Episode 76.5 — Minisode 76.5

[ShaneHebert 12]

Part 2 and 3 to ease your internetting.

 

 

[rexcoltraine 1]

The most annoying thing about the "Swinging on a Star" scene is that it's not even in real time! A stupid scene made stupider by the fact that the director completely cheated it!

[AprilFoolsRebel 457]

Not to nitpick, but there's certainly a difference between "little known" and "little seen". For instance, not a lot of people intentionally watched "Battlefield Earth" or "Cutthroat Island", but EVERYONE knows what they are when you're discussing how you don't want your movie to perform. "Hudson Hawk", while a monumental dud, is certainly well known, but it wasn't a career killer for it's star, and it didn't sink a studio or anything, so maybe it just isn't talked about in the same league as more catastrophic flops.

 

That's actually a really good point. In the pantheon of cinematic failures, it may make the list, but there wasn't the same fallout as so many other films. So maybe people just shrug, acknowledge it exists and then talk about truly catastrophic failures.

[SlidePocket 707]

The director of this movie, Michael Lehmann, is probably best known for helming Heathers a few years before that, and that is probably the reason he got the job for Hudson Hawk. After it bombed at the box office, he surprisingly managed to get more work in film, resulting in Airheads (not that bad), The Truth About Cats & Dogs (pretty good), My Giant (silly), 40 Days and 40 Nights (ok) and Because I Said So (awful).

[Famous Mortimer 5]

I'm going to have to disagree with this film's inclusion. "Hudson Hawk" is one of those films whose status as a great classic of bad cinema is set in stone, with no dissent allowed...and it's really not that bad. By all accounts, Willis was sort of a dick at the time, and any time you didn't see his face in shot it was definitely a double doing his work for him; but it's a surprisingly funny and odd comedy with tons of scenery-chewing performances from a bunch of great actors.

 

It's not perfect, for sure, but it's a million miles away from most of the stuff featured on HDTGM? Approach it just as any other film, not as "oh my god, we're going to watch this mega-flop of a movie" and I reckon quite a few of you will be pleasantly surprised.

[Wien 401]

I'm going to have to disagree with this film's inclusion. "Hudson Hawk" is one of those films whose status as a great classic of bad cinema is set in stone, with no dissent allowed...and it's really not that bad. By all accounts, Willis was sort of a dick at the time, and any time you didn't see his face in shot it was definitely a double doing his work for him; but it's a surprisingly funny and odd comedy with tons of scenery-chewing performances from a bunch of great actors.

 

It's not perfect, for sure, but it's a million miles away from most of the stuff featured on HDTGM? Approach it just as any other film, not as "oh my god, we're going to watch this mega-flop of a movie" and I reckon quite a few of you will be pleasantly surprised.

 

You are wrong. Very insanely wrong.This movie felt like I was watching a reverse Old Dogs... like it was originally meant to be a kids movie, and some exec goes "Wait a sec, kids don't know who the fuck Bruce Willis is... but adults love him! Make this R rated!" There is really no reason for this movie to BE R rated aside from some awkward over the top pseudo violence and all the weird moments of forced adult humor.

 

Not to mention the wildly awful dialog and forced overacting to compensate for it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfnA4lTHglQ

 

If ever there was a reason for the HDTGM crew to bring back the WTF Moment segment, this movie is chock full of them. Its like if Old Dogs and Pluto Nash adopted Barb Wire and Toy's illegitimate bastard child and raised it as its own.

[hugLife 492]

This movie almost numbed my brain. I have 3 pages of notes because the things that happened were so BIZARRE! I feel like they would have to do a 2-hour show on this movie, because I have 3 pages of notes on my own.

 

There cannot possibly be a serious 5-star review for this movie.

[Wien 401]

 

I mean seriously. WTF.

[reverendnathan 1]

 

Literally Jason M.

 

 

Bonkers.

[reverendnathan 1]

This was my first time watching the movie. Other than some dumb exposition in the very beginning, the early parts of the movie were quite promising. It seemed like Hawk's chemistry with various characters around him is cleverly designed, the first heist (of the horse) I thought was well put together, and hell, even the "cartoon world" elements (jumping off a building to a cloth terrace over the entrance? classic! The third time someone jumps off of a building?! C'mon, man!!) worked... but then this movie turns to crap so quickly! It's like you can also see the movie go from acceptable, maybe even good... to just utter garbage.

