agreed.

the first two were definitely cheesy but a lot of fun.
i think i only saw the third one after that, and i don't even think i finished it.

but yeah, the first tremors was a fun movie.

Thanks for bringing this thread back. It always upped the level of discourse around here. Tremors is fun. It's a good quality throwback with a fun, quirky cast, it's like late 50s AIP meets a trashier 80s Coen Brothers. I think it definitely would have been better off without a sequel though.

What you can do, as I do with a lot of horror movies is just pretend their are no sequels.


If you do that and just look at Tremors then it is a great movie with some pretty cool monsters, something that we haven't had much of lately.

Totally agreed. But, between the Mist,Cloverfield and a revival of interest in Godzilla, we can hope for a new giant monster boom.

The Slasher revival has been done into the ground and I hope they do make some good monste movies soon. But unfortunatley they will probaly be shity CGI, Not many CGi monsters look good.. I realy don't like this new format, why can't they get it right!

Tremors is a film that I should like, love even, but for some reason.....I just don't. It annoys me, and I'm not exactly sure why. Maybe I have been in the wrong mood everytime I have tried to watch it.....that happened with Phantasm and I like it now after finally making it through the film.

The 1st part of Tremors was simply a great fun ride. I truly enjoyed it to the end. But on later parts, when the creatures started to walk around then then my interest on this franchise falls apart.

Btw, Slither was as a complete piece of crap to me. Usually I hated to see this kind of 'shit' like creatures related storyline.

Tremors was a lot of fun. I don't know why it got bashed. Nothing like killer worms to get my spirits up.

I definitely agree about the sequels-bringing-the-franchise-down scenario in this case. Tremors was easily one of the best fun-filled romps ever. You gotta love each scene from the first to the last, and the tangy western background score intermixed with cheesy and quirky moments of sheer horror make this a really pleasurable 90 minute trip. As regards the sequels, the lesser said the better.

Hmm...its true that one man's fondness with a particular choice isnt another person's cup of tea. But then, lately, most of the choices have been going down pretty well with audiences and HDC members alike...with one exception.

Tell me folks...why do some of you adore it, while many of you dont like

The Brood

that much?


Bring on the bashing!!

I liked The Brood and don't see anything wrong with it, although I have seen some haters around here.

i really enjoy the brood. it's grim, disgusting, and totally out there, even for a cronenberg film. i really have a lot of fun watching this one, and even find it quite rewatchable. i'm a little surprised to see this one offered up to the "movie bashing" thread.

I have seen some comments about people not liking it for some reason. Maybe that is why _V_ has it up.

I can't bash it.... I dig The Brood.
Cronenberg is a good filmmaker.

He's probably my FAVORITE filmmaker, so you all know I won't bash it. ;) Not my favorite Cronenberg film, but it is up there, its quite....disturbing.

LOVE it! One of my all-time favorites!

i don't really see any opposition to the brood being called a great film.

any haters wish to speak up?

Obviously the haters dont know about this thread or they would have, by now.;)

Anyway, since it has got a positive response largely, I m going to skip it (for now) and move to another controversial entry which people have very strong love-hate relationship with.

It has been hailed for its uniqueness in plot, yet bashed for poor execution and direction.

But what exactly is wrong with


Cube?




Bring it on!

the acting! ugh:mad:

And the autistic kid is a genius? Kinda weak.

Not bad, but not great. there were some cool scenes (such as the splicing scene), but the math threw me off. Math and horror just don't mix.

The acting was sooooo bad... each character was a walking cliche, but I really loved the movie.

yeah, this one was pretty weak,
and the acting was certainly something to roll your eyes at.

i've never been so impressed with cube, although i guess you can't argue that it isn't original.

I loved cube. really original idea.

give us some movies that we can actually bash V!:)

___v___ ? ? ? ?

Right here, Moth.

Everyone loves to bash bad horror movies...in fact most of us revel in it.:D

But the idea behind making this thread was to bash good, critically-appreciated horror flicks. One man's love is another man's hate...and that makes...or rather, has made...for very interesting discussion/debate.;)

And, I do agree that the acting in Cube was horrible, but where the movie scored was the plot and the deaths. Very unique indeed.

