Kill Me Now
“I’m fairly certain When in Rome (1.29) was not originally intended to be a theatrical motion picture,” writes OK magazine’s Phil Villarreal, “but a propaganda film meant to twist your mind into hating many things: Kristen Bell, the city of Rome — nay, the entire populace of Italy. And possibly life itself.
The Touchstone release is basically “a weak rehash of Love Potion No. 9, with Love Potion No. 9 replaced by crack. Random plotting, insipid dialogue and pathetic acting conjoining to become a medieval torture device in movie form.
“How bad was it? My friend’s easily impressed wife, who once called Get Smart the funniest movie she’s ever seen and actually enjoyed Leap Year, wasn’t all that high on it, dismissing it as ‘gimmicky.’
“Translation: It’s the worst movie ever created, with the possible exceptions of Hellboy II and the Super Mario Bros. movie.”
There’s no way this movie could make me hate Kristen Bell.
What’s wrong with Hellboy II?
People gave Hellboy II a pass because Guillermo del Toro directed it and was riding on a wave of good nature generated by Pan’s Labyrinth. Visually it was fun to watch but the story was awful and aside from Ron Perlman and maybe Jeffrey Tambor, the acting was atrocious.
Indeed. Hellboy I & II are far above average comic-book films with actual characters to care about.
One film that could possbibly be worse than “Rome” is the inevitably horrible torture porn “Valentine’s Day”. That trailer alone made me nearly vomit all over my fresh popcorn.
Kristen Bell is way easy to hate. I know I was supposed to hate her in “Forgetting Sarah Marshall”, but her hateability index really made it possible. I almost hate her & everyone else involved for agreeing to make “Couples Retreat”.
I too find the shot at “Hellboy 2″ pretty strange. It’s not a great movie or anything, but it’s much better than most brain-dead movies of its ilk.
J.D. Salinger has died.
When In Rome looks so bad that the TV spots actually consist of Bell in a studio explaining the plot to the TV audience, because apparently it’s so much of a jumbled mess that clips from the film are not sufficient to fulfill this purpose.
I’m with you, Tsuyoi. Kristen Bell is a goddess walking the earth among us mere mortals . I’m looking forward to LexG’s posting on this issue.
And has Dax Shepard ever been in a good movie?
IDIOCRACy.
Josh Duhamel hasn’t exactly got a glittering career either.
With Howard Zinn and J.D. Salinger dying, who will be the third old writer to go? Harper Lee?
I only liked her in the Deadwood two-parter during the second season. Bell that is.
Salinger is the third.
Louis Auchincloss died two days ago:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/nyregion/28auchincloss.html
The cute girl in METROPOLITAN is shown reading his “The Rector of Justin” in the last scene.
It’s not possible that ANY of these movies are worse than “Love Guru” and “Year One”…although I haven’t seen When In Rome yet. But I just can’t really wrap my head around the possibility that there are movies out there worst than those two toilet flushes.
Since the heady days of Patch Adams, no movie had scrapped the bottom of the cinematic barrel more than Year One. Oh right, and Spider-Man 3.
Even Spiderman 3 is an okay film. Just a bit too crammed, nothing more.
How much do you want to bet that Stephanie Zacharek gives this a thumbs up tomorrow?
So, it’s still better than “I Love You Beth Cooper”, right?
Jonathan, seriously? That’s practically a 4-star review of spidey 3 considering what it actually is.
With two Da Vinci Code movies out there, and he picks on Hellboy II?
No mention of ‘The Room’ in the worst films ever made? The others are just shit Hollywood duds; ‘The Room’ is a genuine Ed Wood-standard masterwork of ineptitude.
Kristen Bell is adorable. You can tell because of the way she’s biting her pinkie in the poster. I love it when marketing does my thinking for me.
I love the fact that Villareal writes these disembowelments of romanitc comedies aimed at twentysomething women in a magazine aimed at twentysomething women.
Kristen Bell was also great in SPARTAN and of course on VERONICA MARS. It’s a shame where her career is heading, but there’s always a chance for a course correction.
Uh…Hellboy II is fun escapist entertainment with great production design, and a strong performance from Perlman, so it’s in no way horrible. You think that, you’re probably more than a little nutty. Also, Super Mario Bros. is magnetic in its horribleness, and it at least has Hoskins, Leguizamo, and Hopper seeming to have a lot of fun saying and doing unbelievable shit. Fiascos are better than boring failures. The worst films are mind-numbingly boring, and make you feel suicidal and depressed for the human race. LIKE TRANSFORMERS 2.
so, yeah, I wouldn’t trust Phil Villereal’s opinions on film, though I’m sure this Rome film is terrible.