 

I'm glad I watched it, and I think it's even worth seeing again just to gawk at the poor behind-the-camera choices made to this movie. But you can watch certain parts of the flick and see there was something good here to begin with... maybe even a great movie could have happened(?!)... but man, does this movie just fall apart quickly and just keep going like dominoes. There's more entertainment in trying to wrap your head around what went wrong in this crapfest than any part of the movie itself.

[Joven 373]

So I rewatched an episode of "Would I Lie to You?" with Richard E. Grant after watching this movie again...which culminated in his admission that he made a hip hop version of "To Be or Not To Be." (somewhere theres video for this, but couldnt find it [just the clip from WILTY, just imagine him prancing around in a poofy shirt dress while singing it])

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdT1ZwSQVTs

 

So which is more embarrassing, that, his role in Spice World or his role in Hudson Hawk?

[Famous Mortimer 5]

Eh, I'm in the minority on this one and I don't mind. I thoroughly enjoyed it, despite its flaws.

[hugLife 492]

Eh, I'm in the minority on this one and I don't mind. I thoroughly enjoyed it, despite its flaws.

 

What was there that you enjoyed? The flaws are the only thing that made this movie even remotely enjoyable.

[Joven 373]

I watched it maybe two years ago and thought it was the dumbest most annoying thing ever, this time though I barely paid attention...that really helped. I think if you take each scene individually it's not quite as bad, it's only when you try and assemble those scenes into some sort of coherent whole that the movie really falls apart.

 

Also, Almond Joy's got nuts...(mounds don't)

[RyanSz 3140]

Holy fucknuts I forgot how insane this movie is. From there being two mafioso name the Mario Bros. to David Caruso being a mute mimic and part of a CIA team named after candy bars to the fact that Andi McDowell was somehow seen as a viable actress, even though she gets out performed by a talking crucifix in one scene, this movie has so many parts and NONE of them click well together. And on the McDowell front, she basically only gets work now by licensing her image to shitty harlequin novels.

[DeathToMikeyBay 130]

A lot of terrible movies are funny because it's inept people trying to be serious.

 

Hudson Hawk is one of those terrible movies where you see what happens when inept people are trying SO HARD to be funny.

[IHugKittens 53]

Bruce Willis is really going the extra mile with his one-lines in this one (spoilers):

 

I love this movie no matter what anyone says. It's just so campy and ridiculous and idiotic and trying too hard, how can you not love it.

[Famous Mortimer 5]

 

What was there that you enjoyed? The flaws are the only thing that made this movie even remotely enjoyable.

The very deliberate campy overacting from Willis, Grant and Bernhard (among others). The way it doesn't take itself remotely seriously. The whole new CIA team, who are great.

 

I've read reviews of it down the years where people are just desperate to pile on, because it was a box office disaster and the stars distanced themselves from it and so on - I think so many of those reviews missed the point a bit. For a big budget studio comedy with a star of Willis' size in it, it's a strange strange choice for a movie, no doubt, but would you rather see a movie that aims big and (maybe) misses a little, or yet another safe boring occasionally amusing comedy?

 

If you just look at Willis in the few years around HH's release, he made the Look Who's Talking films, Bonfire Of The Vanities, The Last Boy Scout and Death Becomes Her. These films range from average to terrible, but what they have in common is I'd rather watch HH again over any of them, in a heartbeat. There's very little like it, even now, so even if it was a complete disaster in every way it'd still be an interesting film to watch. Its sense of humour happens to chime with mine, so I love it, no matter what Bruce Willis, Richard E Grant or Paul, Jason and June think of it.

[hugLife 492]

If you just look at Willis in the few years around HH's release, he made the Look Who's Talking films, Bonfire Of The Vanities, The Last Boy Scout and Death Becomes Her. These films range from average to terrible, but what they have in common is I'd rather watch HH again over any of them, in a heartbeat. There's very little like it, even now, so even if it was a complete disaster in every way it'd still be an interesting film to watch. Its sense of humour happens to chime with mine, so I love it, no matter what Bruce Willis, Richard E Grant or Paul, Jason and June think of it.

 

I guess it was just weird seeing Bruce Willis in a movie like this because I think that most people choose to only remember him as John McClane (including me). I think that the movie should have committed a bit harder to the comedy aspects of the film rather than spend so much time making him seem cool in the beginning.

 

Listening to your rationale, the movie only seems as terrible as it does compared to modern standards. The early 90s was an awkward time for movies, especially since there was such a definitive feel to the 80s. I guess I just saw what this movie could be if it were made today, but viewing it in perspective it really isn't a horrible movie.

