and Keloglan’s deception is revealed. He then has to escape his entrapment and stop the Princess marrying the Black Prince.

The Black Prince, ostensibly our villain but I don’t get him. I don’t know what his grand plan is. He wants the Bad guys to be on the top and to do this he wants to marry Princess Cankiz of the Goodie kingdom, which she is very much up for. But after that? Nothing. No great grab for the Kingdom, just marry the Princess. I guess he’s happy to wait for the Sultan to pop his clogs.

Interestingly though, by the end of the film the Black Prince HAS married the Princess but has apparently failed because Keloglan has realised she wasn’t as nice as he’d thought she was and told him so. I guess in Fairytale Land that stuff makes a difference.

All the characters dance to a cover of 'I Will Survive' to finish. I don't get the song choice.

Overall, I’d say Keloglan vs The Black Prince is: meh. It’s a comedy that’s not funny but at least the ideas are there if not the execution.

I’d sooner watch this again than anything Friedberg and Seltzer have ever made.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 9 - Yes Sir!

Number 9: Yes, Sir (2007)

Who wants to watch Police Academy?

But set in the army?

And in Turkish?

You’re in luck, because that’s basically what we are offered here.

Full title Emret Komutanim: Sah Mat, I don’t entirely understand the premise. In Police Academy there was a lowering of the standards that let the likes of Mahoney and Tackleberry join the police force, these guys seem to have literally been taken from a mental hospital. Not many of them particularly stand out though, there was one guy with a love of guns and one who liked to dance around but that’s it. Oh, and one of them enters a Turkish Oil Wrestling event (not as sexy as it sounds). But that’s it really.

From what I could gather, the new recruits were organised by a criminal (a Dr Evil type character with sexy female guards) whom I think wanted revenge on the commander of the base for shooting his balls off. I didn’t have any subtitles when I watched so I could be wrong but I’m pretty sure that’s what it was, he literally had his testicles shot off.

Though there aren’t any elaborate set-pieces, it’s clearly supposed to be played for laughs. Which makes it strange when there’s a tonal shift, such as when a soldier is reading a letter from home. It is difficult to do comedy and then insert real drama. It is well beyond the capabilities of this film-maker. It doesn’t lead to anything anyway, so why even bring it up?

There is one what could have been really cool scene near the end when the soldiers are trapped in two cages which need to be opened at the same time or they will blow up. It’s a great set-up but the limitations of the budget really show when the Commander is going to shoot both locks. I could imagine a Hollywood film would have really ramped up the tension: close-up shots of the commander, sweat pouring from his brow, the timer ticking down towards zero. Here? He just shoots them.

Even though I couldn’t really understand what was being said, I doubt subtitles or even speaking Turkish would have greatly improved my enjoyment of Yes, Sir. I was wrong to say this is like Police Academy.

This is more like Police Academy 6.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 10 - Turks in Space

Number 10: Turks In Space (2006)

(This is actually a trailer for the first Turkish Star Wars but screw it)

We’re in the real shit now. I have watched 90 cruddy films now, ten to go. The 10 worst films (as listed by IMDB on 31/08/2015) ever. And it’s a whopper.

Turks In Space, otherwise known as Turkish Star Wars. Or in Turkish Dünyayi Kurtaran Adam'in Oglu, which translates as ‘Son of the Man who Saved the World’. This is actually a sequel to 1982 film Dünyayi Kurtaran Adam, ‘The Man who Saved the World’, a cult classic in Turkish cinema. Got all that? Good.

It’s worth bringing up, Turkey has a bit of a reputation in the cult cinema world. Basically, they take existing popular franchises and put their own spin on them. There are Turkish versions of Batman, Superman and Spider-Man, none of which have any relation to the original source material. Batman for example, is a homicidal, sexual deviant.

Turks In Space is a take on Star Wars, though crossed with Star Trek. More specifically, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, as they go off looking for a guy all logic would tell you is dead, very dead. The Captain has been searching for his friend for 8 years without success with his rag-tag crew. There’s his incompetent first officer; an android; an old woman who washes the floors; an old man who has apparently slept the last 8 years; a small child; a sexy woman who doesn’t seem to have a specific job and only seems to be there because she has a crush on the Captain; a computer that makes me wonder if I can cram in a Blake’s 7 reference; a black guy. Your standard Sci-Fi crew.

It starts with a montage of great moments in Turkish history, such as the rise of the Ottoman Empire, Attaturk, Galatasary winning the UEFA Cup before they finally get a Turk into space. Can you imagine that? A Turk. In Space!

