5 Movies That You Already Knew Were Going to Suck

You ever see a trailer for a movie and right off the bat you just think to yourself "Aw man that is going to suck balls"? Well I have. At least once a year I find myself saying that after viewing a new trailer. These are the top five movies that you knew were going to suck just by watching the trailer

5. Pompeii (2014)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6TRwfxDICM

When I set out to write this entry, I originally just wanted to talk about Pompeii. Let's be honest, you already know that it is going to suck. When you take into account that it is essentially a Gladiator rip off directed by the guy who brought us Resident Evil, Alien vs. Predator and another of today's contenders (we'll get to that later), the only difference is that everybody dies at the end. And if they don't then this movie will be total bullshit. Even if they do, it'll still be bullshit. I'm sorry, but I thought the genre of tragic romance set during a well known historical event (a la Titanic) died with Michael Bay's Pearl Harbor? 

4. Pain and Gain (2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEQ8jyvmYtw

To be honest, I kinda wanted to see Pain and Gain when I first saw the trailer. Sure, Michael Bay was the director but it looked entertaining. But then I learned that it was based on a true story... A fairly recent true story... That people still remember... And he is painting the villains as being funny and relatable... And they're the protagonists... Do I need to go on?

3. The Three Musketeers (2011)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38an1IAG1TA

Remember earlier how I said that the director of Pompeii directed another dead-on-arrival movie? Well, here's the second specimen. Now, I haven't read the book in a long time, but I'm sure I would have remembered flying pirate ships had they been there.

2. After Earth (2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZIt20emgLY

Here's a little piece of trivia, this is the first M. Night Shyamalan movie to not have M. Night Shyamalan's name at the beginning or anywhere in the trailer. Even The Last Airbender had his name in there because it was his way of showing how much of a fan of the show he was. Okay, here's a little tip, if you want to know how much of a fan he truly is, ask somebody who is really a fan of the show what they think of that movie. Moving on to After Earth, if you want to know why this movie sucked, you only have to look at the two main leads. Jaden Smith, who doesn't know how to act, and Will Smith who knows how to act, but I guess decided to give it up for lent. Maybe he didn't want his son to feel bad. Now of course we all know the movie itself sucks for so many other reasons than just that, but you had to actually pay and see the movie to discover that, we're here to talk about why it sucked from the trailer.

1. Battleship (2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsieadPPvJE

I had a whole rant written out as to why I knew Battleship was going to suck. If I remember correctly, the phrase "What the fuck does this have to do with Battleship?" came up quite a bit. It honestly hurt to see Liam Neeson in this movie. And to borrow a bit from Cinemasins on Youtube, they took the most badass actor in this movie with the most credibility of anybody involved and have him stand on the sidelines for the entire movie. The most ass that he kicks is forcefully hang up a phone on a superior. And this is coming from a man who fought wolves with his bare hands in the Alaskan wilderness only months prior. Also, Rihanna.

True Detective, Season 1 thus far

I'm starting to realize what a sucker I am for HBO's dramas. You all know how much I practically base my life around Game of Thrones, as well as the high praise I and pretty much everybody else has for shows like Boardwalk Empire, Rome and so on. Even their shows that I don't watch like True Blood, while I am not a fan, they certainly do have their fans and they are quite loyal. So what I am about to say about their latest show, True Detective, should not come as any surprise: It's fucking fantastic!

Many have proclaimed it the best show on TV right now, and while I still believe that that title belongs to GOT, I can't help but see why people would say that about True Detective. It definitely has an interesting concpet. Much like American Horror Story, each season (or planned season, rather) while still having the same theme, is going to have its own independent story at the core of it. For the first season, the story revolves around two detectives (played by Matthew Maconaughey and Woody Harrelson) from the deep south who, as we learn through their story in the present, caught a serial killer when they were still partners in the mid nineties. And even though the case is almost twenty years old, there is still some investigation going on into some of the finer details of the case. The story is told in two ways. The first way is in the past as they are solving the case as the events are unfolding, and the second way is through interviews in present day that they are giving separately to the new detectives that have pulled the case out of the file cabinet for reasons we are not yet clear on. I love stories that are told non-linear, because we see how traumatic events can affect a person long term, as is the case with our leads here. Their story revolves around a case of a serial killer who butchered a girl and left her in a field with a crown of antlers on her head.The case takes them everywhere from cults to churches to white supremacists to drug dealers that Walter White would call extreme. And it all makes for a show that is thrilling, jaw dropping and sometimes even a little hard to watch. Slight disclaimer, as I am typing this I am only 5 out of 8 episodes into the first season, so the last three episodes could be just as great as the first five or it could completely fall apart. I don't see that happening seeing how well it's going, and taking into account HBO's eye for picking up quality shows.

