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.