[In Your Opinion] What’s Some Bad Movies That Had Potential To Be Good?

Posted on February 26th, 2010 by admin in straight talk dvd | 8 Comments »

Im talking about movies that looked really entertaining on the preview, or just the hype about them, and when you saw it, they were horrible.

I got a few.

Tropic Thunder. Some big names in it, but didn’t cause any big laughs.

Strange Wilderness. This was a big hit and miss for having Adam Sandler behind it. Plus there was actually funny actors that starred in it, but to no luck failed.

The Punisher sequel. I actually feel asleep to it. What happened?

Carlito’s way: rise to power. Remind me not to buy straight to DVD films ever again.

The DaVinci Code…
All the right subject matter was there, but the presentation was pretentious and contrived. Also, Dan Brown plagiarised ALL his ideas for this story from Baigent, Lincoln and Lee. I think it’s all stuff worth consideration, but doesn’t translate well to film.

Timeline…
The book by Michael Crichton was sooooooo much fun, well-written, exciting and adventurous and does just what you expect from a good novel…doesn’t allow you to put it down and makes you easily feel as if you are right there in the story.
Some extremely key elements of the book were ignored in the movie, the acting and directing were equally lifeless…and I resent the director for this because I know it likely has turned people away from reading the novel.

Solaris (2002 version)…
My favorite film of all time is the original Russian 1972 version of Solaris, directed by Andrei Tarkovsky. It’s the most original and beautiful and mesmerizing "film experience" and to me it will never get old no matter how many repeat viewings.
This movie introduced things not in the book at all. Actually, the book’s beginning occurs 45 minutes into the film. Also, there were some occurences set on the planet in the book, which were entirely omitted in the film. Even the central theme was altered. Despite all this, it WORKED in a way it otherwise may not have.
Sodergergh’s updated version attempted to remake the first film almost shot-for-shot, rather than taking the chance to translate the original story. (Why do something exactly the same, but with sub-par actors and lifeless direction?) All the actors were very, very poorly cast. Ultimately pointless effort. Cronenberg should have done it!
:)

8 Responses

  1. Owned By An Aussie Says:

    Benjamin Button. The idea was FANTASTIC and the storyline was good, but the way they executed it..they had so much more potential they could’ve reached, but nope, didn’t hit it.

    Still a good movie, but I expected more from it.
    References :

  2. dac Says:

    The Hustler (1962?) with Paul Newman, George C. Scott and Jackie Gleason.

    It was really great for the twenty minutes that they were playing pool. The rest was an ill-advised, long, and poorly-executed snoozefest.
    References :

  3. Murphy Says:

    The Eye, but it had too many of The Sixth Sense mojo in it.
    References :

  4. Kenneth J Says:

    The hulk 2003 version…=)…

    Can you answer my question???…

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AjpunLMNoPLtzy3v3g1iRPnsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20090428131119AAdlEsp
    References :

  5. Cyberweasel Says:

    X-Men Origins Wolverine. Download the leaked copy on the internet to see what I mean, not a good movie at all. weak plot, bad acting, poor continuity with the other films, poor character development and basically pisses on the actual comic books.
    References :

  6. Darrell Says:

    The DaVinci Code…
    All the right subject matter was there, but the presentation was pretentious and contrived. Also, Dan Brown plagiarised ALL his ideas for this story from Baigent, Lincoln and Lee. I think it’s all stuff worth consideration, but doesn’t translate well to film.

    Timeline…
    The book by Michael Crichton was sooooooo much fun, well-written, exciting and adventurous and does just what you expect from a good novel…doesn’t allow you to put it down and makes you easily feel as if you are right there in the story.
    Some extremely key elements of the book were ignored in the movie, the acting and directing were equally lifeless…and I resent the director for this because I know it likely has turned people away from reading the novel.

    Solaris (2002 version)…
    My favorite film of all time is the original Russian 1972 version of Solaris, directed by Andrei Tarkovsky. It’s the most original and beautiful and mesmerizing "film experience" and to me it will never get old no matter how many repeat viewings.
    This movie introduced things not in the book at all. Actually, the book’s beginning occurs 45 minutes into the film. Also, there were some occurences set on the planet in the book, which were entirely omitted in the film. Even the central theme was altered. Despite all this, it WORKED in a way it otherwise may not have.
    Sodergergh’s updated version attempted to remake the first film almost shot-for-shot, rather than taking the chance to translate the original story. (Why do something exactly the same, but with sub-par actors and lifeless direction?) All the actors were very, very poorly cast. Ultimately pointless effort. Cronenberg should have done it!
    :)
    References :

  7. Ax Says:

    Godzilla (1998) and Halloween (2007). I think Rob Zombie butchered what could have been a great movie. Shame.
    References :

  8. barksabit Says:

    Running Man- The original story written by John Bachman (aka Stephen King) was so well written and would have translated to film beautifully but they didn’t even come remotely close to sticking to the story line.
    References :

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

|