Now, from what I understand, the plan of the story is going to vary from season to season with a new cast and new characters each time around. That's a bold move, and I'm definitely interested to see where they will take it and what cases and characters they will create for the audience, especially since this first season has been such a hit. For a show revolving around two actors who are typically known for having fun on the set, True Detective has a very dark tone and the characters are all very grim. Very few of them laugh or even smile. Again, a very interesting contrast to the characters I'm used to seeing Woody and Matt play and they play them well. I'm actually legitimately surprised at how well Matthew is in this show because I never knew he could play some really serious roles. I mean, REALLY serious. Remember what I said about few people even smiling in this show? Well his lips don't even threaten to crease upwards once. I feel kind of bad for ever making an impression of him where all he does is be laid back and take his shirt off.

Why Batman vs. Superman is going to suck

Oddly enough, the same thought process is going through the heads of the creators of Man of Steel 2. Superman is not an interesting character. He’s not deep or complex, and he’s invincible which means that he’s not relatable for the audience. Going back, I know that I liked Man of Steel, despite its issues, some of them were pretty big, but my liking for it mainly goes for the backstory and the lore. I liked all of the stuff about Krypton, I liked the story behind Jor-El and his relationship with General Zod as well as Zod’s rebellion. If the entire movie was on Krypton and it ended with Kal-El being sent to Earth, I would have been okay with that.It's the mythology that is interesting. Superman himself is not that interesting. And to compensate, the oh so wise Snyder has decided to shoe-horn the caped crusader and now Wonder Woman apparently into the sequel as well as use the most overused villain in comic book history: Lex Luthor. Don’t get me wrong, I think Lex Luthor is badass, but is he really the best villain to throw punches at the Man of Steel? Isn’t there a robot called Brainiac or another villain called Dark Side? Why can’t he fight a villain named Doomsday? Are none of them more interesting than a bald guy with a green rock and a robot suit? Just saying, you can get creative here guys. And by creative, I don’t mean turning Lex into a skinhead who somehow became a self-made billionaire at 18. Like I said, it's the mythology surrounding the character that is interesting and when you have an established universe full of threats from other worlds and galaxies that can come down and cause trouble for our hero, and yet you keep making his one threat a human with no particular powers, just unlimited resources, then you are exhibiting a complete lack of imagination. Which is not even necessary because you already have the imagining part done for you. The only thing needed is a situation for them to confront each other. Keeping the threat solely on earth and coming from a human is just lazy writing. And the fact that every single adaptation keeps coming back to Lex Luthor is just sad. I could accept the argument that back in Christopher Reeves's/ Richard Donner's days, the effects to create someone like Brainiac or Doomsday weren't around yet, but today there is just no excuse. Give Batman and Superman an extraterrestrial threat that is big enough for them to set aside their differences over.
Really, my biggest problem with this movie overall is the including of Batman at all. Why do we need another Batman movie? We just had three really good Batman movies. Even if you didn't like the last movie, at least it didn't end on a Spider-Man 3 note. So really, what is the point? Are they really that desperate to get out a Justice League movie now that Avengers 2 is on the way? That's really the only reason for their rush and even then, it's not a good enough reason to just slap together the story so you can squeeze two more heroes in there. And not only are they trying to squeeze in the heroes but they are trying to cram in the side characters with them. As much as I like Jeremy Irons, I hate to see him waste his time on a role that won't have as much of an impact on the story as it probably should. And really, the casting for this movie just seems all out of whack. Either they are staying too comfortable with their choices or they are going into straight up "What the fuck?" territory. Jeremy Irons is a safe bet to play older, wiser father figures. Ben Affleck is a safe bet if you want a healthy box office. Jessie Eisenberg as Lex Luthor is where you get into What the fuck? territory. I'm still not convinced he's out of puberty yet, how is he gonna play a ruthless bussinessman (and street punk too apparently)? And before I even say it, I won't listen to the Heath Ledger/Joker argument. It's not the same because Zack Snyder seems to forget that even though he's directed a movie for him, he is still not Christopher Nolan. One of Nolan's strengths as a director and writer is that he can take actors and place them into roles that they are not typically known for. The most obvious being Heath Ledger and the Joker but that's not the only one. How about David Bowie as the inventor Nikola Tesla? Kind of a step in a different direction from Labyrinth, and his crotch didn't get its own credit in this one either. Hey, how about taking character actor Gary Oldman, initially known for playing the most psychotic villains and placing him in the role of Comissioner Gordon? Zack Snyder hasn't exhibited this knack for spotting talent and he's shooting too high for a casting like this one. Look, fans, I'm sorry and I'm seriously trying to imagine him going toe to toe with Superman and I'm still not buying it. How did we go from possibly seeing Bryan Cranston or Juaquin Phoenix in the role to having it handed to a perpetual teenager? I swear, every time I hear something new about this movie, I turn into Darth Vader at the end of Episode III