Massey, and others, that is exactly the kind of hyperbole that comes from not actually seeing very many truly bad movies. I chuckled probably a dozen times in Year One, at least; it’s ramshackle and sketchy, but honestly, I got more enjoyment out of it than The Hangover. Jonathan is correct about Spider-Man 3: it’s overstuffed and, as a result, not very well-plotted. But “somewhat disappointing compared to how great the first two are” is not the same as “worst.” I mean, if we want to go disappointing, X-Men: The Last Stand is so much worse than Spider-Man 3 that I’ve never understood Spidey 3′s status as “worst. movie. ever.” (except that, as mentioned, a lot of people see like ten movies a year).
But come on, this is supposed to be a blog full of movie fans. Haven’t you people ever seen a movie as lousy as, I don’t know, Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever? 88 Minutes? Any Vince Vaughn comedy of the past couple of years? Anything with Cuba Gooding Jr., and I’m especially including any attempts for him to pick up some indie cred by starring in serious or offbeat movies just as awful as his family comedies?
If you want to go with recent and widely seen movies that are “supposed” to be good and therefore more offensive or irritating how about The Notebook? Chocolat? Pay It Forward? The Holiday? Shark Tale? Pearl Harbor? A Beautiful Mind, even! Patch Adams, OK, Massey, point, you actually happened upon something truly awful there. That movie is really bad.
My point is, if When In Rome is somewhere on the bizarre spectrum you could create out of Year One, Spider-Man 3, Hellboy II, and the Super Mario Brothers movie, it’s probably totally watchable. (I’m not saying that’s true; the movie probably sucks. But I’m not convinced by any of those comparisons.)
Oh, and Kristen Bell is great… although I wonder if she, like Sarah Michelle Gellar, will be saddled with that uncommonly well-written role on TV that won’t be easily matched on film. They’re both tiny blondes who developed characters over many episodes and found a lot of depth there… it’s not so easy to do in 90 minutes with a middling-or-worse script.
Second what Jesse said. Veronica Mars rocked in its brief three year run. They are trying to get a feature version launched.
Sorry, Prager, but Auchincloss is not in the same league. Gay Talese would be, as well as Harper Lee.
Interesting that Salinger died exactly one year after John Updike.
Clips @ http://www.darkhorizons.com/trailers/
Thanks….but no thanks. I’m sure I can find some laundry or something equally household drudgish to do than watch this. It’ll be time better spent.
Uh, deathtongue, Auchincloss is not on the same league because he is in a higher league, Harper Lee wrote one very well-received young adult novel, as did Salinger. Salinger also wrote some pretty good short stories. “The Rector of Justin” alone blows them all away. Gay Talese wrote some good, but dated, non-fiction books that no one reads anymore. “Honor Thy Father” was the best of these.
For me, “Rumor Has It” is the gold standard of contemporary bad movies.
I find movies like Legion and Transformers far more appalling for their just plain stupid antics.
Now that I think about it, Updike is wrong because he is known for more than one book, whereas Zinn, Salinger and Lee are pretty much one tome wonders.
1) Bell Power.
2) Leap Year was CHARMING. I’m serious.
3) I can’t see getting worked up over romcoms and chick flicks. I know male critics and bloggers and fanboys and commenters have to go out of their way to bag on stuff like this, but really, it’s not hurting anyone, it is what it is, and it’s not meant to be Apocalypse Now. It’s a cute chick in various cute outfits being cute and falling for some bland guy. It’s not the end of the world, it’s innocuous, and even though it’s out of character with my usual nihilistic cinematic tastes, I quite enjoy this kind of thing.
Mostly for ogling purposes, but like a good, stupid Avril or Hillary or Miley song, it serves a perfectly honorable purpose: To make you think of a cute chick and smile like a douche.
I defer to Henry Rollins’ BRILLIANT rant on Stern years ago, that he has NO issue with groups like Nsync or Backstreet Boys whatsoever, that there’s always been lightweight stuff like that, it is honest about what it is and who it’s for, and it means no harm. Whereas he hates U2 for being pretentious gasbag bullshit fronted by a cheesy crooner who belongs in a bar.
It’s kind of the same way for romcoms.
So, again, BELL POWER. Plus she’s probably barefoot and romping in it, so BOW.
The poster alone spells doom.
“I defer to Henry Rollins’ BRILLIANT rant on Stern years ago, that he has NO issue with groups like Nsync or Backstreet Boys whatsoever, that there’s always been lightweight stuff like that, it is honest about what it is and who it’s for, and it means no harm. Whereas he hates U2 for being pretentious gasbag bullshit fronted by a cheesy crooner who belongs in a bar.”
Aim low and you can’t lose… a good lesson for everyone.
LexG – nicely put.