Ok, hmm...this movie has been hailed as one of the best of 90s horror, and most of us love it for its cheesiness and gore. Yet, some of us dont like it that much.

What was it...casting gone bad? Weak direction? Ending sequence? You tell me what is wrong with


Bram Stoker's Dracula?


Here comes the bashing!!

I actually love Bram Stoker's Dracula; it had a great look, and I love Gary Oldman as Dracula. But there was some horrible casting decisions there, and it really hurt the movie. I can see why others wouldn't care for it.

Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder?



I love the film too.

Yes Keanu Reeves was a bad call. He looked totally out of place as Harker (who says only Christian Slater is wooden?), but Winona did an OK job as Mina, IMO, although I would have preferred a more sexy and vulnerable actress to do the part.

So, besides the casting, anything else wrong with the movie? Or was it just the casting?

i haven't seen it in a while, but the casting is definitely what comes to mind.
however, tom waits as renford was pretty sweet. he plays a good crazy codger.

First of all, was David Bowie art director and costume designer on this movie? Second of all, even Madonna is more believable as a British person than Keanu was. Madonna is Italian, she will never be British and neither will Keanu. He acts like Spiccoli doing masterpiece theater. Anthony Hopkins was good, though. Hopkins was the most true to the gauche Van Helsing of Stoker's novel, so that was cool. But substance was sacrificed for style. If I want to see lame, derivative eyecandy that mangles the Hammer aesthetic, I'll watch Sleepy Hollow. Oh, and Sleepy Hollow blows too. Way to squander Christopher Lee, Tim Burton. Way to squander a horror archetype, Coppola.

I d love to award the title of Surgeon General to Doc. He dissects the movies with a scalpel as smoothly as skin being peeled off by a plastic surgeon.:D

This is good stuff. Keep it coming folks!!



Which brings me to another guilty pleasure yet a much hated movie of modern times...

Why don't many of you like Alien vs Predator? You got both of the most scariest monsters on-screen together vying for top glory, and Paul Anderson directing Lance Henriksen and a buncha lame actors.

Was it the lack of claustrophobia? Or was it the plot?

Bring on the bashing!!

I've yet to see it. I've never really been interested, just didn't seem to be a good idea ( I am not sure why THAT would stop me, it never has before). Though I am sure I will see it and Requiem eventually.

It would be a good idea to watch em back to back. Surely it doesnt compare to watching Alien/Aliens or Predator/Predator 2, but yeah from what I saw from the trailers...they say Requiem is actually a pretty decent watch.

But...going back to the original, what did the movie actually lack? Paul W Anderson's genius in narration? A script which nobody cared for? Or characters who made sunday mass actually seem much better?

Even the die-hard and loyal AvP gamers didnt have much to shout about AvP. Exactly what didn't click with them?

***Bump***

Anyone else wanna take a crack at AvP? If not, we can move on to the dissection of another fun movie.:D

I didn't hate it



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...mule/mouse.gif

I thought it was good. The trouble with the series was, Alien and Aliens set such high precedents that the rest can't live up to the expectations.

Indeed. Isnt that true for all franchises? No wonder we are almost always disappointed with the sequels. Anyway, I thought AvP was mildly entertaining, and had its fair share of atmosphere too. It will remain one of my guilty pleasures (for being a hardcore fan of both franchises).

Hmm...moving on, Doc mentioned recently about a flick which also had its fair share of acclaim and criticism. It was a brooding and gothic take on the infamous legend (and the book by Washington Irving), and it makes for quality entertainment during Halloween. So, even after having such stellar performances by Johnny Depp, Christopher Walken and Miranda Richardson...why do the critics love to bash


Sleepy Hollow?


"OFF WITH THE HEADS!"

Oops...I mean...bring forth the bashing!!:D

I really liked Sleepy Hollow! The setting was great, the acting was above average, and the story was fun even if it did change the legend around a bit. My only complaint was that there needed to be more of the horseman.

I have no complaints with this one either [ i'm very easy to please ]. I thought it had much atmosphere and another great performance from Depp.

I also liked Sleepy Hollow. Although my opinion maybe bias, because Depp is probably my favorite actor.

I'm easy to please as well, for the most part, and I love this film. The performances were good; Depp was great and the casting of Walken was inspired. It had a wonderfully dark look. I think its a very good film.