There’s a warlord, who I guess is our Darth Vader of the piece but nowhere near as badass. I don’t think he actually has a plan of his own but we just accept he does because he looks like a villain. There’s a lot of guff about twins separated at birth and arranged weddings, some not so subtle satire about American foreign policy. None of it very coherent.

It should be said, it is played a lot for laughs with silly set-pieces. There is a Death Star of sorts and we do get a lightsabre battle at the end. I quite enjoyed the impromptu love story, mainly because they done a 3 minute flashback sequence that made me realise the two characters had literally only spent 3 minutes of screen-time together.

And some amazing special effects on display here, like they had been made on an Amiga 600 in the early 90’s. Industrial Light and Magic have little to fear.

Turks In Space or Turkish Star Wars could in no way be described as a ‘good’ movie but it is certainly an enjoyable one. It actually broke my rule: bad films can be so bad they’re good but bad comedies are always just bad. Turks In Space is not exactly funny but it is fun and doesn’t take itself too seriously in any way.

So even if just out of curiosity, I recommend giving it a go.

Brexit: The Movie

If you’re not aware, Britain is holding a referendum on 23^rd June regarding their EU membership. The two sides are Remain, who favour staying in the EU, basing their argument around a strong economy and Leave (or ‘Brexit’ = ‘British Exit’) basing their argument around, erm, sovereignty I think. It’s hard to tell when Leave’s two official campaign leaders (Boris Johnson and Michael Gove) seem more interested in taking the jobs of the two Remain leaders (David Cameron and George Osborne) after the referendum.

Anyway the Leave campaign, or Brexiters, regard Brexit: The Movie as their Jewel in the Crown. Their Ace in the Pack. The thing that destroys all other arguments. ‘Go watch Brexit: The Movie’ they say. Does it really stand up though?

Brexit: The Movie is written and directed by Martin Durkin, whose previous credits include NASA: The Unexplained Files, Ancient X-Files and The Great Global Warming Swindle. Oh, and a documentary on UKIP leader Nigel Farage. Well, I’m assured the next 65 minutes will be impartial and entirely fact based.

Opening hyperbole out of the way, the first stop for Durkin is Brussels and the multitude of EU buildings. There are 90 EU offices across Brussels, Strasbourg and Luxembourg. The European Civil Service (a blanket term for all agencies under the European Commission) employs roughly 30, 000 people. I appreciate that these extravagant buildings can appear wasteful but if you take into account the UK’s own Civil Service employs over 400, 000 people and suddenly this doesn’t seem so much.

The main thrust here though is to explain how the EU works (or doesn’t, depending on your viewpoint). Which Durkin does. In part. He explains that Laws are proposed by the EU Commission and then voted on by the European Parliament. He doesn’t explain they then need to be voted on by the European Council of Ministers, made up of elected government officials from across Europe, before they become law. He doesn’t explain exactly how the Commission comes to make their proposal to begin with. Nigel Farage does appear to bemoan that MEP’s are not able to raise their own questions in the European Parliament and actually, it’s hard to concede he might not have a point here.

When he’s talking about the Commission though, that’s when Durkin’s conspiracy theory past can’t help but go into the overdrive. The shadowy, sinister organisation all run by the big businesses. The EU invests in farmers, science and the arts to buy its support, the bastards. They’re all paid off by the lobbyists, something that absolutely, never ever happens in the UK.

Martin Durkin questions the integrity of people in the EU but I think it’s worth looking at some of his contributors:

·         David Davis, MP – Opposes equality and Climate Change denier. It’s strange seeing him bemoan the unelected status of 28 strong EU Commission when he has voted against any reform of Britain’s own 800 strong unelected chamber, the House of Lords. And indeed, he was Conservative Party whip when they voted to sign the Maastricht Treaty in 1992

·         Peter Lilley, MP – if you’re in the Conservative party and the leader describes you as ‘the bastard’ of the party, there’s something very wrong

·         Kelvin MacKenzie – as a former editor of The Sun newspaper, there is a lot of shit that sticks to MacKenzie but he will forever be most connected with the Hillsborough Disaster and ‘The Truth’ headline that he has NEVER apologised for

·         Nigel Farage – well, I’ll just leave that to Stewart Lee…

Many of the others aren’t much better. Irrelevant you may say but I say if you’re going to question someone else’s integrity, be sure your own house is in order first.

