How bad is it? Dull, cheap and ruined by some bad special effects.
Should you see it? Nah.
This film has two sequels, which is hard to believe. A woman who drowned her child becomes The Weeping Woman of the title, a phantasm that abducts the children of others. After a decent start, where avoiding a child in the street leads to a car accident and then a missing child, the film bogs down, becomes talky - and at least one person mumbles all lines inaudibly - and ends with some of the worst green screen effects ever; the river of the title isn't even real. It's inept, but not without merit, but also not with any charm.
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds."
Thursday, June 8, 2017
Wednesday, June 7, 2017
Recon 2023: The Gauda Prime Conspiracy (2009)
How bad is it? Last of the worst SF trilogy ever made (take THAT, Lucas!)
Should you see it? No. If you really really love cheesy science fiction, then maybe.
I didn't see the first two films of this trilogy, but from this final installment, I'm both sure I didn't miss anything and sure this is the worst science fiction of its decade. The plot's a mess, but after the Earth's destroyed, there's a battle on a sand planet. There's also mutant giant crabs, mutant giant chickens
and people with burn-like skin diseases. Then there's - wait for it - a 1970's blaxploitation soft-core porn scene, before it abruptly goes back to bad CGI spaceships. What the hell was that?! The film is just guys running around shooting weapons (which are from this century, in a future world, for no good reason) and making dick and boob jokes; yes, there's attempted humor, of the most adolescent type. The acting and direction are as bad as the non-existent plot. Some of the effects aren't bad.
Should you see it? No. If you really really love cheesy science fiction, then maybe.
I didn't see the first two films of this trilogy, but from this final installment, I'm both sure I didn't miss anything and sure this is the worst science fiction of its decade. The plot's a mess, but after the Earth's destroyed, there's a battle on a sand planet. There's also mutant giant crabs, mutant giant chickens
![]() |
| This deserved a photo, didn't it? |
Tuesday, June 6, 2017
The Rawhide Terror (1934)
How bad is it? It's one of the worst B-westerns ever made.
Should you see it? Probably not.
It's hard to find films directed by Victor Adamson, but this one that he wrote at least part of (and may have directed some of) is on YouTube and a slightly longer version is on a DVD compilation. It's a complete shambles, as it was meant to be a serial, ran out of money and then was forced into completion with little time - and apparently without a "star" who just disappears. Two brothers witness their parents getting killed by fake Indians and get separated. Without giving much away, one becomes a bad guy who wears a ridiculous disguise of a snakeskin wrapped across his nose. The other becomes a sheriff and defeats his brother, they recognize each other by improbable identical birthmarks and the sheriff wins the love interest. There's plenty of action, and yet it's interminably dull.
Should you see it? Probably not.
It's hard to find films directed by Victor Adamson, but this one that he wrote at least part of (and may have directed some of) is on YouTube and a slightly longer version is on a DVD compilation. It's a complete shambles, as it was meant to be a serial, ran out of money and then was forced into completion with little time - and apparently without a "star" who just disappears. Two brothers witness their parents getting killed by fake Indians and get separated. Without giving much away, one becomes a bad guy who wears a ridiculous disguise of a snakeskin wrapped across his nose. The other becomes a sheriff and defeats his brother, they recognize each other by improbable identical birthmarks and the sheriff wins the love interest. There's plenty of action, and yet it's interminably dull.
Monday, June 5, 2017
Redline (2007)
aka Speed Returns, aka Red Line
How bad is it? Probably the worst car racing film.
Should you see it? No way.
I think the positive reviews this got were from people who mistakenly were reviewing the 2009 animated film of the same name. A woman in a band turns out to be a terrific car driver and one rich f$%^ needs her to beat another rich f$%^ in a race, where killing bystanders doesn't seem to be a problem. Eddie Griffin is the name actor. Imagine trying to dumb down "Fast and Furious," throw in some "Death Proof," "RPM," "Mischief 3000," "Gone in 60 Seconds" and "Death Race 2000" - but remove anything that made those films worth seeing. There's one attractive woman... and nothing else: no plot, no dialogue (it's sometimes cringeworthy), no characterization. Lots of expensive cars that you don't even get to see properly go fast, while I kept checking my watch.
How bad is it? Probably the worst car racing film.
Should you see it? No way.
I think the positive reviews this got were from people who mistakenly were reviewing the 2009 animated film of the same name. A woman in a band turns out to be a terrific car driver and one rich f$%^ needs her to beat another rich f$%^ in a race, where killing bystanders doesn't seem to be a problem. Eddie Griffin is the name actor. Imagine trying to dumb down "Fast and Furious," throw in some "Death Proof," "RPM," "Mischief 3000," "Gone in 60 Seconds" and "Death Race 2000" - but remove anything that made those films worth seeing. There's one attractive woman... and nothing else: no plot, no dialogue (it's sometimes cringeworthy), no characterization. Lots of expensive cars that you don't even get to see properly go fast, while I kept checking my watch.
Sunday, June 4, 2017
Ripe (1996)
How bad is it? Ham-handed and exploitative. Not terrible.
Should you see it? This might get a cult following. I say yes, but keep expectations low.
