Quasar Sniffer

I've been to a fortune-teller before, but as a goof. I don't believe in any of it, I just thought it'd be entertaining. Does that mean I have no credibility? Anyway, I think Jenny Slate's "fuck" on SNL might be the most explained and examined expletive I've ever come across. I've just heard the story recounted many times, especially by Slate herself, but I don't really understand the fascination with it and I'm curious if she's tired of talking about it. I know I would be.

Has there been a Steven Seagal movie on HDTGM yet? He has a whole catalogue of mock-worthy movies. If you want to start with this one, hey, go right ahead.

For those interested (or are... fans of this movie), Rifftrax recently released their version of tearing into this garbage. http://www.rifftrax.com/vod/cool-as-ice

To me, this is EXACTLY what Joe Johnston does. His movies, especially his action sequences, lack any sense of identity, visual dynamics, or, especially, fun. Everything is interchangeable with everything else and nothing seems distinctive at all, it's just two hours of... blah. His movies, with the possible exception of October Sky, all seem like feature length car commercials, with all the excitement that possibility brings. Yes, there are worse directors, and it's not like he's technically terrible the way imbecilic filmmakers like Tommy Wiseau are, but that seems worse to me. He's a guy with enough merit to land an enormous franchise like Captain America or get Benicio Del Toro and Rick Baker involved in a werewolf movie, but still manages to put something that ranges from unremarkable to sleep-inducing on screen. In short, fuck that guy.

Captain America's director, Joe Johnston, is a fucking hack (he also did the Wolf Man remake) and anything he does is worth mocking. I mean, Captain America isn't a bad movie, but it could have been about 12.4 times better if helmed by a decent director.

This also brings up the trope of Jeremy Irons and/or John Malkovich in Terrible Fantasy/Sci-Fi Films ('Dungeons and Dragons' an example for the former and 'Mutant Chronicles' for the latter),

The ONLY movie you have ever walked out on is a legitimately great movie? Who are you and why do you hate movies?

Who is this toolbag telling the provider of FREE podcasts to ditch his wife? This guy can't even do it with proper grammar. Are we being trolled?

I agree that this movie could have been better, but I still enjoy it for what it is. It's certainly better than 'Willow,' though even comparing it to something like 'Blade Runner' seems like an exercise in futility. 'Blade Runner' is a masterpiece, 'Legend' is a pleasantly cheeseball bit of 1980s fantasy.

What is the usual timeline for the podcast? By that, I mean, when do you typically watch the films in relation to recording the minisode and the actual episode around that film? I know some shows are live, some of these movies have been seen by you and your fellow podcasters before, and some are new to you, so that might change the order, but is there a typical formula to how the episodes get made?

This movie is definitely garbage, but it is also a wasted opportunity. John Cusak is perfect casting as Hollywood-Edgar Allen Poe and I love the idea of the troubled, alcoholic, dickish, and brilliant author investigating actual murders. Plus, I have to admit I'm a sucker for this historical period. With all that said, I could barely stay awake during this.

I'm really confused about Dan Aykroyd. I mean, the guy fucking wrote The Blues Brothers and Ghostbusters (GHOSTBUSTERS!), but was somehow also able to crap this stream of insane cinematic diarrhea out. I appreciate that there's probably something about his love for the bizarre and weird (which I have) that made Ghostbusters just as possible as this movie, but I just can't help but wonder what he was thinking. Maybe the combined pressure of being a first-time director, having a significant amount of screen time, and what I presume was hours of getting prosthetics and makeup applied proved too much of a distraction?

Agreed, it's just that this one has Tone Loc, Leslie Nielsen as a samurai armor-wearing villain, and the reoccurring musical theme of fucking "Barbara Ann" by the Beach Boys... because that's what The Kids were listening to in Southern California in the early 1990s. Hence, perfect for this podcast.

Due to unfortunate circumstances, I happened to see 2009's 'Rampage,' which was also supposed to be serious... but is also batshit insane and crazy-stupid. It thinks it says something meaningful about society or whatever, but it comes off like a hundred minutes of unfunny dead baby jokes told by an obnoxious 6th grader.