 

You actually changed my opinion on this movie. That was pretty impressive.

[Quasar Sniffer 4174]

I think one objective way to see how this movie just doesn't work is that there are more terrible one-lines than in the entire series run of 'The Pickup Artist.' [Note: The previous sentence is an example of how a terrible one-liner can ruin one's mood] So many of them are altered or changed due to some very obvious ADR, meaning that, at some point, people realized that this movie is supposed to be funny, was NOT funny, then very clumsy attempts were made to make it funny. I guess you could argue they succeed... but I don't see how. It is not funny.

[Wien 401]

Bruce Willis is really going the extra mile with his one-lines in this one (spoilers):

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

 

I love this movie no matter what anyone says. It's just so campy and ridiculous and idiotic and trying too hard, how can you not love it.

 

 

I have to admit, the one TRUE honest non ironic laugh that I got out of this movie was during that fight scene when Andie MacDowell shot Bruce Willis in the arm on accident.

[wakefresh 689]

I have one story about Andi MacDowell. She lived in Asheville, NC in the early 2000s, and the town where I lived, Winston-Salem, wanted to have a film festival. I was working at the city paper at the time, and got extra tickets since no one on staff was really interested in going, save for the entertainment reporter who had to be there.

 

I took a girl I was dating at the time to the festival and flashed my press badge around. We got into little premiere parties, saw "Bowling for Coloumbine", and had total access. It was very cool and we felt very important to be mingling with Hollywood people, or as Hollywood as people you could get to come to Winston-Salem.

 

Andi was the feature attraction for the festival. And let me just tell you, she was feeling herself hard that day. Her nose was turned up so high it was touching the clouds. They had an opening ceremony where she said a little speech that had the energy of soggy Frosted Flakes. She looked like she wasn't that pleased to be there...until the party afterward where mobs of people flocked to her. Then she had a big smile on her face.

 

You would have thought Beatle-mania had returned by the reactions of people at the party. It was just a bad look to have, ya know? It made the people of the city appear more backwater and hickish than it was. Not to take anything away from her success, but her heyday was the late 80s to mid 90s. This is 2003 or so when she came to Winston. I get it, man. be excited for the event and the vibe it brings, but no one (the mayor's wife, included) should be crying when they meet Andi MacDowell. That's bonkers.

[PhillipMedoc 648]

I think if you take each scene individually it's not quite as bad, it's only when you try and assemble those scenes into some sort of coherent whole that the movie really falls apart.

Yes; that's exactly the feeling I got while watching it. There's bits that work on their own and some of the performances are enjoyable -- Danny Aiello is great and Richard Grant is always enjoyable. But when it's put all together, the tone is all over the place; it's never really a musical, comedy, or action film (it does none of those well enough) and the camp just isn't dialed up enough. I think Bruce Willis is just plain not a great actor and with a better lead, maybe Michael Keaton or someone who could really sell the role and not just resort to smirking all the time, this could have been a better movie. It seems like no one involved knew exactly what kind of film they were making.

[MatthewJamesMcNaughton 11]

Wow. From the part where a Mario got a face full of needles to the part where The Ugly Bitch was electroplated or some shit, I could not believe this fucking movie. Every other scene is ludicrous for the sake of catching your attention, sideplots keep getting thrown around and forgotten about, and the acting is so unbearable that I had to mute any parts with TUB. When the schnauser gets tennis ball'd through the window I lost my shit and started flailing around on my bed yelling NOOO!!1! WHO THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA!? Now, I still enjoyed it, because batshit crazy is my specialty. But suffice to that that this was a solid choice for the show.

 

(As an aside, have any of you considered posting your notes anywhere? Do we a place to publish them? I would be quite interested in the crew's notes, along with many of yours. Just a suggestion.)

[DeathToMikeyBay 130]

I just have to get this out: why all the hate for Waterworld? It's nowhere near the same league as Ishtar or Pluto Nash. Yeah it was the most expensive flop for the time and Kevin Costner has some serious underacting, but as far as mindless summer blockbuster action movies go? It was above average with fantastic sets and action scenes.

 

What is Waterworld (and its also hated twin, The Postman) being compared to in order to earn the infamy? There are at least 3 worse movies released every summer. The Transformers movies have been the low mark for 8 years now yet everyone keeps referring back to Waterworld as worst summer flick. Heck, I'm not ashamed to say that Waterworld and Postman are better than Avatar.