Next is the emotive segment of the film, when we are shown how the EU has destroyed the British fishing industry with its quotas. This is all very sad but like much in the film, is a gross over-simplification ignoring why the Common Fisheries Policy was originally introduced. Basically the problem is ecological brought by decades of over-fishing and declining fish stocks and a Brexit won’t help those fishermen.

Then we have a history of Britain and the EU which can be summed up with: all regulation bad. It talks about the German ‘Economic Miracle’ brought about when it scrapped many of its regulations post-World War 2. Again, this is over-simplifying ignoring the vast amounts of international aid as a strong West Germany was considered vital in Cold War era Europe. It takes a turn for the weird when it gets to the formation of the Common Market and the EEC. The music suddenly turns all sinister when Durkin says the architect of the EEC was French. Why is that a problem? Well, he’s French isn’t he? Those dastardly French! I'm not even being obtuse about it, Durkin just says he's French and leaves it at that.

Apropos of nothing, the talking heads then reveal this is actually a debate of class, the political elite vs the proletariat. If only I’d known sooner, I had no idea Brexit was a gateway to a socialist utopia!

There’s an entertaining segment about EU Regulations and how they affect your life, showing how many regulations cover items in your everyday life. Its slightly misleading as if you were to add up each individual item you’d get a total of 12,368 (note: I did not actually count these up) but actually you’d find a lot of the products share the same regulations. It also ignores why these regulations exist. If I want to put cyanide in my toothpaste, that’s my decision. Back off Brussels!

Then we come to what my mind would call the most distasteful part of the film. Italian’s are stereotyped as lazy, pasta eaters; Asian’s as quirky geeks and the French as beret wearing onion-eaters. Durkin uses a scenario of a European umbrella maker complaining about a new Asian model coming on to the market. He says the EU protect them with tariffs on the Asian company’s goods (which is actually in line with World Trade Organisation rules) and quotas on the number imported (what? Protecting a country’s own industry? How dare they).

Gerald Mason of sugar manufacturer Tate & Lyle Ltd claims EU competition rules and trade barriers have seen a decline in their profits and rise in prices and bemoaning imports from other manufacturers into the UK market. Which jars with claims elsewhere in the film that competition is a good thing to have. But ah, they say, this is not competition, this is ‘protectionism’. However, EU competition laws were introduced to prevent any one company having a monopoly in the market place. A free-market economy requires competition so a certain amount of balancing is required.

Incidentally, contributor David Davis is a former director of Tate & Lyle. I’m sure that’s just coincidence but for full disclosure it should be known.

Next up, our man Martin takes a trip to Zurich to see how Switzerland do outside of the EU. They have access to the European Single Market but are not members of the EU. And it’s hard to deny the Swiss are doing very well. They are one of the most prosperous countries in the world, with one of the highest standards of living and lowest rate of unemployment. However, the Swiss model has recently fallen out of favour with many Leave campaigners as to have access to the Single Market, they have to pay into the EU budget, follow its regulations and have free movement of people.

Actually free movement brings up something I have to give the film credit for: not once does it bring up migration, the lowest common denominator of politics. So I applaud it for at least attempting to take the high road.

The final section is trade and even the film seems confused by this, not sure whether having a trade deal is a good thing or not. There are claims the EU economy is shrinking (not true) and of how prosperous we will be outside. However, and this has always been the criticism of the Leave campaign, there is no evidence to support any of the claims they make. Many respected institutions on the other hand have produced reports that say we will be worse off.

Ending hyperbole telling this is our chance ‘to take back control’, whatever that means.

If you are a Leaver annoyed by what I’ve said, be aware I’m trying to add balance because Martin Durkin gives none in his film. There is no talking head in his film arguing the other side of the case. Even Michael Moore at least gives his subjects the opportunity to give their side in his films. They rarely take it but at least it’s offered.

If you are a Remainer, I am aware there are many who could have put the case far better than I and I don’t doubt there are many things I have missed.

If you don’t know which way to vote, don’t just listen to what I say and don’t watch Brexit: The Movie. Do your own independent research and reach your own decision.

I know which side I am on and Brexit: The Movie has not swayed me.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 11 - The Hottie and The Nottie

Number 11: The Hottie and the Nottie (2008)

Oh Paris, Paris, Paris. Here we are again. When I wrote about Final Justice (number 22), I declared Joe Don Baker the King of bad movies. Well, every King must have his Queen and Miss Hilton fits the bill perfectly.