This is indeed a movie that is a messy pile of shit. As a bonus, it doesn't get the blame (credit?) for being so for some reason. Maybe because the Bryan Adams theme, "Everything I Do," inspired so much hate itself that it distracted people from the movie's awfulness? Anyway, because I feel this film's crapitude is underrated, I feel it is ripe for destroying on a podcast episode. Alan Rickman is still fun in it, though.

So you're saying this movie has problems and inconsistencies with its narrative structure? ...Actually, you make a good point about one of the fundamental problems with this piece of crap. That is, nothing fucking matters. No matter what the characters do, Pacino's Satan In Pajamas is going to kill them and/or steal their souls. Go along with him? He gets what he wants. Stand up to him? You get murdered and he gets what he wants anyway. Refuse his temptations? He gets to call it vanity and, in the world of 'The Devil's Advocate,' that's the Devil's favorite sin and he gets what he wants anyway. So yeah, the movie just shat out two-and-a-half hours of pointless nonsense just so Pacino could yell in monologues and actresses could take their tops off. Fuck this movie.

It's called a Game Gear, get it right! Anyway, I used to watch this movie all the time as a kid; I was just the right age to like it and not realize it was terrible. Sure, now I know it to be a piece of crap, so I view it with a strange combined sense of nostalgia and unbridled hate.

Anyone who doesn't recognize how FUCKING AMAZING this movie is doesn't deserve to use the Internet. Sure, make this an episode of the podcast; just talk about how great it is for an hour.

Woo-hoo! Belated birthday congratulations! I hope, Mr. Paul Scheer, you celebrated in true Double-D fashion, that is... with piranhas. They party the hardest.

I know The Devil's Advocate really isn't about the legal system, but for a movie in which so much of its action takes place in court rooms and legal offices, and whose main characters are lawyers, it really plays fast and loose with... laws. I mean, trials that would typically go on for months have opening arguments and verdicts reached in seemingly the same afternoon. I know a lot of people blame Keanu for being all Keanu, but this movie has so many other problems that keep it from being "good" good. No character is consistent, all these Biblical quotes and references are totally random and horrendously obvious, and the "twists" at the end seem pretty pointless. But if I come across it on TV, I still think to myself, "haha, THIS movie. Nice."

I legitimately love this movie. It's complete and utter madness, but in the way that I wanted a Werner Herzog/Nic Cage collaboration to be.

There could be a great two-for-one episode if coupled with the similarly-plotted (and Roland Emmerich-directed!) White House Down: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334879/reference

Paul F. Tompkins doing Werner Herzog is a good addition to anything! But yes, I remember watching 'The Happening' and frequently thinking to myself, "how is THIS HAPPENING?" An appropriately horrendous movie and topic for this podcast.

A ton of these are really great and would make great products in one form or another, but I have to say, Doom-La-Loon fucking killed it. Nice.

I think this is a case of a movie that didn't know what to do with itself. It's like a haphazard mix between a fantasy-tinged adult drama and a fable aimed at children, resulted in something that is just stupid and boring. Maybe there was a lot of screenplay notes and re-writes? Who knows? For example, there was that whole plot thread about water rationing and drought at the beginning, then it was just dropped in favor of the factory closing in the second half of the movie. Granted, neither are particularly original plots, but I guess if you're doing a fantasy or fable as a movie, you're purpose isn't to break new narrative ground anyway. Still, everything about this movie seems rather haphazard. In a children's fable, it doesn't matter where Timothy really comes from, but in an adult story it kind of does. At the same time, a children's fable should probably not be concerned with the goings-on of an adoption agency's bureaucratic maneuverings. A failure on every level. Questions: Why DOES the adoption agency ultimately grant these nutball "parents" another kid? Is it supposed to be another miracle or something? Where did this stellar cast come from and what are they doing? Fucking M. Emmet Walsh? David Morse? Rosemary Dewitt? These are heavy-hitting, outstanding character actors, given characters with nothing to do but stand around and look disapprovingly at the Handsome Leads that have both done outstanding work in other films. A special nod should go to Shohreh Aghdashloo, who seems to play cleanup hitter every time a movie is desperate for Wise/Classy Ethnic Woman.