There are routine movies and others that blaze a trail. There are routine bad movies and others so horrendous that they redefine bad, that make us look up synonyms for agonizing and abysmal and then gnash our teeth because the language has not kept pace with the decline of film. There are even movies that are so blazingly rotten that they can redefine past experiences and make us look back on recent weak efforts like "Stealth" or "Fantastic Four" and think, "Ooh, that was fascinating."Okay, so fess up; who's going to see it anyway? I loved watching Bo and Luke Duke tear it up in the General Lee on the small screen. Can it be all that bad?
Well, then again, last time I ignored the advice of some critics that left the chair empty (regular chronicle readers understand), I ended up walking out on the movie - some Sarah Jessica Parker flick that was so horrendous it has thus far been the only movie I couldn't tollerate to the very end.
3 comments:
The problem is not only that the movie is so horribly written that you can clearly tell by the previews, thus not drawing any new fans, but that it is a complete bastardization of the original Dukes of Hazard, which has ticked all of the fans of the original show.
Warner Brothers really screwed up what could have been a great opportunity by throwing out what really made the Dukes of Hazard a great show and replacing it with horrid stereotypes of the South.
Is there any reason at all to go besides the Jessica view?
:)
I liked "The Truth About Cats and Dogs"... I like Janeane Garafolo 8^).
But the Duke of Hazzard... I must admit, I couldn't watch it in the 70's. I am from the country, so anything to do with country-ness makes me want to become a serial killer.
Post a Comment