There’s also a whiff of misogyny when one male (Jeff) highlights another male’s (Villarreal) takedown on a piece of fluff aimed squarely NOT in their direction. They are action flicks for chicks. Guys live out their fantasies in braindead Stallone flicks, the women get these. Considering these things are much cheaper to produce, almost guaranteed to recoup their investment and keep plenty of people employed, leave’em alone.
Besides, as most guys in marriages/relationships will tell you, there usually follows some pretty decent sex after viewing them.
Oh, I guess I see the rub right there…
I have hated Kristin Bell in everything excepted season 1 (and season 1 only) of Veronica Mars.
Noiresque, you need to drop that attitude and just BOW to her.
You are not bowing.
“I can’t see getting worked up over romcoms and chick flicks. I know male critics and bloggers and fanboys and commenters have to go out of their way to bag on stuff like this, but really, it’s not hurting anyone, it is what it is, and it’s not meant to be Apocalypse Now”
I disagree. Here’s why:
(1) I try not to be a member of the Yesterday Was Better Club, but I grew up watching the great romantic comedies of the 1930′s and 40′s, and have since caught up to the ones from that time period that I missed. Now, I understand those were different times for a whole lot of reasons, and I understand you can’t recreate the circumstances of those times (I’ve liked some of the the movies that are little more than throwbacks to that time, like THE IMPOSTORS and LEATHERHEADS, but they certainly feel lightweight and studied next to their predecessors). Nevertheless, when I think back on movies like TROUBLE IN PARADISE, IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT, THE THIN MAN, HOLIDAY, THE SHOP AROUND THE CORNER, THE PHILADELPHIA STORY, THE LADY EVE, BALL OF FIRE, THE PALM BEACH STORY, THE MORE THE MERRIER, and ADAM’S RIB, and compare them to the romantic comedies that have come out in the last 15 years, I mostly feel sick. The last year I had any romantic comedies in my top 10 list was 2004, when BEFORE SUNSET and ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND made the list, and whatever you think of either of those movies, it’s beyond dispute those aren’t “traditional” romantic comedies. I happen to think that’s a good thing – all genres should be elastic to some degree – but it speaks to how bad the traditional romantic comedy has become.
(2) The reason why I hate these movies isn’t because they’re female-centered, or pitched to women. It’s because the women in these movies are shallow, self-absorbed, more interested in accessorizing than in genuine feeling, and the love they’re after is only the type where nothing is at stake, or where a Prince Charming figure rescues them. I don’t know about any of you, but I find that incredibly demeaning to women. The great romantic comedy heroines of 30′s and 40′s movies, like Barbara Stanwyck, Katharine Hepburn, Claudette Colbert, Myrna Loy, and Jean Arthur would roll over in their graves if they saw the type of parts offered in these comedies.
in no way is Kristen Bell a movie star worthy of a lead role even in second rate crap like this … this film is worse that Did You Hear What Happened to the Morgans?, at least Hugh Grant has a schtick … Leap Year is like a Preston Sturges classic compared to When In Rome …. Jon Heder plays one of the guys who is stalking Bell and he mimics a Criss Angel type magician, and his assistant is Efren Ramirez (Pedro in Napoleon Dynamite) … Notice how this Disney film plays like a 20th Century Fox romcom, and meanwhile The Tooth Fairy plays like a Disney film
berg – good observation. i actually thought tooth fairy was disney and this was by fox until i looked it up.
Thanks to LIPRANZER for a great list of classics. As a woman and a film buff for well over 40 years, I am sickened by the parade of lame romantic comedies supposedly aimed at women. Sometimes I’m afraid that most women expect too little from movies. These atrocities should all die the first weekend at the box office.
A trend worth noticing [I'm sure it's been written about] is that some of the most satisfying comic movie romances of late come at the end of raucous, male dominated farces. I love the over the top conclusions to WEDDING CRASHERS and 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN.
Shop Around the Corner is one of my favorite movies of all time. Please watch it. Also, the difference between it and it’s modernized version, You’ve Got Mail, serves as a lesson in the current inability to fashion a romantic comedy, even when its components have been served to you on a platter. Or just that Nora Ephron really is awful at what she does. (Natch,, she took a story about two struggling clerks at a department store and turned it into the lives and loves of two BOOK STORE OWNERS. Who cares about these peasants?!)
“I’m fairly certain When in Rome (1.29) was not originally intended to be a theatrical motion picture,” writes OK magazine’s Phil Villarreal, “but a propaganda film meant to twist your mind into hating many things: Kristen Bell, the city of Rome — nay, the entire populace of Italy. And possibly life itself.”
How are these mutually exclusive
columbia sportswear jackets
columbia jackets on sale
columbia outerwear
العاب تلبيس
العاب طبخ
العاب
العاب باربي
العاب ماريو
العاب اكشن
لعبة ترافيان
ترافيان
download msn messenger
Twilight Quiz