She released a music album once too. And if there was a list of 100 worst albums, it would be on there. Probably. I haven’t listened to it. I’m not a masochist. I think. Well, this is the third Paris Hilton film I’ve watched. Because I thought watching all the worst films in the world would be fun.

To be honest, I was trying to avoid concentrating on The Hottie and the Nottie because I looked at the synopsis and was less than enthralled. Plus The Dark Knight was on TV at the same time I was watching, so I might be confused about what happened.

So it starts with the Joker robbing a bank and escaping in a school bus. The hero of our film Nate (Joel David Moore) is dumped by his girlfriend, who attempts to run him over. This is the escape pod scene from Star Wars. If you aren’t familiar with what I mean, this is a reference to a five second scene at the start of Star Wars that is actually the most pivotal moment in the whole of the original trilogy. R2D2 and C-3PO escape an Imperial attack in an escape pod but the gunners on the Star Destroyer choose not to blow it up as ‘there are no life signs on board’. Had they blown it up there would be no Luke, no Obi Wan, no Yoda and the Empire takes over the Galaxy. Obviously, Hottie and Nottie isn’t on that scale but if Nate’s ex-girlfriend had succeeded this film would have been a lot shorter.

This is a sign to Nate that he has to track down a girl called Christabel he once fancied when he was eight. Makes sense. Batman catches Scarecrow in a car park but also has to save some vigilantes in hockey pads.

Nate meets up with his old friend Arno, played by The Greg Wilson. Yes, The Greg Wilson! Star of, umm…and, err…The Greg Wilson (this is what he’s credited as). Arno it turns out has been stalking the girl Nate is after and has a record of her movements. Yet somehow he’s clearly supposed to be a fun, lovable character. The Joker then does a cool trick with a pencil.

Nate finds the girl he’s been after at the beach. In no time at all and without much prompting, Christabel (Paris Hilton) reveals she won’t date anyone until her hideous looking best friend June (Christine Lakin) is dating someone as well. Shakespeare could have written the script. If he’d been a bit simple.

Nate enacts pays someone to date June but it doesn’t go well. Christine Lakin is a very attractive woman but they’ve gone all out to make her as ugly as possible here. Moles on the face, bad skin, bad teeth, greasy hair, obscene body hair. It's basically zombie make-up.

Paris Joker is caught after a cool car chase across Gotham and Commissioner Gordon had faked his death all along!

Nate’s plan is complicated with the arrival of Johann, the former marine, Harvard graduate, dentist, sometimes model who can play guitar and has a singing voice like a tenor. He makes out he’s trying to help June by fixing her teeth and generally beautifying her with various treatments but it’s all a convoluted plan to get to Christabel. Two guys with the same goal but differing methods. Yeah, Shakespeare for simpletons. On a side note, I can’t look at the name Christabel without being reminded of the episode of Family Guy when the Griffins move to New York and Chris becomes an artist called, obviously enough, Christabel.

Joker Hilton escapes jail and sets an explosion killing Maggie Gyllenhall and transforming Harvey Dent into Two-Face.

The whole story is basically about seeing someone’s inner beauty, as Nate comes to realise he loves June and not Christabel. A message slightly undermined by the fact Nate only realises his attraction when June becomes more attractive. Shallow Hal done it better. And when you’re getting beaten out by Jack Black, you are in big trouble.

Paris Joker Hilton blows up a hospital and then tries to get people on boats to blow each other up.

Despite being the big star of the film, Paris Hilton’s character actually spends a lot of time on the side-lines. Her chief role being stand around, look attractive which is just about within her range of capabilities. It’s when she opens her mouth it all goes wrong. There is one scene where she has to act drunk but I’m pretty sure not much acting was required for that part. It's the vanity that annoys me though. The films she is in, the only objective seems to be for Paris Hilton to tell the world how beautiful she is and in a film supposedly based on inner beauty, there is a touch of irony to that.

The Hottie and the Nottie is not the film the world deserves but it’s not the film it needs either.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 12 - Going Overboard

Number 12: Going Overboard (1989)

A true story: sitting in a cinema, I saw a trailer for an upcoming movie about video game characters coming to life and destroying the world. ‘Oh, that looks like it could be fun’ I thought to myself but then I saw the film’s star. ‘Oh, Adam Sandler. I’ll give it a miss then.’

That film was Pixels and by all accounts, I made the right choice.

I’ve said before, a bad movie can have enough going for it that it can become enjoyable. A bad comedy is always just bad. A bad Adam Sandler comedy though is an instrument of torture.