This film has had some very positive reviews and some scathing ones; this will be "meh." Twin girls from a very disturbed family lose their parents in a car accident and then decide to go to the promised land of Kentucky, where they spend time near a weirdly homoerotic army base. One girl is consumed with her budding sexuality, the other with violence. A man comes between them and violence ensues. The ending actually caught me off guard, which is surprising, as much of this film is predictable. It's often well-shot and the performances by the leads rather good (15 year-olds play 14 year-olds, which is refreshing). Unfortunately, the film seems to be trying to make a point without having any point to make. Things start to get interesting and then they change scenes. There's some laughable symbolism and some moments so odd that you wonder if you missed something.
Should you see it? This might get a cult following. I say yes, but keep expectations low.
This film has had some very positive reviews and some scathing ones; this will be "meh." Twin girls from a very disturbed family lose their parents in a car accident and then decide to go to the promised land of Kentucky, where they spend time near a weirdly homoerotic army base. One girl is consumed with her budding sexuality, the other with violence. A man comes between them and violence ensues. The ending actually caught me off guard, which is surprising, as much of this film is predictable. It's often well-shot and the performances by the leads rather good (15 year-olds play 14 year-olds, which is refreshing). Unfortunately, the film seems to be trying to make a point without having any point to make. Things start to get interesting and then they change scenes. There's some laughable symbolism and some moments so odd that you wonder if you missed something.
Friday, June 2, 2017
Robot in the Family (1984)
aka Golddigger, aka A Robot Called Golddigger
How bad is it? Wow this sucks. I mean... wow.
Should you see it? It's VHS only and not worth the search.
Just when I think I've seen all the worst films aimed at children, I discover this (actually, I saw part of it in 1988 and was so bored I turned it off, but I have now seen it all). A father who's an antique dealer creates a robot to find gold and to tend to his children. For some reason, he gives it a creepy voice not unlike Jon Frink of "The Simpsons." A villain steals a gold helmet and that's about to start a Muslim holy war. The family then, after 60 minutes of tiresome "antics," confronts the bad guy and recover the helmet. Joe Pantoliano and John Rhys-Davies are both in this! The film was redubbed, with the children's voices sometimes done by adults, rarely matching their mouths and ALWAYS AT EXTREME VOLUME. There's Drano in food, which gets ignored; there's guys in drag for no apparent reason; there's a rescue by toy robots that's inexplicable. The effects are terrible, even for a no-budget film, the dialogue when it's about anything still meanders, the plot's too contrived and requires too many coincidences. It's just awful.
How bad is it? Wow this sucks. I mean... wow.
Should you see it? It's VHS only and not worth the search.
Just when I think I've seen all the worst films aimed at children, I discover this (actually, I saw part of it in 1988 and was so bored I turned it off, but I have now seen it all). A father who's an antique dealer creates a robot to find gold and to tend to his children. For some reason, he gives it a creepy voice not unlike Jon Frink of "The Simpsons." A villain steals a gold helmet and that's about to start a Muslim holy war. The family then, after 60 minutes of tiresome "antics," confronts the bad guy and recover the helmet. Joe Pantoliano and John Rhys-Davies are both in this! The film was redubbed, with the children's voices sometimes done by adults, rarely matching their mouths and ALWAYS AT EXTREME VOLUME. There's Drano in food, which gets ignored; there's guys in drag for no apparent reason; there's a rescue by toy robots that's inexplicable. The effects are terrible, even for a no-budget film, the dialogue when it's about anything still meanders, the plot's too contrived and requires too many coincidences. It's just awful.
Thursday, June 1, 2017
Rest in Pieces (1987)
How bad is it? Very poorly made, but not uninteresting, slasher film.
Should you see it? If you're a fan of cheap 1980's horror films (especially those from Spain).
I first saw this because I was told it had Scott "Carrot Top" Thompson in it, but instead it has Scott Thompson Baker (full disclosure: I've met Scott Baker. He's a well-known actor in my city). A woman inherits a creepy mansion in Spain when her aunt dies with the stipulation that she has to live there - possibly the hoariest plot in horror history. There's a lot of weirdo retainers living there, including a lawyer, a priest and a psychotherapist, and they refuse to leave. Strange things start happening and then people start getting killed in gory ways. There's so many killers involved that people have to be introduced as fodder, such as a string quartet. One actress is excruciatingly awful, but manages to go topless at least five times, earning her paycheck. The director has a cult following, but this film meanders and, while at least part is tongue-in-cheek, the tone shifts frequently.
Should you see it? If you're a fan of cheap 1980's horror films (especially those from Spain).
I first saw this because I was told it had Scott "Carrot Top" Thompson in it, but instead it has Scott Thompson Baker (full disclosure: I've met Scott Baker. He's a well-known actor in my city). A woman inherits a creepy mansion in Spain when her aunt dies with the stipulation that she has to live there - possibly the hoariest plot in horror history. There's a lot of weirdo retainers living there, including a lawyer, a priest and a psychotherapist, and they refuse to leave. Strange things start happening and then people start getting killed in gory ways. There's so many killers involved that people have to be introduced as fodder, such as a string quartet. One actress is excruciatingly awful, but manages to go topless at least five times, earning her paycheck. The director has a cult following, but this film meanders and, while at least part is tongue-in-cheek, the tone shifts frequently.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)