Why Amazing Spider-Man 2 is going to suck

Comic book movies seem to be the craze nowadays. Between X-Men, The Dark Knight and The Avengers, it seems that we are getting more than our fill of superheroes than we used to get. This is not the first time that we have found ourselves in a comic book binge, being that the late eighties and early to mid nineties were also years that saw a lot of comic book movies. And much like the first time around, I can say with confidence that this age of comic book movies is going to come crashing down and burning like the Hindenberg. Why is that? Well, it only took one movie for people to get fed up with the comic book craze, that being Batman and Robin. This time around, I predict that it is going to be one of two movies: The Amazing Spider-Man 2  or the already sunk Man of Steel sequel. And the problem with both of these is oddly the same, the filmmakers are biting off way more than they can chew, and the reason is also oddly similar. 
Now, I’m gonna be frank with you people, I don’t give a shit about Spider-Man. I know that he’s supposed to be one of the more humorous heroes, but anytime he’s trying to be being humorous, it just ends up being annoying to me. And as a character and a hero overall, I never really thought he was that interesting.So you can imagine when I heard that they were rebooting it the first time, I asked every question there is to ask “Who would do this? What is the point? Why would you do this? When will it be enough? When are you just going to let it die?”  And even after I saw the movie, I still found myself asking this. And now they are making a sequel, with no less than three villains, and they’ve hinted at there being even more! Didn't they learn anything from Joel Schumacher or Sam Raimi? The rule of thumb is never go beyond two! You see, I think the problem is that they are realizing the truth that Spider-Man is such a lame character that they are crowding the screen with baddies to compensate for their shitty lead. The evidence is in the trailer. The most interesting things you see in the trailer is the stuff involving the villains. Jaime Foxx being a lonely nerd with a creepy obsession should be enough to take up one movie by itself. Oscrop following Peter Parker and the CEO’s son being his best friend/ sworn enemy to be is also enough to take up an entire movie of its own. Paul Giamatti I don’t know what the deal is with, but he’s a diverse and lively enough actor that I’m sure you could make an entire movie around. So really, we have an entire trilogy of movies, or a whole season of a television show being thrown into a two hour movie.Is it clear now how this can go horribly wrong?

New Name

I know what you're thinking. The Sinister Cinephile? What the hell kind of a name is that? I sound like a horrible campy Superman villain who uses his love of movies to commit movie themed crimes. Actually, that doesn't sound too bad. I should call Zack Snyder about this. I mean, anything has got to sound better than skinhead Lex Luthor or whatever the hell he's planning for that next movie of his. Anyway, yes, I have now renounced the name of Movie Prick and taken on the identity of Sinister Cinephile. Why? Well, truth be told, that first name was because I couldn't think of anything at the time.  That was just a transitional thing until I could think of something cooler and more fitting. I know, I spent two years thinking of a name and the best I could think of was Sinister Cinephile? Yeah, pretty much. Could be worse, at least I didn't try to include 69 anywhere like half the 12 year olds on Xbox live. So yes, for those that have been following the movie prick, I shall henceforth be blogging under this new identity. I apologize for the inconvenience, if there was one.