I appreciate comedy can be subjective and I know Sandler has his fans. If his brand of juvenile frat-boy humour is what you like, that’s fine. Bear this in mind about Going Overboard though, Adam Sandler removed this from his filmography on his official website. The guy who made Little Nicky doesn’t want his fans to know this film exists.

It was Sandler’s first starring role to be fair to so we probably shouldn’t really expect much from him, which is just as well as he delivers nothing. One of the first things Sandler does is break the fourth wall to tell us this is a ‘no budget movie’, you soon find it’s a ‘no laugh movie’ too (if you’re interested to know, IMDB lists the budget for this film as $200,000 which is not a lot in movie terms but a fair-size budget for an independent feature).

Adam Sandler is a waiter on a cruise ship with dreams of being a stand-up comedian but he’s not very good. He’s not good by the end of the film either but what would you expect.

One of the first things I noticed was the credits saying they were ‘introducing’ actor Burt Young. I remember seeing Burt Young in a highly successful film franchise that started 13 years earlier, the first film even won a Best Film Oscar (he was Paulie in the Rocky films). Couldn’t have been him though as he was only being introduced here.

They’re on a cruise ship travelling to undisclosed location with some beauty Queen contestants so cue lots of beautiful ladies in bikini’s, though to the films credit it doesn’t particularly dwell on it apart from one scene where Sandler is wobbling while delivering drinks. I think the joke is he has an erection and is trying to hide it or alternatively, he could just be clumsy.

It’s bad joke after bad joke. I’m being generous describing them as jokes, they’re just sentences. Bad sentence after bad sentence. Actually, it’s not even fair to call them sentences as they lack the coherency, so it’s bad syntax after bad syntax.

I look at the clock and realise I’ve been watching 20 minutes. It feels like hours and this film is 97 minutes long. 97, it’s too long. 5 minutes is too long.

Some other stuff happens with a dickhead ship comedian, talking heads from the beauty contestants for some reason, terrorists turn up but tragically don’t throw Adam Sandler into the sea.

Going Overboard is not a film you watch, rather it is one you endure. My recommendation, like with any Adam Sandler past, present or indeed future, is avoid. Sandler is obviously very youthful here but lacking any charm or charisma, so to be fair to the man he has improved a little over the years. He's not helped any by poor directing and a script that promises a joke but lacks build up or punchline.

Still, at least there’s no Kevin James.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 13 - Disaster Movie

Number 13: Disaster Movie (2008)

It’s crap.

Oh you want some more? Let me put it like this:

The Avengers. Kim Kardashian. Cloverfield. WWE. Wanted. Jessica Simpson. Indiana Jones. Hannah Montana. High School Musical. Gladiators. MTV. Justin Timberlake. Alvin and the Chipmunks. Amy Winehouse. Batman. Juno. X Factor. Step Up. Kung Fu Panda. Sex and the City.

A pretty random list of popular culture with nothing intrinsically funny about any of them but all things that exist. Which is all Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer think it takes to make a comedy movie.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 14 - Manos the Hands of Fate

Number 14: Manos: The Hands of Fate (1966)

This film has picked up a fair following over the years and has a reputation for being ‘The Worst Film Ever Made’ (though there are obviously other contenders). Here is the story behind the ‘Cult of Manos’:

Back in 1988, a man named Joel Hodgson created a show called Mystery Science Theater 3000 (commonly referred to as MST3K) which aired on Public Access TV in Minnieapolis. The premise is an average Joe(l) is shot into space by a mad scientist and forced to watch bad movies. He’ll try to keep his sanity with the help of his robot friends by watching the movies and making jokes over the top of them, with various little skits in between.

It was a success, eventually picked up by Comedy Central and later the Sci-Fi channel. There were cast changes over the years (most notably Joel being replaced by Mike Nelson) but the show ran for 11 seasons and there were 197 episodes plus a spin-off movie (which was basically just another episode) in total. So popular was the show, producers and directors were actually sending them their films to make fun of, reasoning it was the best way their work would be seen.

One such film they ‘riffed’ over was Manos: The Hands of Fate. It became notorious for the writers and producers of the show, as to make each episode they had to watch the films multiple times and Manos was one of the hardest ones they had to get through.

The story doesn’t end there though as Mike Nelson, Kevin Murphy and Bill Corbett, writers and actors on MST3K would go on to form rifftrax.com, where the premise is much the same. However, the added bonus is you can buy audio files to play over mainstream movies. For example, you can watch the Twilight movies whilst listening to their riffing (definitely the preferred option) on the film.

One film available through their website is Manos: The Hands of Fate, with all new jokes and quips. But wait, there’s more! In 2012, they done a Rifftrax: Live! Event. Simulcast in theatres all over the States, they performed a live performance of their Manos riff.

All this adds to the reputation M:THF has garnered for being one of the worst films ever. Without that exposure, probably no one would have seen it. Is the reputation deserved? Absolutely.

Written, produced, directed and ‘starring’ Harold P Warren, Manos is another low-budget horror film that gets it wrong on every level.

The acting ranges from more wooden than a tree to ridiculous overacting. Poor editing means lines of dialogue get repeated, which is doubly bad because the script is terrible to start with. Consider this line from main character, Mike (Harold Warren himself):

‘We’ll go hide in the desert. Someone is sure to find us.’

You know why it’s called a desert don’t you? The clue is in the name.

The story is a couple are driving, somewhere, with their young daughter but they get car trouble and stop off at an old house. Here they meet a man named Torgo, and after establishing they won’t be able to go anywhere that night they agree to stay the night in the house.

Now Torgo is a creepy looking guy with inflated knees (hunchbacks are so cliché) with a staff that has a hand at the top and has spasms that making it look like he’s masturbating. He is constantly referring to ‘The Master’ and how ‘he won’t like you staying here.’ Would you stay in a place like that with a weird guy like Torgo? At least he has his own slightly comical theme music.

‘The Master’ as it turns out is, well I don’t know what he is really. He sleeps through the day like a vampire but he never drinks any blood. He has a robe with handprints on it but it looks more like he’s wearing two beach towels. He has six wives who stand still all the day, which is the best acting you will see here. The Master wakes them up and instantly regrets as they all start chatting amongst themselves while he can’t get a word in him.

Turns out they are all worshippers of Manos, some evil God thing, and are debating whether they should kill the family. Then a Royal Rumble breaks out amongst the women, which is what I imagine happens whenever any group of 3 or more women get together. Well it does in films. This goes on for ages and resolves absolutely nothing.

The rest of the film revolves around the family’s attempt to escape the cult. There is an entirely pointless scene with two cops who hear two gun shots. They move five feet from their car, wave their flashlight (which looks more like a miniature dildo) and that’s enough for them. They get in their car and drive away. Thanks. For. That.

The ending is obvious to anyone but it takes so long to get there with awful jazz music in the background. A chore does not begin to describe it.

The Manos story doesn’t end there though. Thanks to a kickstarter campaign from actress Jackey Neyman (who plays Debbie in Manos), a sequel is scheduled to be released in November 2016, just in time for the 50^th anniversary.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 15 - Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2

Number 15: Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2 (2004)

Wow, what an incredible movie.

When I looked at its IMDB page I was shocked when I saw it hadn’t won any Oscars. This film was released in theatres on 27^th August 2004 but the Best Film award at the 2005 awards was given to Million Dollar Baby. And Baby Geniuses 2 wasn’t even nominated. What a disgrace, the Academy should be ashamed. Million Dollar Baby indeed with its coherent story, focus on characterisation and good acting.

I just hope Clint Eastwood done the decent thing and handed back all his awards, he knows he doesn't deserve them.

But seriously, this film sucks. Everything about it is wrong, just look at the title it's the wrong way round. Conventional film titling is you put the franchise name before the subtitle, so it should be called Baby Geniuses 2: Superbabies. If they can't even get that right, what hope for the rest of it?

I am just grateful this is the only one in the series I have to watch, there are actually 5 Baby Genius films but all with different casts of babies in them. Because babies are unreliable as actors with their habit of getting older all the time. It is a problem in this film as well as sometimes the babies are noticeably bigger in some scenes than in others.

The whole thinking behind these films though is crass in its simplicity. I can imagine the production meeting:

Big Producer Man: So, any ideas?

Assistant #1: Well, our research shows people are quite fond of babies.

Big Producer Man: Really? Whatever for? They just cry, shit and piss a lot.

Assistant #1: People think they’re cute.

Assistant #2: And Rugrats was very successful for Nickelodeon.

Big Producer Man: We can exploit this. Let’s put babies on screen for 90minutes and make a film around it. And we’ll ‘borrow’ the idea of babies talking to each other. We got anything else?

Assistant #2: Well, Clint Eastwood has submitted us a script about an old boxing trainer who reluctantly takes a young woman under his wing.

Big Producer Man: Like that would ever be successful. No, brainless baby movies it is.

And that’s how it happened.

The ‘story’ here is something about a mind control pulse, a legendary child who protects the world’s children but is actually 70, babies get superpowers and the least emotional reunion between a mother and son ever captured on film.

To be honest, I was trying not to pay too much attention because I was scared my brain cells would melt if I did.

So yeah, it’s pretty bad.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 16 - Humshakals

Number 16: Humshakals (2014)

Interesting thing about this one.

When I first downloaded The List this one was simply titled ‘Doublegangers’. I have to track these films down so I can watch them and a title like that will bring up some, interesting results. And not ones I particularly want on my search history.

Luckily, this isn’t a Premier League footballer’s favourite fetish movie but actually a more innocent Bollywood movie about lookalikes, which presumably should have been ‘Doppelgangers’ but was mistranslated to a more suggestive title.

I almost wish it was a porno as at least that would be easier to explain and this one makes my head spin just thinking about it.

Primarily set in London, there’s billionaire Ashok (Saif Ali Khan) aided by his best friend Kumar (Ritesh Deshmukh) who dreams of being a stand-up comedian. Unfortunately, he sucks. I think I’ve spotted one of his problems though, he’s telling jokes in Hindi to a mainly white, British audience. British people won't even learn French, no way will they learn an Indian language fluently to the point of understanding set-up and punchline.

He has a problem though in the form of his Uncle Kans who wants to take over the family business so creates a drug that makes Ashok and Kumar temporarily think they’re dogs. Just go with it. This gets them put in a mental hospital and allows Kans to take control of the business. If you’re hoping this plays out like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, you will be sorely disappointed.

This is where it gets complicated, two genuine loons are also in the hospital who look identical (well they should, they are the same actors) and are also called Ashok and Kumar. Thanks to a mix-up so obvious they might as well have put a massive sign saying ‘IDENTITY CONFUSION HAPPENS NOW’ as the loons are released with the real Ashok and Kumar staying in the hospital. In a sense, they done exactly that with a snippet of song saying that’s exactly what happens.

The loons are picked up and brought to the real Ashok’s mansion, which they think is all part of a popular reality show where ordinary people are allowed to live like millionaires for a week. Trust me, it makes sense in the film. Sort of.

The real Ashok and Kumar meanwhile are trying to deal with the hospital warden, who is really subtly portrayed as being a cruel, dictator figure. Not really, they put him in an SS uniform and he refers to Adolf Hitler as ‘Uncle’. Yes, he really does.

They do find out their Uncle Kans is responsible for their incarceration but more incredibly, there is a lookalike of their Uncle in the hospital too.

And this is where I tune out. Various schemes are planned up to regain control of the company, lots of identity confusion where it’s hard to keep tabs of who is the real one and who is the duplicate. A third set of duplicates are added (triplicates?) because two sets of each character wasn’t enough. There’s a Prince Charles lookalike. Except it’s the real Prince Charles. If he was a cockney.

It all works out in the end.

I’ve tried to condense this down to just the key plot points but there is so much going on here. I haven’t mentioned the trio of beautiful ladies who are the love interests of the film, the drug dealer responsible for loony Ashok and Kumar being put in the asylum to begin with, one of the lookalikes severe OCD issues. I haven’t mentioned any of the “hilarious” scenes the director Sajid Khan (whom from what I can tell has a reputation for being a bit of a hack) thought would sell the movie. The warden’s torture method of making inmates watch Himmatwala…hey, hey, hey, hey! No spoilers! That one’s for later.

The music videos are actually a welcome break in this film, they gave me a chance to sort out what was happening in the film in my head. Though one of the songs as far as I can tell was all about creating a personal ring tone. Deep stuff.

I need to stop now. My head hurts thinking about it all. So many questions of identity. I mean, am I really me?

I don’t know anymore.

IMDB Bottom 100: Number 17 - United Passions

Number 17: United Passions (2014)

I have been looking forward to this one.

Ever since I first looked at the list of the films, this was the one that jumped out. As a big football fan, it was inevitable I’d have to watch this film at some point. A film made for $30 million but returned just $607 at the box office. A film that star Tim Roth described as ‘a crap movie I did for the money.’

In part a FIFA biopic, in others a biopic of one Joseph ‘Sepp’ Blatter. At time of writing, Mr Blatter is up to his eyeballs in allegations of corruption, receiving illegal payments and new charges coming seemingly every day. If you’re reading this in the future, he may be sitting in a prison cell right now or he may have got away scot-free (though personally, my money is on the former).

I’ll fill in the early part of the movie but if you want to know, 56:34 is when Blatter comes into it.

It starts in 1904, with the coming together of the heads of various football variations across the world to form a global governing body of football. An invitation to join is given to the English FA but as the inventors of the game, they turn up their noses at the chance to join this little organisation. The English are probably the closest this film has to villains, being portrayed as arrogant, snobbish, racist and sexist. Which to be fair, may well have been true of the gentlemen in question.

The group is formed anyway, taking the name ‘Federation of International Football Associations’ (it is implied the ‘Football Association’ part of the name was a deliberate slight against the English FA). It is actually interesting to see throughout the film how FIFA grew from one small room in Paris to the vast, lavish headquarters it now has in Zurich.

Skip on a few years and we meet now President of FIFA, Jules Rimet played by Gerard Depardieu. This covers the period between 1924-1950. It starts with Rimet’s attempts to launch the first World Cup tournament in Uruguay. They present it as fairly straightforward here but in reality it was fairly shambolic with countries withdrawing (only 13 out of 24 invited took part) and stadiums barely finished on time. Heck that would make for a film of itself.

It’s a success but FIFA is still considered a small time organisation at this point and limps along. Tensions rise throughout the Thirties between Rimet and the Italian and German delegates as real world politics threaten to tear the world apart.

Skip forward to 1942, and they tell what is known in football folklore as the ‘Death Match’. It’s the story of a Ukranian youth side in Kiev who played a team of German soldiers. They were supposed to lose the game but ended up winning the game 5-3 to the delight of the watching crowd. The Ukranian players were believed to have been executed soon after. Much of this is now believed to be myth but what is true is that it showed the power sport can have as an inspiration for an oppressed people. On a lighter note, it was the inspiration for Escape to Victory (though that is actually a more brutal film than many remember. Irish international Kevin O’Callaghan deliberately breaking his own arm anyone?).

Happier times come with the 1950 World Cup in Brazil. This is Rimet’s last World Cup as FIFA president, though he still has time to thank the English for ‘joining our little organisation’. Which is a nice call back to an earlier conversation. Or at least it would be if Rimet had actually been present for that conversation.

And this is where the film should have ended. This should have been the film, the life of Jules Rimet, the visionary who launched a tournament nobody thought would succeed, ending in front of a crowd of over 100,000 people at the Macarena stadium in Brazil with millions more following the game around the globe. It’s a shame about everything that follows, as the first half of this film is actually really good.

There is a bit of filler until we reach the year 1974, when we have our main event. Enter Sepp Blatter (Tim Roth) and the film becomes his vanity piece.

The FIFA president is now Joao Havelange, Blatter’s mentor and a man some believe to have been even more corrupt. He’s played by Sam Neill, who speaks with a Brazilian-Portuguese accent whenever he remembers to.

FIFA is in trouble, they are losing money. Only one man can save them: Super-Sepp! You see, he has an ‘ability for finding money’ (films words). He can ‘create new revenue streams’ (films words).

See how Super-Sepp saves the world of football as he:

• -          Brings football to Africa and Asia
• -          Saves FIFA brokering deals with Adidas and Coca-Cola, just by asking for it
• -          Tackles corruption in FIFA by not actually doing anything

Now to give Blatter his dues, in his time as FIFA Secretary General and later President, football has grown massively in Africa and Asia. Women’s football is the biggest it’s ever been. Whether Blatter can take as much personal credit as he does here though is highly questionable.

FIFA is more profitable now than it’s ever been but again that’s more down to its business practices where the host country of a World Cup pay all the costs but FIFA take all the profits.

And corruption. Blatter talks big about corruption in the film, how the gravy train is over but again, he doesn’t actually do anything about it. Maybe this was the film-makers subtle hint to the audience that Blatter is either a liar or an idiot.

Corruption within FIFA was the world’s biggest open-secret, everyone in football knew about it. Where they went wrong though, was screwing over the USA for the 2018 World Cup. Screwing over little European nations is fine but you don’t fuck with America. God bless you, America!

All that remains to be seen is how much Blatter was personally involved.

The film, first half was good but very poor display in the second half. Substituting Rimet for Blatter was a bad idea. The boy Blatter was brought on to be a hero but at the end of the day, his performance left much to be desired.

I'll leave the last word to Tim Roth: